A tense quiet has settled along the Pakistan-India border as a fragile ceasefire holds after days of fierce air battles, missile strikes, and drone attacks. And the world watches in relief as one of the most dangerous standoffs between the two nuclear-armed rivals has concluded. Many in the international community believe that both countries have narrowly avoided a “nuclear war.”
While it is too early to tell whether the newly agreed ceasefire will hold in the coming days and weeks, the latest clashes have clearly emboldened Pakistan in many ways that India’s political leadership may not comprehend.
There are many reasons to believe that the Indian government’s decision to attack Pakistan has backfired on New Delhi and in ways that are not yet apparent.
First, the three-day military exchange seems to have created a visible shift in public confidence in Pakistan. The episode has demonstrated Pakistan’s willingness to absorb blows and retaliate with even greater determination.
This whole incident has brought together the Pakistani nation, people, and political parties across the board. After having been through a very rough patch politically over the last few years, Pakistan has showed remarkable unity in the face of India’s attack. This unity and newfound drive to persist in the face of a greater external threat is perhaps something that will push the Pakistani leadership towards making better decisions in governance, and strengthen the country’s defensive resolve further.
Second, Pakistan’s military has emerged more popular than ever before. Over the last few years, Pakistan’s internal politics left its powerful army with a polarizing image. However, that is not the case anymore. People and political leaderships across the board now realize more than ever before that they need to strengthen their armed forces as the real threat to the country’s sovereignty comes from India, Pakistan’s eastern neighbor.
It was not easy for Pakistan to respond to the barrage of attacks by India on its cities. While the military leadership deliberated on its possible response, India was flooding Pakistan’s airspace with drones and missiles to force the country into making a mistake.
Moreover, there was massive international pressure on Pakistan to avert its retaliation against India. The military leadership worked through these pressures and responded, sending a signal to the Indian government that it would not allow it to impose war on Pakistan without grave costs.
Third, the idea of India imposing a “new normal” on Pakistan has taken a visible dent. From the Indian government’s perspective, any terrorist attack in the Kashmir region will be responded to with attacks in Pakistan. However, this thinking is likely to have backfired for New Delhi’s planners. Arguably, Pakistan responded to India’s new normal with its own massive retaliation, or “new normal plus,” targeting Indian cities, airbases, command centers, logistics sites, and many military sites in Jammu and Kashmir.
If anything, Pakistan has established a new normal with India, indicating that it will retaliate to India’s actions with resolve and firepower. The idea of Indian planners trying to establish a “new normal” with Pakistan is self-defeating as it could bring the two nuclear powers to blows every week or month if there is some incident in Indian-controlled Kashmir.
Fourth, Pakistan has scored a massive diplomatic win in this recent military skirmish with India. There is a sense in Islamabad that its approach of dealing with things maturely, including asking for an impartial investigation into the Pahalgam attack, showing restraint to India’s provocations, and acting only in self-defense, has earned it the respect of the international community.
What is more important is that the United States’ role in this crisis has been perceived to have favored Pakistan more than India. For instance, President Donald Trump has reiterated his offer to mediate between India and Pakistan to resolve the Kashmir crisis, putting the issue on the global stage after many years. This has surely put India, which has always tried to avoid third-party mediation in the Kashmir crisis, in a tight spot.
Pakistan has always wanted third parties to be involved in settling the Kashmir dispute with India. It would therefore be delighted with Trump’s offer.
Moreover, Trump has promised to increase trade with both India and Pakistan. This could bring relief for Pakistan’s trade and economic situation. Furthermore, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has announced that the Indian and Pakistani governments have “agreed to start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site.” This essentially means that the two sides could begin dialogue in the coming weeks on a set of issues, including the Indus Waters Treaty, terrorism, and Kashmir, among other things.
Moreover, from Islamabad’s perspective, the U.S. has once again hyphenated Pakistan with India. While India has worked hard to shrug off this status, Islamabad wouldn’t mind being given parity with India as the country wants the world to see it as a regional power and to give it appropriate weight.
Fifth, India needs to understand that during this crisis, it was not confronting Pakistan alone, but Pakistan and China together. The massive aerial losses that Pakistan’s Air Force has inflicted on the Indian Air Force, including its Rafale jets, using Chinese fighter aircraft and platforms, should serve as a dire warning to New Delhi.
The coverage and interest that Pakistan’s aerial performance has garnered globally has taken strategic thinkers by surprise. This development will only bring Pakistan and China’s militaries closer together in the coming months and years, helping Islamabad fill any gaps.
Moreover, India and Pakistan’s periodic fighting is something which Beijing wouldn’t mind. India’s irresistible focus on Pakistan allows China to see and learn about the Indian military and decision-making capabilities without getting engaged in a conflict with Delhi directly. It is nothing less than a setback for India.
Lastly, India’s announcement that every terrorist attack in Kashmir will be seen henceforth as an “act of war” is a dangerous policy. By following this policy, India is telling the world that it could be at war with Pakistan every other week or month and that its military should always remain ready for war. The idea that India could establish a pattern of periodically attacking Pakistan without facing proportional retaliation is not just flawed, but dangerously delusional.
It is important to mention that India is yet to arrest the attackers involved in the Pahalgam attack. Moreover, India is yet to share any evidence of Pakistan’s involvement with the world. India should not try to externalize its internal security failures on Pakistan.
Already, it seems there is a lot of discomfort in Indian policy making circles about how the clashes with Pakistan have ended. In his speech to the nation on Monday night, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi didn’t mention the U.S. role in the ceasefire even once.
An opportunity has arisen for the two sides to engage in dialogue. There is a significant interest among Pakistan’s top civil-military leaders to resolve issues with India, provided New Delhi is genuinely prepared for meaningful dialogue.
