The Knife’s Edge: India and Pakistan’s Latest Confrontation
The recent escalation of violence between India and Pakistan, sparked by a deadly terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, presents a precarious situation with potentially far-reaching consequences. While history suggests a limited conflict, the current intensity and lack of clear de-escalation paths raise concerns about a more dangerous trajectory.
For over two decades, both nations have possessed nuclear weapons, leading to a complex dance of brinkmanship. They have engaged in tense confrontations, but largely avoided all-out war. This pattern, however, might be shifting. India’s response to the recent terrorist attack, dubbed "Operation Sindoor," involved cross-border missile strikes, a significant escalation from previous responses. While Indian officials describe the actions as "measured, non-escalatory, proportionate, and responsible," the reality on the ground suggests otherwise.
The conflict began with the massacre of tourists in Pahalgam, a popular resort in Kashmir. The attack, which specifically targeted Hindu men, was claimed by the Resistance Front, a group India alleges is linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba, a Pakistan-based militant organization. India, despite Pakistan’s denial of involvement and the lack of concrete evidence, has vowed to retaliate.
This vow translated into missile strikes targeting sites within Pakistan, allegedly used for planning terrorist attacks against India. Pakistan responded with drone and missile strikes of its own, targeting Indian military assets. The exchange has resulted in dozens of deaths and accusations of misinformation from both sides.
Analysts are drawing comparisons to the Kargil War of 1999, a conflict that saw hundreds of troops killed. This latest flare-up is considered by some to be the most dangerous since then, due to its scale, intensity, and lack of a clear "off-ramp." In the past, incidents like the release of a captured Indian pilot in 2019 helped de-escalate tensions. However, no such readily available solution exists at present.
The historical context of the India-Pakistan relationship is crucial to understanding the current crisis. Since the partition in 1947, the two nations have fought four major wars and numerous smaller skirmishes, largely centered around the disputed region of Kashmir. The Line of Control (LoC), an unofficial border dividing Kashmir, has been a constant source of tension, with alleged violations and cross-border firing being commonplace. India also accuses Pakistan of supporting an Islamist insurgency in Indian-administered Kashmir, a charge Pakistan denies while openly supporting autonomy for the region.
The introduction of nuclear weapons added a new layer of complexity. The Kargil War, occurring shortly after Pakistan’s nuclear acquisition, highlighted the paradox of nuclear deterrence. While nuclear weapons might prevent large-scale war, they could also embolden smaller-scale violence, based on the assumption that neither side would risk escalation.
This "stability-instability paradox" has seemingly played out in the years since Kargil, with increasingly intense flare-ups. India’s responses to terrorist attacks have become more assertive, ranging from "surgical strikes" in 2016 to airstrikes on Pakistani territory in 2019. The current missile strikes represent a further escalation, signaling a potential shift in India’s risk calculus.
The United States, traditionally a crisis broker between India and Pakistan, faces a more challenging role in the current situation. While the US-India relationship has strengthened due to shared concerns about China, the US-Pakistan relationship has deteriorated since the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. This shift complicates the US’s ability to exert influence on both sides.
The absence of a clear path to de-escalation raises several concerns. A miscalculation or an accidental strike causing significant casualties could trigger a larger retaliation, potentially spiraling out of control. While India claims its strikes are aimed at deterring terrorism, any incursion of troops across the LoC could be interpreted by Pakistan as an invasion, leading to further escalation.
The nuclear dimension of the conflict remains a significant concern. Both countries possess substantial nuclear arsenals, with Pakistan lacking a "no first use" policy. This means Pakistan might consider using nuclear weapons to deter a conventional attack, especially given India’s conventional military superiority. While India has a declared "no first use" policy, recent statements have cast doubt on its commitment.
The potential for escalation is real, with the former National Security Council staffer noting that as long as missile strikes continue, the nuclear question remains on the table. India’s increasing willingness to use conventional military force against Pakistan suggests that the fear of nuclear escalation may be waning, creating a more dangerous environment.
The people of Kashmir are caught in the middle, bearing the brunt of the conflict and facing increasingly dire human rights conditions. With each new crisis, the two nations seem increasingly willing to push the envelope, raising the stakes for the region and the world.
