| T |
ensions between New Delhi and Islamabad have escalated following a terrorist attack in Indian-Occupied Kashmir. As speculation grows over possible military action, experts warn of a dangerous mix of public pressure, strategic missteps and historic rivalry pushing South Asia to the edge of conflict.
Michael Kugelman, the Director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Center, says that in the wake of the Pahalgam attack, there is a possibility of an Indian military action against Pakistan.
“The primary advantage of such a response for India will be political. There will be immense public pressure for a forceful reaction,” he said. “[But], such an action risks triggering a larger crisis—a particularly dangerous prospect between two nuclear-armed rivals. India must weigh the political and tactical benefits of retaliation against the very real danger of escalation.”
Kugelman says that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi might authorise a resumption of cross-border shelling along the Line of Control, a practice halted under the 2021 ceasefire agreement. Another option could be limited airstrikes, similar to the Balakot operation in 2019. However, that operation had proved costly for India, resulting in the downing of two fighter jets, the capture of an Indian pilot, Abhinandan Varthaman, by Pakistan, and the accidental destruction of an Indian helicopter by its own air defence in the chaos that followed.
Whether the United States will step in to mediate remains uncertain. Kugelman says Washington is currently preoccupied with conflicts in Europe and the Middle East, trade policy adjustments and pressing domestic concerns. Its capacity—and willingness—to play a constructive role in South Asia may therefore be limited.
Kugelman also points out that nuclear deterrence can be both a stabilising factor and a dangerous wildcard. Historically, hostilities between India and Pakistan have remained confined to the LoC and only rarely crossed the internationally recognised borders. However, he says, in the fog of war, the risk of a miscalculation is ever-present. As tensions escalate, the threat of open conflict grows.
Brigadier Ahmed Saeed Minhas (retired), a defence expert, points out that the attack occurred 400 kilometres inside the Occupied Kashmir.
Mushahid Hussain Syed has regretted the pattern of Indian leaders blaming Pakistan for every major security incident in India or Occupied Kashmir. He called it an “automated response” and said the Pahalgam incident was being used to deflect domestic failures and shift blame.
Mushahid Hussain Syed condemned India’s long-standing pattern of blaming Pakistan for every major security incident in India or Kashmir. He called it an “automated response” and pointed out how the incident is being used to deflect domestic failures and shift blame.
He accused Indian government of maliciously using the Pahalgam tragedy as a pretext to unilaterally suspend the Indus Waters Treaty.
Some experts have argued that India is trying to use the Pahalgam tragedy as a strategic justification to withdraw from the Indus Waters Treaty.
Any disruption of the water supply could lead to devastating consequences including reduced agricultural output, food insecurity and economic instability.
These concerns are not new. India has repeatedly violated the Treaty by constructing the Baglihar Dam, the Ratle Dam on the Chenab River and starting the Kishanganga project on the Neelum-Jhelum River. These projects threaten to alter the natural flow of water to Pakistan, thereby infringing on the fundamental rights of the people in the Indus Basin who rely on this water for drinking and farming.
Unilateral actions by India could be seen not just as a breach of Treaty but also as a human rights violation. The water disputes are already before international forums.
In January 2023, India had accused Pakistan of “intransigence” after Islamabad raised objections to Indian hydroelectric projects on western rivers. Pakistan had initially sought the appointment of a neutral expert, but later referred the matter to the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague. India pushed for a neutral expert instead of arbitration. The World Bank decided to allow both mechanisms to proceed in parallel. India, however, has since refused to participate in the PCA proceedings. This dual-track process appears to have frustrated New Delhi, which has now made a unilateral announcement to suspend the Treaty.
Former Pakistani High Commissioner to India Abdul Basit says that India cannot legally suspend the Indus Waters Treaty unilaterally. He has urged against alarmist reactions.
Basit has pointed out that bilateral trade between the two countries has already been suspended. This has rendered the closure of the Wagha-Attari border largely inconsequential.
The writer is a senior staffer at The News, Karachi