ollowing the Pahalgam terrorist attack, India, blamed Pakistan without presenting conclusive evidence and launched cross-border strikes on May 6-7.

These actions marked a deliberate attempt to climb the escalation ladder and assert dominance through punitive measures.

By executing precision strikes through Al-Fatah missile systems and integrating advanced airpower, Pakistan imposed significant costs on India, reflecting operational superiority and establishing conventional deterrence.

“While the Indian Army and Air Force leadership appeared to spiral into a state of alarm, with heightened alerts and haphazard responses, a strike group of the Indian Navy’s Western Command led by aircraft carrier INS Vikrant was deployed to the northeastern Arabian Sea, just beyond Indian territorial waters. Closely monitoring the developments, the Pakistan Navy was forward-deployed, maintaining a high-alert posture. Despite both sides scheduling live-fire exercises in the area, no direct naval engagement occurred. Interestingly, the only reports of a naval strike came from sections of the Indian media, which falsely claimed an attack on Karachi.” Please attribute this quote.

Rear Admiral Faisal Shah (retired), a defence analyst, says a marine domain conflict has the potential to spin out of control. Once that happens, it has the potential to turn into economic warfare and cannot be easily contained.

India has carried out large-scale harbour and coastal development in its west. In the event of an India-Pakistan war, India’s western coastal assets will be vulnerable to attacks from Karachi, posing a significant threat to the country’s economy and security. The harbours of the west and coastal installations, including major ports like Mumbai and Kandla, could sustain severe damage, disrupting maritime trade.

The Bombay High region is a crucial petroleum transit hub. The billion-dollar worth of Gujarat’s diamond industry could also take a massive hit.

Additionally, shipbuilding industries and other coastal facilities could be damaged, leading to significant economic losses and potential long-term impact on India’s GDP. The country’s reliance on these coastal assets makes them a critical vulnerability in the event of a naval conflict.

For its trade from the Persian Gulf, India is dependent on sea lanes.

“Pakistan enjoys a very critical geo-strategic position at the mouth of Hormuz. It has a robust presence at Gwadar; it can harass and intercept Indian commercial shipping.”

Rear Admiral Shah says India is a large commercial country that can dig into its reserves. But that is not possible indefinitely. “In fact, that can be a double-edged sword.”

Type 054 A/P frigates stand out as technologically sophisticated warships, equipped with formidable surface-to-surface, surface-to-air and anti-submarine weaponry, as well as advanced surveillance and detection systems.

In a war scenario, India will require as much as 25 percent of its navy to protect and shield the commercial shipping. “India would be at a big disadvantage,” says Shah.

In any naval theatre, it is not only the hostile navies and allied commercial shipping that absorb the damage. Assets belonging to international commercial shipping can also become unintended targets. The insurance and war surcharges significantly increase the cost, with serious operational challenges like the long and costly routes to avoid the conflict zone increasing fuel consumption and transit times. Shah says the cost can be prohibitive.

For a high-intensity conflict in hostile waters, the Indian Navy will need to commit two-thirds of its battle-worthy fleet.

Unlike some other international ships of comparable size that have at least two squadrons (26-30 fighter jets), aircraft carrier Vikrant has only 10-12 MiGs deployed over it. The MiGs don’t have a great record against Pakistani forces.

Vikrant’s air defence system, featuring the Barak 8 surface-to-air missile system, too, has limitations that make it susceptible to saturation attacks.

Pakistan’s coastal defences could deny it the freedom of action. Like any big platform, Vikrant will be an easy target, requiring much protection.

The Pakistan Navy has undertaken substantial modernisation to enhance its maritime capabilities in response to the growing influence of its neighbor in the Indian Ocean. Among its key assets, Type 054 A/P frigates stand out as technologically sophisticated warships, equipped with formidable surface-to-surface, surface-to-air and anti-submarine weaponry, as well as advanced surveillance and detection systems.

Submarines continue to pose a significant threat to aircraft carriers, particularly in contested maritime environments. During the 1971 Indo-Pak war, the Indian Navy’s aircraft carrier Vikrant remained deployed to the Bay of Bengal, largely due to concerns over Pakistan’s submarine presence in the Arabian Sea. More recently, the Pakistan Navy, leveraging advanced underwater surveillance technologies, successfully detected and deterred an Indian nuclear submarine from approaching its territorial waters in 2019 near Karachi and in 2002 near Gwadar.

PNS Hangor, equipped with air-independent propulsion systems, lithium-ion batteries and acoustic jamming capabilities, has significantly enhanced its underwater endurance and stealth. The Pakistani vessels are set to be armed with the Babur-3 submarine-launched cruise missile.

Experts say the Pakistan Navy has also inducted the P282/CM-401 supersonic anti-ship missiles that have both anti-ship and land-attack capabilities. They can effectively neutralise the threat posed by India’s Dhanush ship-launched ballistic missiles. They also provide a credible counter to the Indian Navy’s BrahMos missile system.

Despite deployment of powerful naval assets, neither India nor Pakistan made a move at sea. The quiet at the sea showed just how risky a naval clash could be. One wrong step at sea could quickly escalate the tension into a much bigger crisis, with serious economic and strategic damage far beyond the battlefield.

The writer is a senior staffer at The News, Karachi