India Opens ‘Pandora’s Box’ with Strikes on Pakistan
Ishtiaq Ahmed
Bradford: It is difficult to separate patriotic emotions from objective analysis when addressing the current tensions between India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed neighbours with a long and troubled history.
However, in this instance, India appears to have taken the role of aggressor. Its actions seem calculated and premeditated, following the recent terrorist attack in Pahalgam, which, Pakistan has categorically condemned and denying having any involvement.
India’s immediate suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a landmark agreement brokered in 1960 between Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistani President Ayub Khan, marks a significant and worrying escalation.
This treaty, which regulates the sharing of the Indus River system, has withstood multiple crises over the decades. The Modi government’s decision to abandon it, along with its earlier abrogation of Article 370 (which granted special autonomy to Jammu and Kashmir), suggests a broader strategic shift.
It appears to be discarding historical commitments made by India’s founding leaders in favour of a more aggressive, nationalist agenda.
The military escalation reached a critical point when India launched cross-border strikes, dubbed “Operation Sindoor,” targeting locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
Read More: https://thepenpk.com/the-indus-water-treaty-equation/
Reports indicate that the missile strikes killed at least 26 people and wounded dozens more in Pakistan’s Punjab Province and Kashmir region. In response, Pakistani fire reportedly killed at least 10 and injured several in Indian-administered Kashmir.
Pakistan has accused India of deliberately targeting civilians in what it terms an unprovoked act of aggression, while India maintains that it struck only terrorist training camps. Both governments are now engaged in rhetorical warfare, stoking nationalist fervour to rally domestic support. While the fog of political posturing obscures many facts, it is difficult to ignore that India appears to be scripting the latest chapter in this dangerous escalation.
India’s strategy bears resemblance to the approach Israel has taken in its conflicts with neighbouring Muslim-majority regions, marked by pre-emptive strikes, tight control of contested territories, and a disregard for established agreements. The military and strategic alignment between India and Israel is well-documented and may offer insights into New Delhi’s current playbook.
Pakistan has declared a national emergency, and its Prime Minister has convened the National Security Council (NSC). Though an official response has yet to be unveiled, Islamabad has indicated that it will retaliate proportionately. The scale and nature of its actions are likely to become clearer within the next 24 hours.
The situation is rapidly evolving into a volatile tinderbox. China has labelled India’s actions as “regrettable,” while the UN Secretary-General has urged restraint and a return to dialogue. Iran has echoed similar concerns. The United States, a close ally of India, is treading cautiously, likely constrained by its strategic interests.
Russia, India’s hitherto principal arms supplier, remains distracted by its ongoing war in Ukraine and may not be in a position to mediate. Among potential mediators, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, nations with strong ties to both India and Pakistan might emerge as credible brokers for peace.
Read More: https://thepenpk.com/indian-strikes-kill-26-civilians-injure-46-in-pakistan-dg-ispr/
Amid the escalating tensions, a sliver of hope lies in the fact that formal diplomatic relations between the two countries remain intact. In most cases of military confrontation, severing diplomatic ties is among the first steps; the fact that this has not happened suggests both sides are acutely aware of the catastrophic consequences of a full-scale war. Bilateral trade also continues, albeit under strain, reflecting the deep interdependence that exists despite the animosity.
At the heart of this crisis lies the unresolved Kashmir’s right to self-determination, an issue that has haunted India-Pakistan relations since Partition. Until a resolution is achieved that reflects the aspirations of the Kashmiri people and acknowledges their right to self-determination, long-term peace in the region will remain elusive.
The Modi government’s unilateral removal of Article 370, which provided constitutional protections to Jammu and Kashmir, has only deepened the mistrust and inflamed tensions.
The immediate trigger for this crisis may have been the Pahalgam terrorist attack, but the roots run far deeper. India’s suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty and subsequent military action suggest a significant escalation that risks destabilising the entire region.
As both nations brace for the next phase of this confrontation, the international community must act swiftly to prevent a wider conflict.
The author is a British citizen of Pakistani origin with a keen interest in Pakistani and international affairs.
India would be better off and more constructive if it was to join forces with Pakistan to contain and eliminate the terrorist threat on both sides of the border instead of war mongering .
Perhaps, Modi is not interested in eliminating terrorist threat. Instead , his agenda is more extreme and expansive as that of Israel .
My Rational Assessment is that :
This article is intellectually provocative but leans toward advocacy journalism. It reflects deep concern over regional destabilization but adopts a selectively critical stance, focusing heavily on Indian actions while downplaying or ignoring Pakistan’s own strategic behavior and internal contradictions. A more balanced analytical approach would critically interrogate both countries’ roles in perpetuating the conflict, including their use of nationalist narratives, proxy warfare, and diplomatic brinkmanship.
I make no apology for being partisan . In fact, I have alluded to it in the opening sentence. Even with all the faults that we see with Pakistan’s internal and external position, in the conflict, India is the aggressor and all the evidence that it has created a scenario to pursue a certain goal.