April 22, 2025 began as a normal day for just about everyone. A sunny afternoon saw 500 or so tourists turn up at the Baisaran meadow in South Kashmir\u2019s Pahalgam. What was supposed to be a serene and peaceful day, however, turned dark.
The massacre by Pakistan-linked terrorists of over two dozen Hindu tourists in the Pahalgam area of the Union Territory (UT) of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) has plunged the region into a serious crisis, one that could lead to a military conflagration between India and Pakistan.
Sudden sounds of gunshots rang through the air. And before anyone could react, a group of five or six terrorists from The Resistance Force, an offshoot of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, had killed at least 26 innocent tourists in cold blood. As more details of this dastardly terror attack come in, one thing is clear: it was a well-planned attack specifically aimed at tourists, directed from Pakistan.
Pattern of the Attack
The attack took place on the day when two VIP visits were underway: Prime Minister Narendra Modi was travelling to Saudi Arabia in a landmark visit not only in the context of bilateral ties but also of India\u2019s role in the conflict-ridden Middle East; and JD Vance, the Vice President of the United States, was in India on an official-cum-personal visit. Parallels were immediately drawn to a similar terror attack on innocent civilians in the Chittisinghpora village in Kashmir on March 20, 2000, coinciding with the arrival of then-US President Bill Clinton to India. Thirty-five people from the Sikh community were brutally massacred. But there\u2019s another analogue.
A few days before the massacre, Pakistan\u2019s de facto ruler Army Chief General Asim Munir had berated the \u201cTwo-Nation\u201d theory and called Kashmir the jugular vein of Pakistan which it can never give up, nor forget the Kashmiris fighting (most of the terrorists in J&K are Punjabi Muslims from Pakistan) against India, clearly indicating that he was going to ramp up support for the Pakistani Islamist Jihadist terror groups and their proxies operating in the UT. Propagandists of the Pakistan Army, including journalists like Najam Sethi, were openly warning on television news programmes that Kashmir was going to heat up. The carnage in Pahalgam, therefore, should not come as a surprise.
After the deadly Uri Attack in September 2016, where 19 Indian soldiers were killed, India launched what it called \u201csurgical strikes\u201d across the de facto border – also known as the Line of Control (LoC) – targeting what it said were militant launch pads in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. And in 2019, after at least 40 paramilitary personnel were killed in Pulwama, India hit an alleged militant camp in Balakot with air strikes – its first such strike deep inside Pakistan since 1971. Pakistan responded with air raids, leading to a dogfight and the brief capture of an Indian pilot. Both sides showed strength but avoided full-scale war.
Nature of a military response depends on the intended political message
Any military response to a major terror attack will be shaped by the political message that is being sought to be conveyed by the victim state and in the recent past the US experience after 9\/11 in 2001 and the Israeli response to the October 2023 Hamas attack are instructive. A cost-benefit analysis would reveal that the ideology of terrorism cannot be erased by military means alone, though the elimination of suspected terror groups remains a political imperative after a major attack. To that extent, the probability of a Modi military response remains high.
Pahalgam will have to be responded to in a measured and calibrated manner and as the adage goes, revenge is a dish best served cold. In the first instance, the perpetrators of Pahalgam should be identified, apprehended and the cross border linkage established in such a manner that the links to Rawalpindi are irrefutable. The intelligence lapses that led to Pahalgam must not be swept under the carpet and heads must roll \u2013 at the top.
Options for India to respond to ghastly attack
Be that as it may, India\u2019s options are that the ceasefire on the Line of Control (LoC) can be ended and areas inside Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) can be pulverised using artillery and rockets. Pakistan will undoubtedly retaliate, but does India have enough bunkers to secure the civilian population and the military personnel, or did it waste the four years of ceasefire basking in the sun? By heating the LoC and putting military pressure all along the international border, India can force Pakistan to divert and commit the bulk of its forces to its eastern front.
India can unsettle Pakistan and keep it guessing by making shows of forays across the border to ensure Pakistan doesn\u2019t redeploy these troops to its western front, where two insurgencies are already raging. This will put enormous pressure on the Pakistani forces. Chances are they will try to negotiate a deal with Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, conceding to their demands to get some relief from the West. The implications for Pakistan\u2019s security will be extremely damaging. Alternatively, Pakistan will be caught in a two-front situation. Additionally, with Sindh heating up over Punjab and Pakistan Army\u2019s plans to steal its waters, another front might open up, which can also be exploited by India. To keep Sindh calm, if the military has to back down from its self-enrichment plan to green the desert by desertifying Sindh, it will be a major setback to the Army\u2019s prestige and power.
Targeted assassination is one of the oldest forms of revenge, mastered best by Israel. How Israel was able to assassinate Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran, or Hezbollah chief Hasan Nasrallah, is now a well-established story. In Pakistan\u2019s case, however, key figures in the army and major terrorist groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Jaish-e-Mohammed could be targeted and eliminated. With the advancement in surveillance technology and targeting systems, it may not even be necessary to have a physical presence of an operative, once the initial work has been done.
Apart from heating the border, India can target terrorist bases and perhaps Pakistan military establishments using artillery, air power or missiles. To be sure, Pakistan will respond. India needs to absorb these attacks and go up the escalation ladder. Another prong can be economic. India can unilaterally declare the abrogation of the Indus Waters Treaty. Again, there will be a pushback from the World Bank and other multilateral institutions. Pakistan could try to drag itself into international arbitration. Does India have the diplomatic clout to defy and defeat the forces arrayed against it? Will the Americans and Europeans stand with India or on the fence? How will China respond? Will India convey to China that it is \u2018either with us or against us\u2019 in this fight against Islamic terrorism? And if it is against India, will there be strategic and economic consequences for China? How far is India willing to go?
Some challenges to be factored into a military response
India\u2019s military response is predicated on its composite military capability and the reality that a significant component of the helicopter fleet \u2013 the ALH (Advanced Light Helicopter) is grounded for safety reasons tells its own story. The reduction of troops in J&K due to the Galwan challenge with China and the dilution of boots-on-the ground post-Covid and the Agniveer scheme has placed a heavier than usual burden on the Army in discharging its low intensity conflict and internal security duties.
India\u2019s response must be firm but calibrated, combining strategic deterrence with developmental integration. A long-term solution lies in simultaneously ensuring zero-tolerance against terrorism and building inclusive peace through democratic participation, economic upliftment, and community trust-building in Kashmir.
Pahalgam is a challenge and it must be met with resolve and integrity across the board to quarantine the ideology of terrorism in Kashmir. Impulsive military responses could be costly and counterproductive in the long run.
Dr. S. Krishnan is an Associate Professor in Seedling School of Law and Governance, Jaipur National University, Jaipur<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
April 22, 2025 began as a normal day for just about everyone. A sunny afternoon saw 500 or so tourists turn up at the Baisaran meadow in South Kashmir\u2019s Pahalgam. What was supposed to be a serene and peaceful day, however, turned dark.The massacre by Pakistan-linked terrorists of over two dozen Hindu tourists in the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[395],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-486110","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","category-opinion"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nagalandpost.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/486110","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nagalandpost.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nagalandpost.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nagalandpost.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nagalandpost.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=486110"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nagalandpost.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/486110\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nagalandpost.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=486110"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nagalandpost.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=486110"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nagalandpost.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=486110"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}