Pakistan Affairs
Saif
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2024
- Messages
- 15,397
- Reaction score
- 7,874
- Nation
- Residence
- Axis Group
‘Margin for error razor-thin’
Tensions between India and Pakistan, both nuclear-armed, have escalated since last week following a deadly terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir.
NEWS ANALYSIS: Indo-Pak tensions
‘Margin for error razor-thin’
Analysts say rivals eying ‘escalation dominance’, but any misstep may trigger a war
Tensions between India and Pakistan, both nuclear-armed, have escalated since last week following a deadly terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir.
Amid war of words from both sides, analysts fear that though both the rivals are not an all-out war, any misstep might trigger a spiralling conflict between the neighbours.
Yesterday, Pakistan claimed India intends to launch military action within "the next 24–36 hours on the pretext of baseless and concocted allegations of involvement in the Pahalgam incident."
On April 22, gunmen killed 26 people in Indian-administered Kashmir, the disputed Himalayan region that has long strained relations between the two neighbours.
India identified three attackers, including two Pakistani nationals. Pakistan has denied involvement and called for a neutral investigation.
Since the attack, both nations have taken retaliatory measures: India has downgraded diplomatic ties, expelled Pakistani nationals and suspended the critical Indus Waters Treaty, and Pakistan has closed its airspace to Indian airlines.
On Tuesday, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi gave the military "operational freedom" to respond, according to a senior government source. Modi also declared India had a "national resolve to deal a crushing blow to terrorism," the source told Agence France-Presse.
The day before, Pakistan's Defence Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif told Reuters that a military incursion by India was imminent and that Pakistan had made "strategic decisions" in response.
He added that Pakistan was on high alert and would only consider using nuclear weapons if "there is a direct threat to our existence."
The crisis has also united political rivals in both countries.
In Pakistan, where political parties have recently criticised the military, the looming threat has galvanised public and political support for the armed forces.
In India, opposition leader Rahul Gandhi, usually a vocal critic of Modi, stated that the opposition stood united in condemning the attack.
"Whatever steps the government wishes to take, we will fully support them," Gandhi said.
Modi faces intense domestic pressure to respond, as "criticism of the Indian government's perceived failure to protect civilians was also widespread," said Praveen Donthi, an analyst at the International Crisis Group.
Analysts suggest any conflict would focus on achieving "escalation dominance" --demonstrating superior force to shape future relations.
"India is not looking to escalate this crisis," said Yogesh Gupta, a former Indian ambassador, in the South China Morning Post.
"We only want to re-establish deterrence against Pakistan's terror strikes, as we did after Balakot," he added, referring to India's 2019 airstrike on a militant camp in northern Pakistan run by Jaish-e-Mohammed.
Gupta noted that Pakistan's current army chief, Asim Munir, is "far more hostile" than his predecessor, Qamar Bajwa, who had sought de-escalation after the 2019 strike. Thus, "this deterrence will need to be established at a much higher level," Gupta said.
Asfandyar Mir, a Washington-based South Asia security analyst, agreed that India and Pakistan are "moving toward a hot conflict, likely to be more intense than the 2019 crisis."
"The mood in India is one of vengeance, and Indian leadership appears committed to imposing an enormous cost on Pakistan," Mir said, while noting that Islamabad is "equally prepared to counter any Indian action and respond forcefully and swiftly."
"The situation [in 2019] was eventually defused, thanks in part to diplomatic pressure from Washington," said Donthi.
It's unclear how this crisis might unfold without such external intervention, said Christine Fair, a professor at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service.
Analysts warn that international mediation may be less likely this time than during previous flare-ups.
"The US is preoccupied with Ukraine, Gaza, and the Iran deal, possibly opening space for Beijing to insert itself," said Colin Clarke of the Soufan Center in New York.
However, "given China's close relationship with Pakistan, it is unlikely India would trust it as a neutral mediator."
"The US has been clear: Pakistan is on its own, and the US will not pressure India to hold back," Fair said.
Military analyst Boyko Nikolov said the crisis is "less about strategic victory and more about maintaining credible deterrence while managing domestic narratives."
Both sides are signalling "they can absorb a punch and strike back harder," but the real danger, he added, is a misstep -- such as a poorly calibrated strike or a terrorist attack attributed to the wrong actor -- that could "spiral beyond control."
"For now, both nations are posturing, but the margin for error is razor-thin," said Nikolov, editor-in-chief of BulgarianMilitary.com.
‘Margin for error razor-thin’
Analysts say rivals eying ‘escalation dominance’, but any misstep may trigger a war
Tensions between India and Pakistan, both nuclear-armed, have escalated since last week following a deadly terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir.
Amid war of words from both sides, analysts fear that though both the rivals are not an all-out war, any misstep might trigger a spiralling conflict between the neighbours.
Yesterday, Pakistan claimed India intends to launch military action within "the next 24–36 hours on the pretext of baseless and concocted allegations of involvement in the Pahalgam incident."
On April 22, gunmen killed 26 people in Indian-administered Kashmir, the disputed Himalayan region that has long strained relations between the two neighbours.
India identified three attackers, including two Pakistani nationals. Pakistan has denied involvement and called for a neutral investigation.
Since the attack, both nations have taken retaliatory measures: India has downgraded diplomatic ties, expelled Pakistani nationals and suspended the critical Indus Waters Treaty, and Pakistan has closed its airspace to Indian airlines.
On Tuesday, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi gave the military "operational freedom" to respond, according to a senior government source. Modi also declared India had a "national resolve to deal a crushing blow to terrorism," the source told Agence France-Presse.
The day before, Pakistan's Defence Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif told Reuters that a military incursion by India was imminent and that Pakistan had made "strategic decisions" in response.
He added that Pakistan was on high alert and would only consider using nuclear weapons if "there is a direct threat to our existence."
The crisis has also united political rivals in both countries.
In Pakistan, where political parties have recently criticised the military, the looming threat has galvanised public and political support for the armed forces.
In India, opposition leader Rahul Gandhi, usually a vocal critic of Modi, stated that the opposition stood united in condemning the attack.
"Whatever steps the government wishes to take, we will fully support them," Gandhi said.
Modi faces intense domestic pressure to respond, as "criticism of the Indian government's perceived failure to protect civilians was also widespread," said Praveen Donthi, an analyst at the International Crisis Group.
Analysts suggest any conflict would focus on achieving "escalation dominance" --demonstrating superior force to shape future relations.
"India is not looking to escalate this crisis," said Yogesh Gupta, a former Indian ambassador, in the South China Morning Post.
"We only want to re-establish deterrence against Pakistan's terror strikes, as we did after Balakot," he added, referring to India's 2019 airstrike on a militant camp in northern Pakistan run by Jaish-e-Mohammed.
Gupta noted that Pakistan's current army chief, Asim Munir, is "far more hostile" than his predecessor, Qamar Bajwa, who had sought de-escalation after the 2019 strike. Thus, "this deterrence will need to be established at a much higher level," Gupta said.
Asfandyar Mir, a Washington-based South Asia security analyst, agreed that India and Pakistan are "moving toward a hot conflict, likely to be more intense than the 2019 crisis."
"The mood in India is one of vengeance, and Indian leadership appears committed to imposing an enormous cost on Pakistan," Mir said, while noting that Islamabad is "equally prepared to counter any Indian action and respond forcefully and swiftly."
"The situation [in 2019] was eventually defused, thanks in part to diplomatic pressure from Washington," said Donthi.
It's unclear how this crisis might unfold without such external intervention, said Christine Fair, a professor at Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service.
Analysts warn that international mediation may be less likely this time than during previous flare-ups.
"The US is preoccupied with Ukraine, Gaza, and the Iran deal, possibly opening space for Beijing to insert itself," said Colin Clarke of the Soufan Center in New York.
However, "given China's close relationship with Pakistan, it is unlikely India would trust it as a neutral mediator."
"The US has been clear: Pakistan is on its own, and the US will not pressure India to hold back," Fair said.
Military analyst Boyko Nikolov said the crisis is "less about strategic victory and more about maintaining credible deterrence while managing domestic narratives."
Both sides are signalling "they can absorb a punch and strike back harder," but the real danger, he added, is a misstep -- such as a poorly calibrated strike or a terrorist attack attributed to the wrong actor -- that could "spiral beyond control."
"For now, both nations are posturing, but the margin for error is razor-thin," said Nikolov, editor-in-chief of BulgarianMilitary.com.
