Tensions between India and Pakistan have intensified in the aftermath of the Pahalgam incident, where 26 Indian tourists lost their lives. India swiftly blamed Pakistan, despite a lack of concrete evidence. In response, India withdrew from a key treaty, prompting Pakistan to close its airspace. Analysts warned that these moves brought the region closer to war. That warning became reality on the night of May 7, when India launched airstrikes on nine locations in Pakistan, including Bahawalpur, Muridke, and Muzaffarabad. The strikes reportedly killed 26 people and injured dozens more. India claimed it was targeting terrorist camps, framing the operation as a counterterrorism measure.
However, this action drew sharp criticism. It was seen internationally as a rash and provocative escalation. Pakistan, in turn, launched a calibrated and deliberate response. Citing Article 51 of the UN Charter, which allows states to defend themselves, Pakistan treated the Indian strikes as acts of aggression. In retaliation, Pakistani forces shot down five Indian warplanes. The exchange of fire along the Line of Control (LoC) resumed, signaling a deeper escalation.
In terms of conventional military power, India had a perceived advantage, particularly in air capabilities. The Indian Air Force recently acquired 26 Rafale fighter jets from France, armed with SCALP missiles and AASM Hammer bombs. Despite these technological gains, the Indian jets were downed by Pakistan’s JF-17 Thunder aircraft, equipped with Chinese PL-15 air-to-air missiles. This outcome has caused considerable embarrassment for India and invited comparisons to past military standoffs.
This pattern of escalation is not new. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has repeatedly been accused of stirring hostility with Pakistan to boost domestic popularity. Critics argue this tactic appeals to nationalist sentiments and a population often misinformed by partisan media. Much of Indian television coverage has downplayed recent failures, contributing to public confusion and misinformation.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has repeatedly been accused of stirring hostility with Pakistan to boost domestic popularity.
Recent developments at the Line of control (LoC) further reflect India’s shifting posture. Reports suggest Indian forces raised white flags at certain positions. Meanwhile, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, Ishaq Dar, emphasized that Pakistan would continue to show restraint, unless provoked. Pakistan maintains that it does not seek war, but will respond decisively when necessary. The broader concern is regional strategic stability. Both India and Pakistan possess nuclear weapons. Current developments suggest that deterrence is weakening at the conventional level. According to the escalation ladder, the situation has reached the fourth level, crossing the threshold of limited conflict. The “stability-instability paradox” is at play here: nuclear deterrence may prevent full-scale war, but it encourages smaller, riskier conflicts. The present trajectory is dangerous. If India escalates further, a conventional war becomes more likely. The burden is now on Indian leadership to act with maturity and restraint.
Geopolitically, the stakes are higher than ever. Pakistan has full support from China , mainly due to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which is vital to Beijing’s interests. On the other side, the United States and its allies have been propping up India against China. This support comes through platforms like the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) that is between India, Japan, Australia and USA and I2U2, an alliance of India, Israel, the UAE, and the U.S.
India claims its military buildup is aimed at China. But Pakistan sees the real threat directed at itself. That’s why it’s in an arms race, to match India’s growing capabilities. This conflict has now become a testing ground for rival technologies and alliances. With global powers involved, South Asia risks becoming a battlefield in a new cold war. Pakistan and India could end up as pawns in a much bigger power struggle.
The writer previously worked with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), where I conducted research on social inclusion and gender equality in the context of Pakistan.