Two things should not have happened in April and May 2025. On April 22, the unfortunate incident of Pahalgam should not have happened because it was a high-security zone and a famous tourist resort in the conflict-ridden area. Secondly, India should have attacked Pakistan on May 7, on its counterforce and countervalue targets so deep inside Pakistan. Instead, India should have accepted Pakistan’s offer of a fair, free, and impartial investigation.
Nuclear nations do not conduct their affairs like India does. The same had happened in February 2019, also after the Pulwama incident. On that occasion, too, Pakistan had offered its cooperation for an investigation, but India refused. On each occasion, it appeared as if an old script was executed, with some adjustments. Pulwama killed Indian military personnel, but Pahalgam led to the killing of innocent civilians who were there for vacations.
Even if India did not want to discuss Jammu and Kashmir immediately, it should have addressed the issue of water shared between the two countries under the Indus Water Treaty of 1960
On each occasion, the task of punishing Pakistan without any worthwhile investigation was given to the Indian Air Force (IAF), the fourth largest in the world. Since India did not change the narrative and the modus operandi, Pakistan also thought it appropriate to stick to its response option of quid pro quo, which had been communicated to India well in advance that we will not believe but act if India does any military misadventure.
The outcome was even more disastrous for the IAF. On February 27, 2019, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) shot down two IAF fighter jets in a brief aerial engagement, and the Indian Air Defence system downed one IAF Helicopter in the fog of war. However, between May 7 and 10, 2025, PAF claims to have shot down at least six fighter jets and a Combat UAV. The claimed aircraft include at least four Rafale jets, one Mirage 2000, and one Su30MKI. I understand that claims and counterclaims are part of the warfare, and may take years before the claim is awarded to the shooter, but several Indian officials have started to come to terms with IAF losses.
Coming back to the title and the first few lines of this short article, it should not have happened. However, the two nuclear neighbours missed an opportunity to initiate serious talks, which could have prevented the recurrence of these short wars.
Ideally speaking, some kind of Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) should have been initiated to resolve their protracted conflicts. Even if India did not want to discuss Jammu and Kashmir immediately, it should have addressed the issue of water shared between the two countries under the Indus Water Treaty of 1960, which India has suspended.
There are several issues which could be taken up to restart CBMs, which were initiated after the 2001-02 military standoff between the two, but suspended after the Mumbai Attacks of 2008. The two cricket-loving nations do not play against each other in their countries, primarily because India refuses to come to Pakistan and also denies visas to Pakistani players to play in India. In contrast, the clash between the cricketing giants is always a gatecrasher if held in India or Pakistan.
Likewise, India does not allow media and showbiz people to visit and work in Bollywood, whereas the people of India profoundly love Pakistani stars. Similarly, the absence of direct trade between the two states results in wasted time and money spent through the Gulf states.
The international and regional shocks do provide opportunities for warring nations to resolve their disputes or conflicts peacefully. In my opinion, the May 2025 events provided an opportunity for India to initiate a dialogue on different platforms. But misunderstanding or mistrust led to another missed opportunity.
I have always insisted that India stands to gain more by having resolved its disputes with Pakistan. However, India’s refusal to comply continues to test Pakistan’s resolve in defending its territorial integrity and sovereignty. On each occasion, Pakistan has responded in kind, ably led by the PAF, which is the leading pillar of the country’s conventional response. How long will India persist in this behaviour, and what are its motives for causing strategic instability in South Asia? These questions need to be studied seriously, as each of these short military engagements has the potential to escalate into full-blown wars. A serious effort is required by academia in both countries to convince India’s leadership that such incidents are counterproductive and may lead to serious consequences. Let us not miss the opportunity for peace and productive engagement for the sake of mistrust alone. Please talk for peace, walk for peace, play for peace, and trade for peace, because the people of South Asia deserve a better life.
The writer of this article has authored four international books: Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan, South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace, Understanding Sun Tzu and the Art of Hybrid War, and Diplomacy and Deterrence.”
Two things should not have happened in April and May 2025. On April 22, the unfortunate incident of Pahalgam should not have happened because it was a high-security zone and a famous tourist resort in the conflict-ridden area. Secondly, India should have attacked Pakistan on May 7, on its counterforce and countervalue targets so deep inside Pakistan. Instead, India should have accepted Pakistan’s offer of a fair, free, and impartial investigation.
Nuclear nations do not conduct their affairs like India does. The same had happened in February 2019, also after the Pulwama incident. On that occasion, too, Pakistan had offered its cooperation for an investigation, but India refused. On each occasion, it appeared as if an old script was executed, with some adjustments. Pulwama killed Indian military personnel, but Pahalgam led to the killing of innocent civilians who were there for vacations.
On each occasion, the task of punishing Pakistan without any worthwhile investigation was given to the Indian Air Force (IAF), the fourth largest in the world. Since India did not change the narrative and the modus operandi, Pakistan also thought it appropriate to stick to its response option of quid pro quo, which had been communicated to India well in advance that we will not believe but act if India does any military misadventure.
The outcome was even more disastrous for the IAF. On February 27, 2019, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) shot down two IAF fighter jets in a brief aerial engagement, and the Indian Air Defence system downed one IAF Helicopter in the fog of war. However, between May 7 and 10, 2025, PAF claims to have shot down at least six fighter jets and a Combat UAV. The claimed aircraft include at least four Rafale jets, one Mirage 2000, and one Su30MKI. I understand that claims and counterclaims are part of the warfare, and may take years before the claim is awarded to the shooter, but several Indian officials have started to come to terms with IAF losses.
Coming back to the title and the first few lines of this short article, it should not have happened. However, the two nuclear neighbours missed an opportunity to initiate serious talks, which could have prevented the recurrence of these short wars.
Ideally speaking, some kind of Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) should have been initiated to resolve their protracted conflicts. Even if India did not want to discuss Jammu and Kashmir immediately, it should have addressed the issue of water shared between the two countries under the Indus Water Treaty of 1960, which India has suspended.
There are several issues which could be taken up to restart CBMs, which were initiated after the 2001-02 military standoff between the two, but suspended after the Mumbai Attacks of 2008. The two cricket-loving nations do not play against each other in their countries, primarily because India refuses to come to Pakistan and also denies visas to Pakistani players to play in India. In contrast, the clash between the cricketing giants is always a gatecrasher if held in India or Pakistan.
Likewise, India does not allow media and showbiz people to visit and work in Bollywood, whereas the people of India profoundly love Pakistani stars. Similarly, the absence of direct trade between the two states results in wasted time and money spent through the Gulf states.
The international and regional shocks do provide opportunities for warring nations to resolve their disputes or conflicts peacefully. In my opinion, the May 2025 events provided an opportunity for India to initiate a dialogue on different platforms. But misunderstanding or mistrust led to another missed opportunity.
I have always insisted that India stands to gain more by having resolved its disputes with Pakistan. However, India’s refusal to comply continues to test Pakistan’s resolve in defending its territorial integrity and sovereignty. On each occasion, Pakistan has responded in kind, ably led by the PAF, which is the leading pillar of the country’s conventional response. How long will India persist in this behaviour, and what are its motives for causing strategic instability in South Asia? These questions need to be studied seriously, as each of these short military engagements has the potential to escalate into full-blown wars. A serious effort is required by academia in both countries to convince India’s leadership that such incidents are counterproductive and may lead to serious consequences. Let us not miss the opportunity for peace and productive engagement for the sake of mistrust alone. Please talk for peace, walk for peace, play for peace, and trade for peace, because the people of South Asia deserve a better life.
The writer of this article has authored four international books: Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan, South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace, Understanding Sun Tzu and the Art of Hybrid War, and Diplomacy and Deterrence.”