Escalating Tensions Between India and Pakistan: Strategic Response or Political Diversion?

 

Escalating Tensions Between India and Pakistan: Strategic Response or Political Diversion?

https://rakeshinsightfulgaze.blogspot.com/2025/05/india-launches-missile-strikes-in.html

In the wake of a recent terror attack in Kashmir, the Indian government has launched a series of strikes on Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (POK), a move being framed as a decisive counter-terrorism action. However, critics argue that this show of force may be more about deflecting blame than delivering meaningful security outcomes—especially with state elections in Bihar just around the corner.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration is under scrutiny for what many see as a serious lapse in intelligence and security preparedness. Kashmir, a region long plagued by militant activity, saw yet another deadly attack despite prior warnings. In response, the government opted for military retaliation. Yet, there is growing skepticism over whether this approach targets the root of the problem—or merely its visible symptoms.

The destruction of training sites may carry symbolic weight, but history shows that infrastructure can be rebuilt, and extremist ideologies persist unless the deeper networks—those who fund, train, and logistically support terror—are dismantled. So far, there has been little public evidence that India has traced and exposed these networks, nor any strategy outlined for sustained pressure on them.

For a campaign of this scale, the government owes the public a comprehensive explanation: who was targeted, what intelligence supported the strikes, and how this operation fits into a broader national security strategy that avoids pushing the region toward a nuclear confrontation. Even a remote risk of escalation with a nuclear-armed neighbor should demand careful political and military calculus—not reactionary optics.

There is also a striking absence of statesmanship reminiscent of past Indian leadership. During the 1971 crisis, then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi articulated a clear vision to both domestic and international audiences—culminating in the liberation of Bangladesh. Today, the country seeks similar clarity and conviction from its leaders. Yet the political messaging appears focused more on domestic consumption than regional resolution.

Some suggest that a more strategic and transformative approach would involve supporting political resistance within Pakistan, such as the Baloch movement, to directly challenge the Pakistani military establishment—an institution that has long wielded disproportionate influence over the country’s foreign and security policies. Weakening this apparatus could, in theory, open space for civilian political forces to foster more peaceful engagement with neighbors.

However, this too is complicated by international geopolitics. Certain Western powers, driven by strategic interests, continue to support or tolerate the status quo in Pakistan, particularly its military dominance. A destabilized South Asia—just stable enough to avoid open war, but never cohesive enough to rise as a unified economic force—serves some external agendas.

For those applauding the recent strikes as a demonstration of strength, caution is warranted. Unless backed by long-term strategy and transparency, there’s a real risk this is little more than political theater—a calculated move to rally nationalistic fervor ahead of the polls.

Whether this marks the beginning of a sustained shift in India’s counter-terrorism doctrine or simply a well-timed performance will become clearer in the days to come. For now, the region watches—and waits.