Muslim World Report

India Responds to Pahalgam Terror Attack with Sweeping Measures

Dr. Anthony Lindsay | Apr 23, 2025 9:35 PM | 7 min read | 1296 words

TL;DR: A recent terrorist attack in Pahalgam, India, has led to drastic measures by the Indian government, including suspending the Indus Waters Treaty and closing the Wagah-Attari border. These actions signify a shift in India’s national security approach and could escalate tensions with Pakistan. The article discusses the implications of these actions, potential retaliatory scenarios, and the necessity for diplomatic engagement.

The Situation

The recent terrorist attack in Baisaran Valley near Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, which claimed the lives of 27 individuals—primarily tourists—represents a critical juncture in the fraught relationship between India and Pakistan. This incident is not merely an isolated act of violence; it has triggered a series of aggressive measures taken by the Indian government, indicating a marked shift in its approach to national security and regional diplomacy.

India’s Immediate Actions:

In response to the attack, India has taken the following decisive measures:

  • Suspended the Indus Waters Treaty: This essential agreement was established in 1960 to govern water-sharing between the two nations. Its suspension could exacerbate existing tensions over shared water resources, a contentious issue in South Asia (Wescoat, Halvorson, & Mustafa, 2000).

  • Closed the Wagah-Attari border: This closure halts all trade and movement, while also revoking all SAARC visas for Pakistani nationals, demanding their departure within 48 hours.

  • Expulsion of Military Attaches: Three Pakistani military attaches have been expelled from New Delhi, and Indian military advisors have been recalled from Islamabad, further straining diplomatic ties. This signals a departure from previously nuanced responses to cross-border terrorism (Gleditsch et al., 2002; Hiro, 2012).

These actions carry significant implications for regional stability and reflect a disturbing trend towards militarism and nationalism that has taken hold in India.

Consequences for Civilians

The Indian government frames its actions as necessary for safeguarding national interests; however, these measures risk deepening the vulnerabilities faced by ordinary people in both countries. Civilians are often the most affected by the fallout of diplomatic breakdowns and military posturing. The global implications of these events resonate far beyond South Asia, reflecting broader patterns of imperialism and state violence (Dudgeon, 2005).

What If Scenarios

As the situation continues to unfold, it is essential to consider various ‘What If’ scenarios that could impact the region’s stability and the relationships between India, Pakistan, and the international community.

What if Pakistan retaliates militarily?

Given the historical precedent of military confrontations between the two nations, a scenario where Pakistan responds militarily is conceivable. Possible forms of retaliation could include:

  • Localized skirmishes along the Line of Control.
  • Coordinated military operations aimed at Indian positions.

The implications of such a response would be dire, potentially leading to full-scale conflict and a humanitarian crisis as civilians become increasingly vulnerable to the collateral damage of war (Ladwig, 2008).

A military escalation could:

  • Destabilize the entire region: Prompting a humanitarian crisis that affects millions.
  • Entrench animosities: Deepening societal divisions and hardening nationalistic sentiments on both sides (Clary & Narang, 2019).
  • Provoke international responses: Particularly from nations like the U.S., China, and Russia, with vested interests in South Asia.

The possibility of nuclear strategy debates reigniting is particularly concerning, given that both India and Pakistan possess nuclear arsenals. Any military confrontation could quickly spiral out of control, leading to catastrophic consequences (Makeig, 1987).

What if international bodies intervene?

If hostilities escalate, could international bodies like the United Nations or regional powers step in to mediate? While past interventions have often met skepticism, the current geopolitical climate may demand a more active role from global players (Boyle, 1991).

Potential interventions could include:

  • China leveraging its relationship with Pakistan.
  • The U.S. encouraging de-escalation with India.

However, the effectiveness of any external mediation hinges on both nations’ willingness to engage constructively (Tignino, 2010).

What if diplomatic relations normalize?

A more optimistic scenario involves the gradual normalization of diplomatic relations between India and Pakistan. Should both governments recognize the value of diplomatic ties amid escalating tensions, it could set the stage for a long-term peace process. Initiatives could include:

  • Confidence-building measures.
  • Backchannel communications.
  • Collaborative frameworks addressing broader socio-economic issues.

Engagement could allow for addressing longstanding grievances, including those related to Kashmir and cross-border violence. A comprehensive peace process may facilitate joint economic projects and people-to-people exchanges, promoting mutual understanding (Dudgeon, 2005; Rafiq & Rowen, 2006).

However, achieving this requires a significant paradigm shift from both governments, moving away from the historically entrenched zero-sum mentality (Impiani, 2019).

Strategic Maneuvers

To navigate the complex dynamics resulting from the recent escalation in Jammu and Kashmir, several strategic maneuvers are essential for all parties involved.

For India

Recalibrating India’s national security strategy is crucial. While the government’s immediate measures may seem justified, a more nuanced approach toward Pakistan could stabilize the region. Key recommendations include:

  • Reopening diplomatic channels at a limited level to facilitate communication regarding cross-border issues.
  • Engaging in confidence-building measures that emphasize collaboration against terrorism without aggressive posturing (Hankins et al., 2002).
  • Focusing on public diplomacy: Transparency regarding actions can help build trust both regionally and internationally (Khan, 2012).

For Pakistan

Pakistan must proceed cautiously in its response. Instead of escalating tensions, it could leverage regional geopolitical strategies to advocate for resolution through international pressure on India (Zhang & Li, 2018). Prioritizing internal stability and addressing socio-economic grievances can mitigate the influence of extremist narratives.

Prioritizing Civil Society Engagement

Both nations must prioritize the needs and security of their civilian populations. Engaging with civil society organizations, peace advocates, and local communities can foster resilience against extremist narratives and promote a culture of dialogue (Dudgeon, 2005). Civil society actors can play a significant role in peacebuilding efforts by:

  • Facilitating dialogue between communities.
  • Promoting understanding and challenging conflict-perpetuating narratives.

The Role of the International Community

The international community’s role in advocating for restraint cannot be underestimated. Global powers must encourage both nations to engage in dialogue, supporting initiatives that foster cooperation—such as economic collaboration or cultural exchanges.

International actors can also facilitate confidence-building measures through negotiation frameworks that incorporate third-party mediation, creating neutral platforms for dialogue to explore solutions to disputes (such as Kashmir and cross-border terrorism).

Conclusion

The recent developments following the terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir serve as a critical reminder of the complexities surrounding India-Pakistan relations. As the situation evolves, all players must recognize the need for strategic foresight and collective responsibility in pursuing peace and stability in the region. The stakes are considerably high—not just for the two nations involved, but for a global community that must not overlook the ramifications of unresolved conflicts.

References

← Prev Next →