A terrorist attack on tourists near Pahalgam, Kashmir Valley, on April 22, claimed 26 lives. The emphasis on atrocities was picked out from non-Muslim men and close assassinations. It aims to shock, upend peace in the state and damage the tourism-based economy of the Kashmir Valley.
Several red flags lasted for a while. US Vice President JD Vance and his Indian-Furin wife Usha visited the country with the children, emitting informal Bonhomie. Meanwhile, Islamabad President Donald Trump's initial meeting list was missing.
Next is the ruthless speech of Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir. Despite the 1971 Indian-Pakistan War and the creation of Bangladesh, he resurrected theories of both countries. He boasted about the uniqueness of Pakistani Muslims and ignored DNA evidence, which suggests that most Pakistanis have South Asian descent. Finally, he described Kashmir as the “jugate vein” of Pakistan. The April 22 attack requires more than improvisational decisions. Planning by Pakistan’s interprofessional intelligence once advanced, it was underway when General Munier shared his twisted vision. Pakistan's army has serious image problems at home, as terrorist attacks by Tehrik-e-Taliban (TTP) and Baloch Lolelation Arme (BLA) are out of control. The military impasse with India provides the necessary distraction.
On March 11, the BLA hijacked the Pakistani train, including military personnel, including 400 people. The Bal Road Chits election was held in 2024, such as in Kashmir, the legality proposed by the BLA. Pakistan's military outspoken name India and Afghanistan as “promoters and promoters”.
Eventually, Prime Minister Narendra Modi began to officially travel to Saudi Arabia, and the trip was suspended as the Pahalgam attack occurred. Pakistan has been dissatisfied with its “brothers” in the Gulf-ruling family that has been in contact with the Modi government.
These factors increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks. Therefore, the lack of expectations of security and intelligence agencies is unexplainable. Are the Delhi and Srinagar governments complacent for their own publicity on constitutional changes in 2019 and the expansion of presidential rule?
In retrospect, different governments have tried to use dialogue, mild deterrence and even regularly withdraw to deal with Pakistan. However, after the abolition of Article 370 of the Constitution in August 2019, the Narendra Modi government chose the path of “no dialogue” until the end of terrorism. Diplomatic relations have been downgraded, visa policies have been tightened, people have been minimized, and trade and commerce have been suffocated. India's behavior seems to be no longer in Pakistan and its economic collapse has nothing to do with diplomacy.
This strategy can be a compulsory diplomatic role in a brief outbreak, but it cannot be a permanent strategy. If anything, Pakistan's Chinese dependence has intensified, and China has ensured Pakistan's survival. Currently, China is distracted by a trade dispute with the United States, making it more suitable for India. So it may be China's restrictions on Pakistan rather than the United States.
So what is India’s choice about Pakistan? First, the BJP’s excessive nationalist politics put it on it. It retaliated in 2016, attacking armed camps by dispatching attack parties at the Line of Control (LOC). In 2019, the government launched an air strike on the armed training agency in Balakot after the Pulwama terrorist attack caused 46 paramilitary personnel. With the Lok Sabha election for a few weeks, it benefits from the election. Coincidentally, that was President Donald Trump’s first term. U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo coordinated with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates while in Vietnam to curb escalation. Prime Minister Imran Khan remains the army's favorite, handing them a captured Indian Air Force pilot. Did the mediator make any commitment to Pakistan for resuming dialogue after elections? Today, Pakistan refuses to return even a BSF Jawan, Purnam Sahu, who accidentally crosses the border. After the 2019 general election, the BJP decided to implement its old Kashmir old agenda, abolishing Article 370 and ignoring Pakistan.
Although Secretary of State Marco Rubio advised India to take responsible action for long-term peace and stability in South Asia, the U.S. State Department has conveyed “full support.” US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth told Defense Secretary Rajnath Singh that India has “the right to defend itself.” Britain also suggested “measurement” after the attack was “despicable”. Iranian Foreign Minister Syed Abbas Aragchi made a two-day visit to India on May 7. As the United States threatens to punish any country that buys Iranian oil, his focus will be on bilateral trade.
India has announced temporary measures such as further reducing diplomatic relations, expelling all Pakistani nationals, suspending the Indian Moisture Treaty, etc. However, wait for the kinetic reaction. The government believes that the Balakot attack has established a deterrence. The Pahalgam attack negates this. India has limited options as the Pakistan Army and Air Force are well equipped and supported by its nuclear arsenal. It can launch symbolic attacks on terrorist facilities, in the air or on the ground. This could fail because Pakistan has transferred its jihad assets. Pakistan will then retaliate in kind.
To re-establish deterrence, Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal must be neutralized. It is speculated that after 9/11, the United States formulated an emergency agreement to quickly capture or destroy Pakistan's nuclear weapons. Since then, Pakistan has increased its number to over 100 and spread it to protect them.
Only after the development of nuclear weapons did the Pakistani army's terrorist weapons against India were no coincidence. If it is impossible to determine the destruction of the weapon, then the alternative is to build a missile defense system like the Israeli Iron Dome Plus. India can be protected as a whole, but it can cover six important political, economic and financial centers. This will allow Pakistan's nuclear weapons to occupy Pakistan's territory against a limited war to occupy India, lower Pakistan's military and even withdraw from ISI and terrorist leadership.
Ukraine has shown that nuclear weapons can be used to fight the opponents. A country with nuclear weapons has a red line, which usually means a threat that violates its core territory or sovereignty. Needle-punches like Balakot attack have symbolic domestic advantages. However, the Pakistani army suffered neither face nor tangible damage. At the same time, existing policies could continue the Pakistani army by encouraging entities of Bal Luzhi and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
However, India must not decline in its development efforts to find the founding of the states of Chammu and Kashmir or support for civilian governments. Finally, diplomacy must be resurrected. If the old path of dialogue fails to stop terrorism, the new approach to boycott fails. The solution lies in real deterrence and candid dialogue.
The author is the former secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He tweeted @AMBKCSINGH.
