By MEI News, New Delhi
12 May 2025
India’s military operation codenamed “Operation Sindoor,” launched on 7 May 2025, has significantly escalated tensions with Pakistan, marking a new chapter in their fraught bilateral relations.
The precision strikes, which targeted nine terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK), were a direct response to the 22 April Pahalgam terror attack that killed 26 civilians, including 25 Indians and one Nepali national.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s address to the nation on Monday, 12 May, further intensified the situation, as he declared Operation Sindoor a “new normal” in India’s policy against terrorism, warned against Pakistan’s “nuclear blackmail,” and limited future dialogue to terrorism and PoK.
With Pakistan now under international scrutiny and facing India’s uncompromising stance, what options does Islamabad have?
The Context: Operation Sindoor and Modi’s Speech
Operation Sindoor saw India deploy advanced weaponry, including SCALP missiles and Hammer smart bombs, to destroy terrorist infrastructure linked to Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), and Hizbul Mujahideen.
The Indian Ministry of Defence described the strikes as “focused, measured, and non-escalatory,” deliberately avoiding Pakistani military installations.
However, Pakistan’s retaliatory drone and missile attacks on Indian military targets in Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab, and Rajasthan—neutralised by India’s S-400 defence systems—escalated the conflict, leading to civilian casualties, including 27 deaths in Jammu & Kashmir’s Poonch district.
In his televised address, Modi reiterated India’s zero-tolerance policy on terrorism, accusing Pakistan’s military and government of nurturing terrorist networks.
“Terror and talks cannot go together,” he stated, adding that any dialogue with Pakistan would focus solely on terrorism and the return of PoK.
He also dismissed Pakistan’s nuclear threats, asserting, “Any nuclear blackmail won’t be tolerated by India.”
The speech, described by Indian officials as a “doctrinal change,” signals a sustained campaign against terrorist infrastructure, with Modi warning that operations are “paused” but not concluded, contingent on Pakistan’s future actions.
Pakistan’s Immediate Response
Pakistan’s leadership has reacted with defiance.
Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif condemned India’s strikes as an “act of war,” asserting Pakistan’s right to a “forceful response.” Pakistani forces violated a brief ceasefire agreement on 10 May, launching artillery and drone attacks, which Indian officials claim targeted civilian areas and military installations.
Defence Minister Khawaja Asif’s attempt to claim on CNN that Pakistan shot down Indian jets was swiftly debunked, highlighting Islamabad’s struggle to control the narrative.
The closure of the Kartarpur Corridor and suspension of border ceremonies underscore Pakistan’s defensive posture.
Strategic Options for Pakistan
Pakistan now faces a complex set of challenges: balancing domestic pressures, managing international perceptions, and responding to India’s military and diplomatic offensive. Analysts suggest several potential courses of action:
- Military Posturing and Limited Retaliation
Pakistan’s military has already demonstrated its willingness to respond, with artillery shelling and drone attacks along the Line of Control (LoC). However, India’s superior air defence capabilities and precise strike technology exposed vulnerabilities in Pakistan’s arsenal, particularly its “Made-in-China” systems. Continuing tit-for-tat strikes risks further losses, as India has vowed a “firm response” to attacks on its military targets. - Diplomatic Outreach and International Support
Pakistan has sought to internationalise the conflict, appealing to the United Nations and allies like China. Beijing urged restraint from both sides but stopped short of endorsing Pakistan’s position, reflecting its cautious approach amid broader geopolitical concerns. The United States, through President Donald Trump, claimed credit for brokering a temporary ceasefire, a claim India dismissed by asserting no third-party mediation is needed. Pakistan may push for UN Security Council discussions, as it did after the Pahalgam attack, but India’s veto-wielding allies, like the US and Russia, are unlikely to support measures against New Delhi. Pakistan’s foreign ministry is also briefing Islamic nations, hoping to rally support, though the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation’s response has been muted so far. - Internal Crackdown on Terrorism
Modi’s speech explicitly called on Pakistan to dismantle its terror infrastructure to avoid further strikes. While Pakistan has historically denied state sponsorship of terrorism, its defence minister’s admission of harbouring terrorists, as noted in X posts, has weakened its global standing. A visible crackdown on groups like JeM and LeT could ease international pressure and provide a face-saving way to de-escalate. However, domestic political constraints, including the military’s influence and public sentiment, make this challenging. - Economic and Domestic Stabilisation
Pakistan’s economy, already strained by inflation and debt, cannot sustain prolonged conflict. The closure of border districts, suspension of trade routes, and heightened security measures have disrupted local economies, particularly in Punjab and Sindh. Sharif’s government may prioritise domestic stability, focusing on economic relief and public morale to counter India’s narrative of a destabilised Pakistan. However, this approach risks being perceived as weakness, especially among hardline nationalist groups.
International Reactions and Constraints
The international community remains wary of escalation between two nuclear-armed neighbours.
The British Parliament debated the crisis on 8 May, urging de-escalation, while Singapore expressed “grave concern” over the military confrontation.
The UN Security Council’s reluctance to condemn India’s actions, despite Pakistan’s objections to omitting mention of the Resistance Force’s role in the Pahalgam attack, limits Islamabad’s diplomatic leverage. China’s call for restraint, without explicit support, suggests Pakistan cannot rely on automatic backing from its closest ally.
The PoK Factor
Modi’s emphasis on PoK as a non-negotiable issue complicates Pakistan’s position.
India’s narrative frames PoK as illegally occupied territory, a stance reiterated by External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar and backed by domestic political consensus. Pakistan’s historical claim over PoK is central to its national identity, and any perceived concession risks domestic backlash. Yet, India’s strikes in PoK, coupled with Modi’s rhetoric, signal a willingness to challenge Pakistan’s control militarily and diplomatically.
What Lies Ahead?
Pakistan’s response will likely be a mix of defiance and pragmatism.
In the short term, limited military posturing along the LoC and diplomatic efforts to rally international support are probable. Sharif’s government may also initiate symbolic crackdowns on terrorist groups to appease global opinion, though substantive action remains uncertain given past patterns. Economically, Pakistan will seek to mitigate the fallout of border closures and military mobilisation, possibly through Chinese financial aid.
However, Modi’s speech has set a high bar for de-escalation.
By framing Operation Sindoor as a sustained policy and dismissing nuclear threats, India has signalled it will not hesitate to strike again if provoked. Pakistan’s ability to navigate this crisis depends on its capacity to balance domestic pressures with international expectations, all while addressing the terrorism question that India has placed at the forefront.
Pakistan is in a bind. It can’t afford war, but it can’t afford to look weak either. The next few weeks will test its leadership like never before.
Leave a comment