India stands at yet another critical juncture in its fraught relationship with Pakistan following the brazen terror attack in Pahalgam, Kashmir, that claimed the lives of 26 innocent civilians, including honeymooners, local guides, and tourists from across the country. This atrocity, the deadliest attack on civilians in the valley since the 2008 Mumbai siege, has shaken the nation’s conscience and reawakened bitter memories of past tragedies.
The question now echoing through New Delhi’s corridors of power is not if there will be a response, but what form it will take — and how far India is willing to go this time.
A Pattern of Provocation and Retaliation
From Uri in 2016 to Pulwama in 2019, India’s counter-terror playbook has evolved significantly. In both cases, Delhi swiftly retaliated through calibrated military action — first via surgical strikes across the Line of Control, and then with airstrikes deep into Balakot, Pakistan — marking the first such incursion since the 1971 war.
But the Pahalgam massacre differs starkly in one critical aspect: the victims were unarmed civilians, not soldiers. This shifts the emotional and political threshold of response. Former Indian High Commissioner to Pakistan Ajay Bisaria, who steered diplomacy during Pulwama’s aftermath, has drawn chilling parallels between Pahalgam and Mumbai 2008, emphasising the symbolic and psychological damage inflicted.
Diplomatic Breakdown and Strategic Signaling
In the wake of Pahalgam, India unleashed a multi-pronged retaliation:
- Suspended the Indus Waters Treaty — a move with deep strategic implications for Pakistan’s agriculture-dependent economy.
- Shut down visa issuance for Pakistani nationals and ordered diplomatic expulsions.
- Closed key border crossings and airspace access to Pakistani aircraft.
- Revoked several bilateral agreements, mirroring post-Pulwama diplomatic isolation tactics.
Delhi’s swift and sweeping response aims to impose a cost on Islamabad not just in rhetoric, but in tangible economic and diplomatic terms. Islamabad, in turn, has reacted with reciprocal measures, suspending peace treaties and accusing India of “aggression under the guise of mourning.”
Escalation versus De-escalation: A Diplomatic Balancing Act
India’s approach remains a tightrope walk between assertive deterrence and calibrated restraint. While public pressure mounts for military action, behind closed doors, the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) weighs consequences carefully — from economic fallout to the risk of full-scale conflict.
Veteran diplomats like Bisaria highlight the dual instincts at play — escalation for deterrence, and de-escalation for stability. After the Pulwama crisis in 2019, India pursued aggressive military and diplomatic actions, but eventually reopened communication channels and reappointed its envoy to Islamabad — achieving a tactical win without spiraling into war.
Indus Treaty Suspension: A Watershed Moment?
Among all the recent retaliatory measures, perhaps the most consequential is India’s decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty — a pact that has remarkably survived wars and decades of enmity.
By halting hydrological data sharing and reviewing dam projects previously disclosed under the treaty, India signals a shift toward strategic water leverage. While experts agree that India lacks the infrastructure to immediately block river flow, the political message is unmistakable — water can no longer be considered off the table in India-Pakistan disputes.
Pakistan, which relies heavily on the Indus basin for agriculture, drinking water, and hydropower, has called the move an “act of war.” This raises alarm not just regionally but globally, as transboundary water conflicts become more prevalent in a warming world.
A Civilian Tragedy with Strategic Consequences
The Pahalgam attack comes at a time when India was beginning to project relative calm in Kashmir, following the abrogation of Article 370 and years of insurgency fatigue. For many Indian citizens, the violence shattered a fragile sense of normalcy. For the government, it was a brutal reminder that the Kashmir question remains unresolved and inflammable.
While no group has formally claimed responsibility, the nature of the assault — targeting Hindu civilians and asking victims to prove their faith — has stoked communal tensions and national outrage. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has vowed that those responsible “will hear India’s response loud and clear.”
The Road Ahead
India is unlikely to return to the diplomatic status quo anytime soon. The stakes are higher, the political will for retaliation stronger, and the memory of civilian deaths more visceral. But Delhi must also navigate international diplomacy, economic stability, and the ever-looming threat of nuclear miscalculation.
The Pahalgam killings may well mark a new turning point in India’s counter-terror and foreign policy doctrine. Whether it results in deeper estrangement or forces a hard reset in India-Pakistan ties remains to be seen.
What is clear, however, is this: India’s threshold for restraint is wearing thin — and its enemies are on notice.
