THE CONTEXT: A rare mass-casualty assault on tourists in Pahalgam (Anantnag) has triggered India’s most sweeping package of “coercive-diplomacy” steps against Pakistan since Balakot 2019. The Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) has paired diplomatic downgrades with punitive riparian measures, signalling that the escalation ladder remains open.
BACKGROUND: PATTERN OF CROSS-BORDER TERRORISM
-
- Historical continuum: 1999 Kargil → 2001 Parliament Attack → 2008 Mumbai Attacks → 2016 Uri Attack → 2019 Pulwama → 2025 Pahalgam.
- Terror proxies: Shift from Jaish-e-Mohammed overt operations to TRF (plausible deniability model).
- Doctrine revival: Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir’s ‘jugular vein’ rhetoric mirrors pre-Kargil escalatory doctrines.
INDIA’S DIPLOMATIC AND STRATEGIC RESPONSES:
| Measure | Rationale | Historical Parallel |
|---|---|---|
| Suspension of Indus Waters Treaty (meetings/data sharing) | Strategic signal; legal non-breach (Art VII IWT) | Pulwama Response (2019) – India expedited water project clearances |
| Visa Cancellations, Consular Downgrade | Minimalistic engagement principle | 2002 Parliament Attack aftermath: diplomatic isolation tactics |
| Closure of Attari ICP Border | Halt economic soft targets | 2016 post-Uri trade suspension at LoC points |
| Diplomatic Briefings to Global Partners | Narrative shaping; preventing external mediation | Post-2019 Balakot, extensive international outreach |
PAKISTAN’S REACTION: COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE POSTURING:
-
- Mirror Actions: Visa suspensions, trade blockages, threats to Simla Agreement stability.
- Escalatory Rhetoric: Water blockade = “act of war”; indirect threats of retaliatory strikes.
- No Internal Accountability: No action initiated against TRF-LeT infrastructure despite FATF technical compliance demands.
GEOPOLITICAL RESPONSE:
-
- Global support for India: The U.S., EU, Japan, and UAE have condemned terror without urging Indian restraint.
- Pakistan’s Diplomatic Isolation: FATF grey-list removal (2022) gains squandered; no serious allies are willing to back Islamabad’s accusations.
- Strategic Calculus: China is cautious after the Gwadar attacks; the Saudi-UAE axis is reducing the enthusiasm for financial bailout in Pakistan.
IMPACT ASSESSMENT
1. Trade – Formal bilateral trade (USD 1.2 bn in 2024) likely to zero out; indirect third-country routing (≈USD 10 bn) faces higher logistics costs.
2. Aviation & Connectivity – Pak air-space closure raises flight times to Europe and US by up to 40 min, inflating ATF costs for Indian carriers.
3. Water & Energy Security – Potential acceleration of 3.6 GW of run-of-river projects on Chenab/Jhelum; ecological downstream risks.
4. Tourism & Local Economy – Pahalgam footfall plunged 60 % within a week, imperilling J-K’s ₹600 cr annual tourism revenue.
THE CHALLENGES:
1. Treaty Law Complexity: Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) Exit Constraints
-
- The IWT (1960) — brokered by the World Bank — lacks an explicit withdrawal clause; unilateral suspension risks violating Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969) norms.
- Possible reliance on “Rebus Sic Stantibus” doctrine (Art. 62, VCLT) — fundamental change of circumstances — but highly contentious and rarely accepted internationally.
2. Escalation Control in a Nuclearized Environment
-
- Pakistan’s Full Spectrum Deterrence Doctrine (2015) and possession of tactical nuclear weapons (e.g., Nasr missiles) narrow India’s kinetic options.
- Framework Reference: India’s “Cold Start Doctrine” (Proactive Operations) — limited thrusts without strategic overreach — remains doctrinally relevant but politically sensitive.
3. Humanitarian Optics and International Perception
-
- Any material reduction in Indus river water flows could violate the humanitarian principles of Customary International Law (no harm principle) and SDG-6 (Clean Water & Sanitation).
- 2008 Sri Lankan military campaign backlash over civilian harm shows how quickly humanitarian narratives can shift geopolitical alliances.
4. Disruption of Regional Connectivity Initiatives
-
- Closing the Attari ICP and other land corridors hinders India’s own regional integration goals:
- INSTC (International North-South Transport Corridor).
- Chabahar Port–Afghanistan–Central Asia linkage.
- TIR Convention transit initiatives.
- Impact:
- Afghan exporters (especially dried fruits) rely on Wagah–Attari land route.
- India’s outreach to Central Asian Republics weakened without functional terrestrial routes.
- Strategic Dilemma: Punishing Pakistan economically vs hurting regional goodwill and India’s “Extended Neighbourhood Policy.”
- Closing the Attari ICP and other land corridors hinders India’s own regional integration goals:
5. Proliferation of Cross-Border Proxy Warfare
-
- Post-retaliation, increased proxy operations (terror attacks, cyber sabotage) by Pakistani deep-state assets like:
- Jaish-e-Mohammed,
- LeT’s cyber-warfare wing,
- ISI-linked “cyber militias”.
- Post-2019 Balakot strikes, India faced a spike in cyber phishing attacks (CERT-IN reports 2020).
- Post-retaliation, increased proxy operations (terror attacks, cyber sabotage) by Pakistani deep-state assets like:
6. Managing Global Narratives and Information Warfare
-
- Pakistan actively weaponizes global media and human rights forums (e.g., OIC resolutions).
- Social media misinformation campaigns amplify allegations against India.
- 2020 EU DisinfoLab exposed over 750 fake pro-Pakistan/anti-India websites.
7. Long-term Diplomatic Isolation of Pakistan: Marathon, not Sprint
-
- Tactical victories like FATF grey-listing (2018-2022) can be reversed unless pressure is sustained.
- Over time, geopolitical dynamics (e.g., China’s BRI push, Russia’s tilt toward Pakistan post-West sanctions) can dilute isolation efforts.
THE WAY FORWARD:
1. Institutionalise an Escalation Management Doctrine
-
- Formulate a graded retaliation matrix approved by the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS), embedding diplomatic off-ramps tied to counter-terrorism benchmarks (UNSCR 1373 compliance).
- U.S. 2022 “Integrated Deterrence Strategy” against grey-zone threats offers a modular model to adapt.
- It balances credibility of punitive responses while containing nuclear risks under the doctrine of Escalation Dominance (Colin Gray, strategist).
2. Hydrological Strategy 2.0 under Indus Treaty Framework
-
- Expedite India’s storage rights (up to 3.6 MAF on eastern rivers under IWT provisions) via projects like Ujh Multipurpose Project (212 MW, 781 MCM) and Shahpur Kandi Dam.
- 2016 Kishanganga Arbitration Award confirmed India’s non-consumptive uses.
3. Financial Warfare: Disrupt Cross-Border Terror Funding
-
- Enhance coordination with FATF, Egmont Group and Interpol NCB units to track and freeze terror-related hawala, shell firms and crypto-wallets.
- Deploy blockchain forensic analysis (similar to Chainalysis models) to follow illicit financial trails.
- Terror groups like LeT/TRF increasingly exploit decentralized finance (DeFi); tackling financial lifelines cripples operational capacities.
4. Technological Edge on Line of Control (LoC)
-
- Deploy AI-powered foliage penetration radars (FOPEN), automated counter-drone systems, and loitering munitions at identified infiltration hotspots.
- Israel’s “Iron Dome” hybrid AI-defense model offers lessons on fusing radars, UAVs and auto-targeting for rapid-response neutralisation.
- LoC dynamics have shifted towards tech-enabled infiltration; India’s counter-infiltration grid needs modernization for pre-emptive interdiction.
5. Strategic Minilateralism: Mobilising Key Partners
-
- Activate quiet back-channel diplomacy with UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Quad-Plus members (France, Australia) leveraging shared counter-terror imperatives.
- Gulf states designated TRF as terror entity in 2024; build on this momentum.
- Shared Intelligence + Joint Pressure = Diplomatic isolation of Pakistan without overt escalation; reflects ASEAN’s Quiet Diplomacy success model.
6. Build Enduring Societal and Economic Resilience in J&K
-
- Expand Project Sadbhavana 2.0:
- Counter-radicalisation modules based on UNDP’s Youth Resilience Model.
- Subsidized tourism revival packages (₹5,000 crore corpus).
- Skill-building hubs in all 20 districts by 2027.
- Expand Project Sadbhavana 2.0:
THE CONCLUSION:
India must craft a calibrated strategy that fuses lawful hydro-diplomacy, cutting-edge counter-terror capabilities, and societal healing in Jammu & Kashmir. While leading a global norm-building agenda against state-sponsored terrorism, transform asymmetric provocations into opportunities for strategic ascendancy.
UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTION:
Q. The terms ‘Hot Pursuit’ and ‘Surgical Strikes’ are often used in connection with armed action against terrorist attacks. Discuss the strategic impact of such actions. 2016
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q. Discuss India’s diplomatic and strategic response after the Pahalgam terror attack. What are the main challenges India faces, and what steps should be taken to deal with them effectively?
SOURCE:
Spread the Word