Retaliation, surgical strike, and the new dilemma: India at a crossroads amid rising tensions with Pakistan!

India faces a defining choice: Retaliate, strike, or hold back?

Over the past few decades, the relationship between India and Pakistan has been defined by cycles of conflict, uneasy truces with sporadic, erratic diplomacy. Yet once again, the spectre of military confrontation looms large over South Asia. In the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack on unarmed tourists, adding to the recent provocations and mounting tensions along the Line of Control (LoC), discussions within India’s strategic community have turned to the possibility of retaliation, particularly through surgical strikes or precision military action.

However, unlike previous instances, India’s political establishment appears unusually sceptical and cautious this time. Past experiences, combined with evolving regional dynamics, have forced New Delhi to reconsider the cost-benefit calculus of any immediate military adventure.

Speculated and unconfirmed reports suggest a potential threat of additional terror strikes within India.

While Indian intelligence agencies have not officially escalated the national security threat level, they are closely monitoring the situation to prevent unnecessary public alarm and panic.

Sources indicate that ongoing cricket league matches could be possible targets, with the use of sophisticated mobile drone explosives being a particular concern.

Undisclosed intelligence inputs have pointed towards Pakistan-based terror networks allegedly testing highly advanced mobile drone explosive systems.

In light of these developments, authorities have ramped up security measures in cities hosting the matches, deploying anti-drone jammers, drone shooters, and drone catchers to mitigate potential threats.

Lessons from the past: A brief history

India’s doctrine of calibrated retaliation against Pakistan took a definitive shape in the post-Uri attack environment of 2016. Following the death of 19 Indian soldiers in a terror strike on an army camp in Jammu and Kashmir, India carried out its first publicly acknowledged “surgical strike” across the LoC, targeting terror launch pads. The action was hailed domestically as a strong response to Pakistan’s “proxy war” strategy and was seen internationally as a bold, calculated move within the framework of conventional warfare.

In 2019, after the Pulwama terror attack killed 40 CRPF personnel, India escalated further by launching airstrikes deep into Pakistan’s Balakot region, decisively striking a Jaish-e-Mohammed training camp. Again, the boldness of the response marked a shift in India’s strategic posture: refusing to be constrained by the traditional fear of nuclear escalation.

Yet, both cases also revealed the inherent risks of escalation. Following Balakot, Pakistan responded with aerial strikes of its own, with a tense air skirmish ensued, during which an Indian Air Force aircraft was shot down, and the pilot was captured and later returned. Unconfirmed reports then suggested Pakistan lost its American fighter in the combat, which was denied by Pakistan. The international community rushed to de-escalate the situation, underlining how quickly such confrontations could spiral out of control.

Today, it appears that these lessons are weighing heavily on New Delhi’s mind.

Why this time is different

Unlike the relatively unprepared responses Pakistan mounted in 2016 and 2019, intelligence assessments suggest that Pakistan is now better prepared for an Indian strike. There are credible reports indicating that Pakistan’s military is on heightened alert, anticipating a possible Indian retaliation. Compounding the problem is the active involvement of Turkey and China, two of Pakistan’s staunch allies, who are reportedly monitoring India’s military movements through intelligence and technological assets and passing critical information to Islamabad. This support has boosted Pakistan’s armed forces bosses in Islamabad, who believe they will garner international backing, in case India strikes first.

This triangulation of support has effectively robbed India of the element of surprise, with a cornerstone of surgical strike tactics.

Moreover, while Pakistan’s internal situation remains dire, with widespread economic hardship, skyrocketing inflation, with a food crisis engulfing large sections of its population. Its military machine appears insulated from these woes. Despite its economic collapse, Pakistan continues to allocate significant resources to its armed forces and nuclear arsenal. As one observer noted: “Pakistan may not have food for its people, but it certainly has arms & ammunition for its army.”

This paradox underscores a troubling reality: a cornered, desperate Pakistan could be even more dangerous, willing to escalate beyond conventional boundaries to divert domestic anger outward.

India’s strategic dilemma: Short-term action or long-term war?

Given these dynamics, India faces a complex strategic dilemma.

A limited, surgical strike, while politically satisfying and symbolically powerful, risks inviting a calibrated Pakistani military response. With Pakistani forces better prepared, Indian casualties could be higher, further the conflict could escalate unpredictably.

On the other hand, preparing for a more sustained military engagement poses its own risks: economic strain, international diplomatic backlash, with internal political consequences, especially with important State elections on the horizon.

Furthermore, any prolonged engagement could open space for China to exert pressure along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in Ladakh, creating a two-front situation that India has long sought to avoid.

Thus, decision makers political establishment in New Delhi must carefully weigh whether short-term political gains are worth the risk of longer-term strategic over-extension.

The nuclear shadow: Pakistan’s threats

Adding an ominous layer to the crisis is Pakistan’s recent nuclear rhetoric. Islamabad has reiterated its long-standing doctrine of “first use” of nuclear weapons in the event of an existential threat. In this case, Pakistani leadership has hinted that a surgical strike targeting critical military installations could be interpreted as such an existential threat.

Although many analysts believe Pakistan’s nuclear threats are largely designed for deterrence and psychological warfare, the risks of miscalculation remain alarmingly high. History shows that once hostilities begin, the ability to control escalation becomes increasingly difficult, especially in a region where both nations possess significant nuclear arsenals and ballistic missile capabilities.

The international dimension

Internationally, both the United States and Russia have urged restraint, while China has been subtly backing Pakistan’s position, calling for “regional stability”, a coded warning to India. Meanwhile, Middle Eastern nations like Saudi Arabia and the UAE, traditionally supportive of India’s economic rise, are watching carefully but remain wary of an open conflict that could disrupt their broader strategic interests in the region.

Turkey, increasingly assertive under President Erdogan, has become one of Pakistan’s most vocal backers in international forums, further complicating India’s diplomatic options.

Conclusion: A moment of decision

India today stands at a critical crossroads. Retaliation in the form of surgical and air strikes on terror locations, once a straightforward choice, is now fraught with dangerous complexities.

In a world of shifting alliances, information warfare, and nuclear brinkmanship, any misstep could have far-reaching consequences. New Delhi must calibrate its response not merely to satisfy domestic political demands or public opinion, but to ensure that India’s long-term strategic interests are protected.

Astrological India is facing an adverse period ahead with political leadership under a tight situation within its own network. Any disaster that happens will call for ouster and a change in leadership immediately. Which can gain widespread support like wildfire.

A cool-headed, strategic approach, blending diplomacy, covert action, economic pressure, and selective military measures, may offer a wiser path forward than a rush toward open war. History will judge the wisdom of India’s next moves, but at this moment, restraint may prove to be the ultimate form of strength.

Indian leadership is weighing its options with caution?

Wait & watch for Pakistan’s next move…

Note:
1. Text in Blue points to additional data on the topic.
2. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of PGurus.

For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.

The post Retaliation, surgical strike, and the new dilemma: India at a crossroads amid rising tensions with Pakistan! appeared first on PGurus.