A group of terrorists attacked tourists in a remote meadow in Kashmir, identified those who were non-Muslim, and shot them dead (they also shot dead a Muslim tour guide who tried to oppose them). The horrendous and barbaric attack has led to a predictable outburst of harsh anti-Pakistan (and in many cases, anti-Muslim) outrage in India and the govt has already announced some steps against Pakistan and is presumably planning to undertake some more in the coming days.
Meanwhile, Pakistan (and individual patriotic Pakistanis) have taken to social media and traditional media to paint this as a “false flag attack” (i.e. carried out or planned by the Indian authorities themselves, presumably to allow them to retaliate against Pakistan; why?) or at least as India being “too quick to accuse Pakistan” (ie “we did not do it, and they are accusing us without proof”). This is all as expected in the usual India vs Pakistan show, but it is important to keep in mind that the situation has supposedly changed a little since 2019. Before that date there were many terrorist attacks in Kashmir and every major event would be followed by tit for tat exchanges along the line of control, but with both sides respecting “red lines”. Then in 2019 there was a large attack in Pulwama that was followed by an Indian retaliatory attack on a militant camp in Balakot in Pakistan proper (which crossed the previous red line of what retaliation was permissible). Since then there had been relative peace in kashmir and many commentators felt that the balakot bombing had established a new “red line”, that India will respond to any major attack in this or similar manner, so Pakistan has dialed down the terrorism it previously promoted in Kashmir. But if that is the case, then this attack obviously crosses that threshold and will lead to response. Irrespective of who is at fault and who did what, this was the supposed line and it has been crossed, so what next?ย
As usual, i dont know. But lets list the questions and possible answers.
- IF this was indeed planned by Pakistan, then the question is “why”? Why now?
Possible answers and objections:
A. The generals face total delegitimization in Pakistan and they decided to heat up the conflict with India to restore their position in society. (I dont buy this because I think they had recently recovered some ground vs Imran Khan, so why now?)
B. The Pakistani establishment genuinely does not want to give up on Kashmir and considers it non-negotiable, so the recent tourism boom had to be stopped, no matter what the cost. (I can buy this, but then what is the calculation of how the retaliation will be handled? in the past, America was the backstop, but with Trump in charge, is that still the case? If the pat on the back came from china then we are in more serious trouble because they may really want a war to happenย in South Asia, and have the ability to make it very painful for India too (and they dont give a fig about how many Pakistanis die in the process.. that remains a general theme, Muslims as cannon fodder for more capable powers)
C. The generals really felt that India is conducting terrorism in Balochistan (and perhaps even thru the “unknown men”) and that this is just payback and nothing special. Minor retaliation will be handled and eventually the two sides will have to agree to dial down terrorist proxies in BOTH countries. (the problem is, Modi cannot afford to lose face here, making this a very high risk strategy; do they really want to take the risk? I honestly don’t know).
2. And if Pakistan did NOT plan it, then what happened here?
A. Genuinely free lance terrorists made this move on their own. (IF that is the case, then we would expect Pakistan to hurry to convince India (behind the scenes) that this was not us, and then try to coordinate a face saving retaliation and a few months of high tension, but no bigger crisis. With gulf and America mediating, this could even become an opportunity rather than a crisis. This would be great as far as I am concerned, but it seems doubtful to me. The vigorous and immediate “false flag” line is not a good sign.
B. Its actually a false flag attack. I dont buy this because I dont see what India gains from it. If you want to steelman this, you can say that it is really doubtful, but IF it is true then a really big war is coming because there would be no point in doing this if you did not have a greater evil plan behind it. Again, I dont buy it. I dont think the Indian state is even capable of doing a “false flag” of this magnitude. And i dont see them planning such a risky war when Pakistan is declining in power and will be less of a threat in the future.
A few days ago I posted a piece called “The historic task of the Pakistani bourgeoisie” where I said: “ย it is theย historic task of the Pakistani bourgย to either make Pakistan a more normal country, or to watch it broken up.ย i.e.ย the historic task of the Pakistani bourgeoisie today is toย defang the two-nation theory (TNT). And that “There is a โSomalia alternativeโ, but one hopes that the middle classes are making too much money to want to reach that level of โlow carbon footprintโ eco-friendly freedom. “
Obviously I am a peacenik. I have spent 40 years trying on various forums to promote some sort of saner alternative to the 1000 year war. But if you go back and look, I do say in every case that A is the better option by far, and if we fail to do A, then B will get done with greater violence and pain.
The next few months are not going to be a good time for India and Pakistan. After that, saner heads can still prevail. The alternative is much worse, but necessity rules the world. it is what it is. My vikarna act has to end someday in any case ๐
By the way, of historic value now, but I wrote this about “India and Pakistan, the long view” over 10 years ago:
“The Pakistani hardliners case is qualitatively different. We are the party that wants a change in borders or at least some major move towards Kashmiri autonomy that we can accept as a halfway house to union with Pakistan. We have tried to force this change using proxies as well as the regular army and we have (till now) failed. But our hardliners think the failure isย not as final as it seems. Our options are still open. Now that America is getting out of our hair, and China wants us more than ever (or so we think), we can deploy the threat of revived Jihad and Khalistan to ask for concessions. If India does not make concessions, we may have to move beyond the threat. Those willing toย useย these levers (rather than those just wanting toย threatenย to use them) are probably in a minority even in Pakistan. But the minority has the Paknationalist narrative on their side. So they can get their way because they control the Pakistaniat narrative and when push comes to shove, their opponents cannot muster good arguments without challenging the core narrative. All else being equal, the national narrative wins.
So let us suppose the hardliners win the argument. Do they have a case in the real world? i.e.ย canย they win?
That depends on what weight one assigns to different factors. Pakistan has a proven record of deploying proxies and supporting insurgencies. All talk of Balochistan and MQM notwithstanding, India does not have such a record inย Westย Pakistan. Even though Doval sahib has reportedly said โwe can hurt them more than they can hurt usย using these same toolsโ,ย an objective observer would have to say the edge lies with Pakistan. Our use of proxies has a record of โsuccessโ. Indiaโs (in West Pakistan) does not. And Indian internal security institutions are already stretched thin and their state is known to be rickety and inefficient. Advantage Pakistan?
On the other hand, India is the bigger power. It has the bigger armed forces (even if they are weaker pound for pound; I am not saying they necessarily are. Maybe they are not. But the point is that even if theyย areย somewhat less efficient than Pakistanโs armed forces (superior American weapons, less waste and corruption in procurement and weapons systems, higher asabiya??) they are so much bigger that they probably have a conventional edge. What if they actually use that advantage? Well, we donโt know for sure until they do, but these are twoย nuclearย powers, Everyone gets nervous. So the threat of force is in Indiaโs favor, but even India would prefer that itย not be put to the test.ย
It may be that in a few years India will be in a position to impose penalties with less fear of things getting out of hand (or going unexpectedly badly) but it is not in that position yet (wet dreams of ultranationalist Indian notwithstanding). Even though India may be able to prevail in a conventional confrontation, it will not do so without considerable cost; costs that may set back the economic takeoff that is Indiaโs best chance of breaking out of the glorious poverty that has long defined it.
So, the bottom line is, we donโt know if the hardliners on either side can win. It is best not to put their theories to the test. (note that this was written 10 years ago, much water has flown down the indus since and even the IWT is now on the table.. interesting times)
Even a supremely successful redo of Balakot is not enough this time around. Its time to push the LoC westwards by a few km to more defensible grounds and ‘natural border features. Such a public loss of land is a clear humiliation and consequence for PakMil, and the only way to deter future recurrences of this type of ‘spectacular’ murders that they have repeatedly executed time and again in pursuit of their agendas.
yes India has to do whatever it can to prevent these incidents
One doesn’t have to be a Hindu nationalist or even a nationalist to see that something has been rotten in the state of Pakistan ever since it’s inception. And that is Islamic exceptionalism grounded in the nature of that belief system. And much like Raktabeeja, the rakshasa, one drop of terrorist blood spawns a hundred more. Israel is dealing with a similar, albeit self-inflicted situation. In India’s case, the terrorists want to do harm actively despite no provocation. And it’s that desert ideology that’s at the root of it, without any antidote till date. It will keep going on like this unfortunately. There is no solution.
Kashmiris have full civil rights, unlike Palestinians.
Agree, that’s why the situation is very different. In India’s case, it’s just provoking a response presumably. In Israel’s case; they have stared at the abyss too long and have turned into monsters themselves; again very unfortunate.
yes India is much better than any of its neighbours in how it treats its minorities.
one would not want to be Tibetan in China or Hindu in Pakistan.
And Bangladesh is going into a tailspin.
India persecutes Muslims
After Indian funded LTTE was eliminated the claims of Tamils being harassed have ended
oh really? btw I love Sri Lanka; great great place
Sri Lankan Tamils only have themselves to blame for their misery. Blaming the Indian state is a deflection.
I don’t know enough to comment
>one would not want to be Tibetan in China
Economically Tibetan are far better of than Indians in India
Tibet GDP Per Capita USD 10,567
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chinese_provincial-level_divisions_by_GDP_per_capita
and their rights?
When one is a dirt poor Indian Dalit, what rights to they have.
Rights dont put food on the table, or even get an education
that’s not the point; I think there is something very valuable about the Indian democratic experience.
Every journalist, twitterati, commentator on India likes to bring up the long suffering Dalits. In India however social engineering has thrown up some oddities. In surveys of castes most opposed to intermarriage Dalits tend to rank at the top as loss of Dalit status nowadays means loss of opportunity.
Dalit rights it seems do get you an education and possibly food on the table too.
Somebody in India seem to be losing out
Life Expectancy: 67
Literacy: Avg 74% (males at 82.14% and females at 65.46%
Tibet
Life expectancy 72
Literacy 99% (15-60 age group)
Lanka
Life Expectancy76
Literacy 94%
Even if those numbers are correct (they aren’t) your point is?
I guess Sri Lanka is leapfrogging Tibet as well?
yes amazing country
I think we forget just how variegated caste is in an Indian context.
They explicitly don’t have the right to have a sovereign country of their own. And they have fewer rights than they did before the Modi regime removed special status.
yes but unlike Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza; Kashmiris have full rights within India.
What does this sovereign country look like? Just the Kashmir valley? What happens to the rest of India when the Sikhs, the Tamils, the Kukis see this and express their old/new desires? What recourse will they have when China or Pakistan express their intent?
where did I allude to Kashmiri independence
Problem with the format. My reply was towards the previous message. (Hector)
Ok yes – I tend to see the comments in a different format
Excellent article – will comment in detail
[…] India and Pakistan, Back to the Future.. April 23, 2025 […]
Excellent articulation. But this is unfortunately going to continue endlessly. I am not hopeful of better sense prevailing anytime soon. The further down the rabid religious rabbit hole Pakistan goes, the worse it will get.
yes thank you – I don’t know why comments didn’t come through
There is a narrative built in Kashmir and Pakistan that India is the occupying force (never mind the civilisational and foundational ties and the sheer lie involved).
On the other side of the Himalayas lies Tibet, which modern China has occupied for a similar length of time, the Tibetians have been tortured, their culture suppressed and the population displaced by Chinese entrants. Yet all protests against occupation have been peaceful with violence limited to self immolation by passionate monks.
The reasons why this is so, is self evident to a rational mind (with a basic understanding of the religions involved).
I think that Pakistan is just a multiplier and enabler of an existing problem which can never truly be solved.
If your identity is built around your religion first and heritage denied then there is always the desire to smash the nose of an idol your ancestor carved with care and beauty.
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
thank you ๐
Two things:
1) Kashmir is Muslim majority and it’s people clearly do not want to be ruled by New Delhi and their new Gujarati overlords. They also don’t welcome Bihari immigration and settlement in their lands. It is also geographically isolated from rest of India and historically it has been more independent courtesy of its geography. So the appeals to ‘civilizational’ ties with rest of India do not mean much to them.
2) Peaceful protests are all good but they do not result in any significant change, especially if the people protesting are a minority. China has pretty much digested Tibet, India has not been able to do that to Kashmir despite having half a million soldiers stationed there.
I more or less agree with you here. Two things can both be true at the same time:
1) the atrocity on these tourists, and the Islamic triumphalist narrative which motivated it, are both disgusting and deplorable,
2) Kashmiris should have the right to sovereignty and self determination (and no, that’s not limited to Kashmiris, but we don’t have to get into the issues of other minority ethnicities right now).
non-violent resistance is commendable
how about Pakistanis get the “right to self-determination” first before we attempt it with a landlocked Kashmir state?
Once Pakistanis get out from the slavery of the kleptocratic zameendars LARPing as Military jernails, and figure out how to run a viable state without IMF bailouts, then maybe we can talk about Kashmiri “right to self-determination”. After all, Kashmir isn’t going anywhere.
Pakistan is complex; it would be interesting to see what referendums in the provinces would be..
The entire country (India) is ruled by the Gujuratis and has Bihari migration, I would say those are commonalities rather than differences. And you’ve missed the point, If you don’t acknowledge your history, you keep fighting to free yourself from it.
Finally, what has India not been able to do to Kashmir? It hasn’t thrown everyone in a re-ed camp and forced people to shave their beards (Uyghur violence). Those half a million soldiers are pretty well behaved I would say, There are just 30,000 American soldiers in Okinawa and they have more atrocities in peacetime without getting stoned.
Bihari migrants are a cause of friction in several other Indian states, not just Kashmir..
India would have been able to integrate Kashmir as well, but because Pakistan needles the issue every now and then, the Indians are not able to govern it effectively and have to resort to heavy handedness which further erodes their position. India in the recent past tried to do the same by supporting Baluchistan insurgents with some success.
As to why Pakistan keeps the interfering, two reasons – both discussed here often.. the first is the need for the army to create an enemy to justify its existence. This may be true but is becoming less relevant since Pakistan has many other enemies, and they don’t need India to be one forever. The second is simply water and geography, Pakistan does not want to permanently give away Muslim majority area with all its major rivers away to India. The current IWS treaty suspension just proves that this issue will always keep Pakistan as subservient to India – which brings the ideology of Pakistan into question – they don’t want to be subservient to a Hindu India.
yes even in Chennai now; it’s incredible how the Bhaiyyas have changed urban culture
India would have been able to integrate Kashmir as well, but because Pakistan needles the issue every now and then, the Indians are not able to govern it effectively and have to resort to heavy handedness which further erodes their position.—
what ever was left in j&k after pak and china have their bits, has now been further divided. shia and buddhist portions are now cutoff. jammu except for the muslim districts are voting bjp. all that needs to be done is- 1) legislate a certain percentage of guaranteed spending in jammu region. earlier they were neglected by muslims of the valley.
2) create a sub autonomous part for kashmiri pundits and one for gujjars in the kashmir region.
this will happen, if the scenes of this week continue to happen.
How many Kashmiri Pandits are there?
500,000 was the number when they were cleansed out of kashmir. they stay in camps and can vote in j&k elections.
outside kashmir, their numbers are many more, and they don’t feel prosecuted and hence no pressure to come ‘home’ to kashmir. there is also no religious connect like jews of europe to ‘palestine’. if they start buying some property and move into kashmir for few months of a year things will change.
I don’t think a settler type situation is a solution.
The 1.4 TFR (in 2021. must be lesser now) will automatically take care of that.
Naah, India has integrated Kashmir pretty well post 370.
Where are the hartals or the leaders that were so prevalent back in the day?
Heck, India held a G20 summit in Kashmir.
Kashmiri Muslims might not like India but have become comfortable with the riches that the Indian economic boom have provided. Just like muslims in the west who cry about the west but will never live in their home countries. ๐
These are all desperate attempts by Pak to raise a dying issue.
And Bihari labourers are already present in huge numbers and will only increase.
Kashmir is over. Focus on Balochistan. BLA is getting stronger and stronger and they have a 4+ fertility rate and don’t have the comforts of Kashmir to placate them.
yes nobody would choose to be Uighur or Tibetan under Chinese rule
We in SL have found the Chinese very reasonable over recent 75 years. Cant say that of India
======
Looking back at history, this bullying behavior by the United States seems somewhat familiar. In the early 1950s, when China had just been founded, its development was severely hindered due to the Western countries’ embargo and blockade. To survive and develop, China urgently needed to import various materials, including rubber. At this time, under the control of the United States, rubber prices plummeted, while rice prices soared. This caused severe economic difficulties for Ceylon, which depended on rubber exports and rice imports. However, China and Sri Lanka broke through numerous obstacles and signed the historically significant Rubber-Rice Pact, opening the door to friendly relations between the two countries. To retaliate against Ceylon’s trade with China, the United States invoked the Battle Act, halting aid to Ceylon and the supply of sulfur needed for rubber plantations*
From my archives
R. G. Senanayake Minister of Commerce in 1952 said: “We noted on the Chinese side the absence of the spirit of bargaining and haggling on comparatively small points. On the other hand, they gave us the impression of being large minded and forthright in their dealings”
https://www.dailymirror.lk/breaking-news/China-A-more-trustworthy-partner/108-307572
very fascinating to know
“ There is no duty superior to the duty of abstention from injuring other creatures.”
You cannot justify the killing of innocents for any cause… If independence is built on such evils then it is not worth having in any moral universe. And while many people feel we do not live in such a moral universe, this is not practically a good idea either, because if it is not based on morality, then it is based on “realpolitik” and moral arguments about rights and whatnot are just tools to get what you want and it cuts both ways..
Realpolitik /geopolitics is amoral. But even in a ‘moral universe’, rulers and their subjects are completely fine with innocents dying as long as it’s mostly the other side, and sometimes people are fine with it on their own side too if it achieves an aim.
Both India and Pakistan have used non-state actors to eliminate innocents. Pakistan has historically used them to counter balance it’s numerical and economical disadvantage, India now uses them to project power or to gain more leverage.
that’s a terrible world to live in – no innocent should ever be sacrificed under any scenario.
let’s agree on the basics of humanity
We have always been living in that world. I don’t view it with rose tinted glasses, and while everyone agree with general rules of humanity, people of all stripes often break them.
yes but I think we should be very vigilant in insisting on Common Universal Values, which is different to the Rules Based Order.
there is simply no “both-siding” when it comes to non-state actors. It never ceases to surprise me the sheer number of educated Pakistanis who are utterly one-eyed about this simple honest fact.
yes for the good of the country they should be very clear-eyed
100-%
is it so clear they don’t want to be ruled?
is it clear they don’t want to be a part of India?
False. Kashmir has 1.4 TFR in 2021 (must be even lower now).
The labour class is exclusively Bihari/UP. It will only increase.
Plus plenty of rich/educated Kashmiris leaving Kashmir and marrying Indians from other states and settling in the cities.
Baloch, KPK, Afghanistan TFR is 4+, higher than Pak Punjab and Sindh.
Good times coming. ๐
The Vale of Kashmir, hasn’t been independent since the time of Jahangir i.e. approx 1620.
Things will be more apparent in the days to come as to whether Pakistani agencies are involved in this horrible attack targeting unarmed innocent civilians.
I would tend to agree with 1C – Asim Muneer is a vengeful person – that’s why he got the job. And every thing points to the fact that – unlike his predecessors – he is the first real hardline Islamist COAS in GHQ. (Zia was Islamist hardliner but he appreciated India still)
This is likely a retaliation for Indian support for BLA, especially after the recent train hijacking, and summary executions of Punjabi workers (this attack in Kashmir follows the same method of checking ID cards and singling out victims). It also comes as a response to Indian assassination campaigns in foriegn countries – especially Pakistan targeting Kashmiri Jihadis, which provides them with an added motivation to retaliate.
Killing tourists in cold blood does not favor local Kashmiris as it destroyed tourism, but plays into Pakistan’s geopolitical position of shutting out Indian attempts to integrate it.
eye for an eye will make the world go blind
Why doesnโt the โhigher asabiyaโ work with the Pakistani hockey or cricket teams? Serious question.
I also think a war at this juncture is suboptimal. But maybe thatโs why Pakistani junta wanted one, but are they going to get it? We donโt know. Hopefully we may not need to know.
What we do know is that Modi certainly has the risk appetite of a war leader, Trump admin (whatever oneโs view of them) are the most pro Indian US admin to have ever existed, Arabs are close and Pakistanis arenโt Arabs.
very good question
the post british hindu military leaders are unpredictable:
1) they brought ‘tanks’ into kashmir valley in 1948 and beat off the invaders.
2) they crossed the international border in 1965 and approached lahore.
3) they captured east pakistan, in 1971 when it was believed that a standoff in dacca was all that was possible.
4) they got airforce to bomb pak forces in kargil.
5) they have stood up to china, except in 1962, that too on arunachal pradesh front.
6) it appears modi and his team can take a hit of 3 or 4 atom bombs and will hit back. no this is not an angry response, somebody like subramaniam swamy said this some tears ago.
7) very sad but possible.
why would they take a hit of 3 or 4 atom bombs??
Because the Pak terrorist policy of bleeding us by a thousand cuts is still to their advantage; including that of deniability and false outrage. India has been too soft on the real planner, the army and the ISI. No doubt that bombs or nukes will be very very destructive, but at least it will conclusively stop this slow death for India. If Modi called their nuke bluff in 2019 when Abhinandan was captured, I don’t see why not now? Personally don’t think it will come to this, non-kinetic action will cause enough havoc, if done correctly.
How have we ended up talking extinction level scenarios? I don’t think anyone can guarantee nukes end with 3-4 or that we don’t have an apocalyptic scenario once they start flying.
To what extent are terror attacks really effective, apart from the outsize reaction they provoke. The result of 9-11 was excusing the Iraq war, I don’t think Osama really had that on his vision board when plotting 9-11.
I actually feel the best thing India can do in this scenario is to just extend the tourism collapse in Kashmir and turn the locals against the terrorists.
Keep the cause and effect clear and human nature tends to be pretty incentive driven. Between the US world bank control and India’s river control Pakistan is in an unenviable position. There is a peaceful way out. I just hope we are smart enough.
Perhaps I did not articulate myself well enough. All I meant was we should call out Pak’s nuclear bluff. We should not be scared of any repercussions even in the event of a full scale war and the possibility of using WMDs. The fear factor of an unhinged Pak waving it’s nukes has spooked us in the past from taking necessary action, therefore resulting in a restrained response. I think they play their cards pretty well, the Pak army has not just survived but thrived with a country filled with cannon fodder to do their bidding, haven’t they?
Doesn’t mean we dive straight into bombing wontonly. That would just be stupid. Don’t think it’s part of our DNA to do that either even in the face of extreme provocation. I think for the first time in a very long time we’re actually in a pretty sweet spot as far as the International scenario is concerned. The Trump admin is probably the most pro-India administration thus far, the West is caught in the Ukraine and Israeli conflicts, and with the US-China trade war, I think we can pretty much can do what we should do. Yes, between the IWT no longer in force, a nice naval blockade and just squeezing them dry economically will do the job; w/o firing a single bullet.
9-11 set back the American Empire not because of the initial attack but the response.
In fact avoiding the provocation is much more constructive ..
Absolutely – it is better for South Asians to avoid killing one another on such a mass scale..
I donโt think nuclear weapons is a good idea tbh
Of course. I was responding to the original q of under which circumstances would India be willing to take a hit of 3-4 bombs. The only circumstances under which it would happen are like what happened in Pahalgam, the final straw that broke the camel’s back. I personally agree with you, that strategic restraint and the use of long term non-kinetic actions carefully calibrated would be more efficacious. If anything, the Pakistani Punjabi Muslim is the puppeteer and till that class feels mortal fear, the rest are all dispensable; both other ethnicities within Pak and of course any Indians. So targeting that particular class would make sense if kinetic action needs to be taken.
I have noticed that Indians love to talk big before a conflict, and then whimper for reconciliation when the get hit back.
All this talk of nuclear war was pretty common in 2019 as well, and as soon as they saw their pilot getting beat up by locals, the tone changed from aggression to concern.
The mood is fickle and will change at the first sign of trouble. Uptil now they have neither caught any of the terrorists nor have they presented any evidence that Pakistan is involved. We are just running on feelings here, and I don’t think they are willing to get nuked for feelings.
1971 begs to differ
Yes imagine if Indira hadnโt done that; it would have been so much more dangerous.
In GBShaw’s Pygmalion there is a character called Alfred Doolittle who says that he suffers from middle class morality and laments his loss of penury where he could act out his unrestrained desires.
Pakistan with it’s state of penury and an army which keeps a discontent population in check with perpetual fear of an external or internal strife probably always desires a war more.
Strangely I agree with our friend here, the reality of war is quite different from the idea of it, the abject surrenders of yesteryear by Pakistan have only fuelled a desire to regain martial face.
The terrorists and their backers want this war, I suggest we don’t give it to them.
The Afghans, meanwhile, having less to lose than the Pakistanis act out their feelings with even more impunity and are best suited to do so.
nobody ‘wants’ war. And its abundantly clear that India has a lot more to lose in case of conflict. But 30+ years of repeated attacks, the only things I have seen work temporarily to pause the terror attacks was the post 9/11 WoT induced American pressure on Mushy, and the shock effect of India’s Balakot air raid on Pakistani soil. Clearly “no war” isn’t working, while delivering consequences and cost to PakMil has a higher probability of deterring future murders.
These are correlations and causalities we make in our search for explaining the world. Did terror drop in Kashmir due to the Balakot raid? The Pakistanis publicly have quite different feelings about it.
The Pahalgam attack was done in a cold premeditated fashion to provoke maximum response.
Violence is almost like a Karmic cycle, every act demands another in retribution.
In my opinion we should do the unexpected and support Imran Khans release. The Pakistani populace will be overjoyed and it will really drench Asim’s match flicking and release us from this torment.
Asking for Agent Immy’s release is a good suggestion ๐ made me chuckle.
There is arguably a very strong co-relation with the more muscular responses that GoI publicly implemented – regardless of how effective the ‘win’ was. Both the post-Uri cross-border strikes and Balakot bombing were a public slap in the face to PakMil. And an effective message delivered that the consequences of using ‘non-state actors’ will be public going forward. It doesn’t matter what kind of feelings the propaganda fed “Pakistani awaam” had about them. They are the enslaved masses, to be blunt, they simply do not matter.
I think coding Pakistani as enslaved is not a correct reading tbh
yes that’s a good idea tbh
S Qureishi,
I fear that the problem runs a little bit deeper than chest-thumping and online threats. Based on my observations of the India-Pakistan conflict, it seems that there is a tendency amongst Indians to (incorrectly) believe that they are losing more than their Pakistani counterparts in the context of their long-running conflict.
Whereas Pakistan had to deal with the fallout from its dismemberment in 1971 and the formation of Bangladesh, nothing similar has taken place in India. Independence movements in Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, and the Northeast have yet to bear any sort of tangible fruit.
And then there’s the much-overlooked fact that Indians brag about how they have fewer casualties during wars with Pakistan, this despite them being several times larger than their adversary.
FWIW, terrorist incidents like this one are doing a better job of bringing the pain to the Indians due to their disruptive nature and sensationalist media coverage. A growing Indian middle class with more to lose than their predecessors may one day think a lot more carefully before resorting to violence.
Illiterotard
I think the Indian lower & middle classes are the more warmongering ones because they consume garbage media and whatsapp forwards overestimating Indian position and history. BJP now has a stranglehold on Indian print, tv and online space and they have used it to create the victim narrative against Pakistan (and the world). The cheap internet connection, the smartphone camera and their people’s rudimentary use of the English language has pretty much destroyed all the soft power and mystic that anyone on SM had outside of India, and it’s all replaced with disgust. This will further their victim narrative against not just Pakistan but the world and is another factor for them to want war. But wanting war from afar and being in it are two different things, and while I am vary of underestimating it – I don’t think the Indian demeanor (especially those of the Bania and other non-marital castes that are now in charge) will accept any large scale bloodshed. They will fold at first sign of trouble.
Modi’s 370 of integrating Kashmir in India seems to have spectacularly failed. Ajit Doval’s support for BLA and TTP proxies inside Pakistan will get responses not just in Kashmir but elsewhere now that Bangladesh has flipped to Pakistan again.
I think you mean Martial, not Marital. Ironic, given your views on the rudimentary nature of English amongst Indians. I suppose Modi is a bit of a non marital person given his Brahmacharya persona. Perhaps two wrongs do make a right.
It is sad though, that racial and caste stereotypes exploited and codified by the British persist in the minds of their colony which judges itself on the command of their language. Why are we so unwilling to erase the legacy of the British but either side goes to great lengths to erase Hindu & Muslim history.
divide and rule alas
Bania and non-marital castes.. LOL
what sort out language are you using.
Hahahaha wet dreams of Bangladesh “flipping” to Pakistan.
Some online jamaati trolls don’t mean shit.
Bangladesh has one neighbour which controls all it’s water. Bangladesh will NEVER be against India.
BNP will come to power, mend ties with India and then the BAL will come to power sometime later.
Bangladesh will NEVER be a “launchpad” for ISI like lots of Pakistani right wingers are having wet dreams over.
And response to Kashmir is funny considering BLA has just taken over an entire town in Kalat (Mangocher). First a train, now a town? Next time you will lose the entire state.
Kashmir is solved. A fertility rate of 1.4 means that Kashmiris are declining and will be replaced by mainland Indians (already happening with the labour class being from the Hindi heartlands). While Balochistan with a 4+ TFR means more Balochis.
More pain incoming for Pak. ๐
Don’t forget Afghanistan/TTP which again have high fertility rates.
Pakistanis should realize that this is not the 90s – as the Pakistan cricket team has found out.
Proxy warfare like fast bowling is a thing India is better at in the here and now.
The most painful thing for Pak nationalists like S Qureshi here is watching India inch away year after year becoming richer and richer while Pak just remains there, a failure.
Doval sahab, what happened to the Cold Start doctrine? It’s May already and the weather is hot, if the caburretted engines in your Migs are not starting, you cannot blame the weather. We are patiently waiting for surgical strike #3.
yes but I think the Indian middle class is removed from the conflict. the big Metros are not all that close to Pakistan; especially Kolkatta & Chennai.
Delhi & Bombay (the two biggest) are near. Ahmedabad, Chandigarh aren’t far.
Tbh though it has worked South Asia has been peaceful and India is growing at a very rapid clip.
The odd attack every few years in a region of 2bn ppl has to be contextualised.
That’s what hurts Pakistanis the most. That they have been left behind.
It would take Pakistan 25 years to get to present day India status with current growth rates.
I think Pakistan is ruled by a very small unaccountable coterie of elite that runs counter to its interests.
IWS had protected Pakistanโs water rights why obsess over Kashmir otherwise.
I donโt see the point for Pakistani cockiness when it is completely unwarranted. What has Pakistan achieved the last 3 decades or even since independence.
Just cockiness with nothing to back it up.
Some right wingers were fantasizing about how daddy China along with Pak and Bangladesh gonna subdue India via terrorist attacks all over.
Reality is that the NE insurgencies are dead. There are IPL matches being held there and international cricket is regular. The Quetta and Peshawar teams in PSL have played ZERO matches in Quetta and Peshawar.
Bangladesh will NEVER be anti-India. They know which path leads to prosperity.
And as per recent news, Balochistan has captured an entire town in Pak (even Pak propaganda accounts are tweeting it so it’s true).
So it is Pakistan who has to contend with two of their four states (50%) being completely unsafe while India chugs away at 6.5-7% growth rate.
Pakistanis just have to get used to India pulling away year after year (which manifests in things like India smashing them in cricket).
capacity issues?
what do you mean by capacity issues; in the way to take atoms?
pakistan’s delivery capacity as of now.
Xianjian. Tajiks and Uighurs
Looks quite nice and very clean
https://youtu.be/eQPRfIoOYtY?t=1397
Hmm wouldnโt want to be in Xinjiang or rather Uighurstan
Ethnic composition
Even Srinagar looks quiet nice and clean compared to most Pak cities.
If that was reply was to me. I am not a Pakistani.
Sri Lankan, proper mutt. Tamil, Sinhalese and Irish
Does anyone know what the name Pahalgam means.
In Sinhalese it would mean
Pahala (lower) Gam (village)
Pahalgam literally means “village of the shepherds” in Kashmiri, with “Puheyl” meaning shepherd and “goam” meaning village.[6][7] In Hindu literature, the region is mentioned as “Bailgaon”, meaning “village of the bull”, to indicate where the Hindu god Shiva left his bull on the way to Amarnath.[8][9]
Thanks
An excellent analysis. We should also consider 1D : Pakistani establishment is worried about the long term survival of TNT. The central claim of TNT, the assertion that South Asian Muslims would do better if they formed a separate nation state, had empirical support till 1990 (at that time per capita income of Pakistani Muslims was almost twice that of Indian Muslims). However things have changed and now Indian Muslims are marginally ahead of Pakistani Muslims. The difference is still too small to cause a shift in public perception, but the gap might become much bigger in near future. TNT is bound to collapse if the general population of Pakistan start believing that Indian Muslims are enjoying a better quality life. The Pak Army is just trying to delay this as much as possible. The attack on the tourism industry in Kashmir or the Pakistani media continuously comparing Indian Muslims with Jews under Nazi rule are probably part of this effort.
the current cope for so-called educated Pakistanis is how India is suppposedly “making the mistakes with the BJP that Pakistan did in the 1980s under Zia”. The pyschotic desire to somehow maintain a fake superiority complex is laughable if not for the murders of Indians that are a direct consequence.
BJP is nothing like the Zia regime
Just can’t deal with the fact that India has left them behind.
I donโt think Pakistan really dwells on that. Pakistan feels like a fact to its inhabitants ex Baluchistan.
And watching Indian Muslims like Shami and Siraj winning trophies while their heroes get kicked out in the first round.
How India Should Respond to Pahalgam
In what follows I assume the following. The prime movers of the Pahalgam attack are Gen Asim Munir and Lt Gen Asim Malik (DG ISI). The main purpose of the attack was to indicate to India that the recent terror attacks in Balochistan (such as the Jaffer train incident) and various targeted assassinations of Pakistani assets are a violation of Pakistanโs red line, and that India should stop crossing this line. The hypothesis is that the deterrence established by India via Balakot did not fail but its true scope is now becoming visible. Pakistan army is not averse to respecting Indiaโs red line in Kashmir provided India does the same in Balochistan and other areas of Pakistan.
Whether India actually provides substantial material support to violent Baloch separatists is not clear based on public evidence alone. It is clear, however, that the Pakistani army thinks that it does, and this attack may be its way of telling India that this is unacceptable.
Indiaโs involvement in targeted assassinations of Pakistani terror assets seems clearer and more certain.
Indiaโs Response
How India should respond depends upon the level of support it currently provides to separatist Baloch or other violent groups. Let us call these scenarios as high support vs low support (where the low option includes no support).
High Support
In the first instance India needs to decide the relative priority of two possible goals. These are a) maintaining Indiaโs redline in Kashmir (keep jihad below a manageable threshold) b) maintain its high support for violent anti Pak army groups.
Normally one would say a > b but this is not as straight forward as it appears. What if the conflict with Pakistan is an existential one i.e. one in which only one party can survive in its current form? If the eventual solution necessarily requires the breakup of Pakistan might not periodic high casualty terror events in Kashmir be an acceptable cost, provided that Indiaโs eventual goal is reached before the terror becomes unmanageable?
There is also the question of why India has to choose between the two. Why canโt she decide to pursue both goals?
Reasoning our way to a > b
Both the (a and b) and (b >a) scenarios are morally fraught and strategically dangerous.
Both the Baloch separatists and TTP have at times targeted civilians although the former have been generally more morally restrained. This includes civilians not working under the command of or in furtherance of some army activity e.g. school children or bus/train passengers chosen for their ethnicity.
The moral calculus for supporting violent separatist movements is fraught precisely because of such possibilities. Targeting the Pakistani army is morally justified and so is targeting terror assets used by it. Unintentional harm to civilians in the carrying out of such activities is not desirable but it is acceptable. But how can India ensure that her support does not flow to those activities where the direct and selective targeting of civilians is part of the goal? This is not easy to do and that should count as a general disincentive for India to carry out this policy. At the very least it should prompt India to strictly limit such support to clearly defensible actions.
The ideal state for Pakistani army was when it was able to carry out proxy terror in Kashmir (and elsewhere in India) without any significant risk of either limited or protracted conventional war. Neither of these potential outcomes were in its favor (though the latter is worse). Associated with this is its policy of bluffing i.e. of deceptively indicating that these outcomes are riskier for India than for it because of the low nuclear threshold. This does not mean however that there are no scenarios in which it truly does think that such a risk is worth taking.
High causality and high visibility events such as the Jaffer Express attacks and to a lesser extent the continued very public killings of Pakistani assets such as Shahid Latif, Muhammad Riaz etc. with little or no repercussions for India create a sense of impotence and humiliation for the Pakistani army (as they would for anyone else in the same situation). The deepening repression that the army has unleashed against Baloch nationalists (which includes popular but non-violent civil activists) constitutes a vicious cycle. No matter its public bravado, inwardly it would be aware of its dangerous potentialities. It cannot therefore tolerate such events beyond a point, both because of existential and psychological reasons.
This, therefore, is a red line beyond which it is willing to risk conventional war with India (even when such a war might pose more risks for it than for India). Pursuing Option b involves the repeated crossing of this red line and of the consequent violation of Indian red lines. It involves rising chaos, terror and repeated, too frequent wars (not just skirmishes). Will it lead in the long term to the breakup of Pakistan?
Pakistan army has committed genocide in the past and based on its brutal history it is a fair assumption that, other than against Punjabi Muslims, it would be willing to do so again (especially if is pushed to the wall). India has no border with Balochistan and cannot execute a large-scale military operation in favor of the separatists (a la Bangladesh) and even if it could, it likely would involve the nuclear threshold. The separatists are simply not strong enough to defeat the army militarily by themselves. This does not rule out an uneasy civil war like situation in the future where the separatists have some kind of quasi control over some areas but that is a far cry from a breakup. So, option b is strategically dangerous, possibly too dangerous. This leaves us with the option a >b.
Restoring the red line
Restoring Indiaโs redline requires more than abandoning or diluting option b. This is because punishment is not merely about deterrence but also about justice/vengeance. Without proper vengeance India would be massively demoralized.
Modiโs job therefore is to inflict very severe costs on Pakistan (while at the same time dialing down support for violent separatist activity, if any). It is not easy to spell out precisely what these costs must be but there are rough guidelines and examples. A Balakot type skirmish will be too brief and with too little cost to Pakistanis. India should not be too eager to end the engagement once it starts. India does not necessarily have an overwhelming military advantage in the short or even the medium term, but it is also not necessary that the point at which the conflict ends the damage to Pakistan is greater than that to India. As long as the cost to Pakistan is high enough it does not matter very much that India suffers a higher cost.
India must be filled with a cold determination to inflict these costs and an acceptance that this will require Indian blood and economic pain.
Low Support
This scenario is ironically more difficult for India to manage than the high support one. This is because in addition to restoring its red line it has to somehow convince Pakistan that its involvement in violent separatism or TTP type groups is minimal and not that threatening. I doubt that this can be done easily. If Baloch separatism or Taliban violence continues down a vicious spiral, then the conflict between India and Pakistan may ratchet out of control too. Regardless India should continue her policy of targeted assassinations.
The FutureThe IWT suspension is an opportunity for India to restore some fairness to the distribution of water resources between India and Pakistan as well as to create new ways to impose costs in the medium and long term.
Morally Pakistan has lost the moral right to these resources (whatever the legal position may be) and India would be justified in refusing to share them (when it practically can withhold them in the future). The moral status of actions such as deliberately flooding Pakistani areas is more complex and I will not go into that issue here.
It is also somewhat premature to discuss the strategic risks of using water as a means to imposing costs since this option is not yet available and may not be available for a number of years, if ever.
ConclusionIndia is at a difficult and consequential juncture. Her first task is to restore deterrence. She must decide also whether what deterrence was lost unconditionally (independent of option b) or temporarily and conditionally (because of option b). This is not an easy judgment to make, and on it will depend, her best response.
‘Restructuring” the LoC at several points to favorable geographical terrain is one way to publicly punish PakMil. Provided Indian army has the capability to pull it off, and hold the LoC firm. But I think this is a bit too much to ask, given that post Shimla, the Indian position has been to convert existing LoC to a border.
Hey, one can dream of Indian army pushing the LoC forward so that Sharda Peeth is on the ‘right’ side, no? ๐
it’s interesting to see that the Kartapur corridor has stayed intact
Because its a dollar earning machine for PakMil and GoI is leery of any move that positively reinforces PakMil’s attempt to resurrect ‘Khalistan’.
how is the IWT tilted to Pakistan?
This part makes a lot of sense to me – “If the pat on the back came from china then we are in more serious trouble …” This would be a great time for the Chinese to start a war in the Indian subcontinent. After all, with all this chaos around the world, this would be the right time to impede economic progress in India using Pakistan as a patsy. Of course, I still think India should go ahead with a tough military response(I leave it to the wisdom of the planners). I am not a fan of Mrs. Gandhi’s economics but I really don’t think she would have done nothing after say the 2001 Parliament attack or even the 2008 Mumbai attacks. And I do believe that it was a mistake to do nothing then. I agree there would have been economic costs but I think you have to stand up to bullies when you can.
The tragedy is we are not a serious country. Why was the IWT suspended only now? Tough non-kinetic measures should have been taken when the first terror ops started, enunciating a clear red line. Along with appropriate military action, it would have sent a strong message. We need a clear ruthless policy wrt Pakistan, which unfortunately neither the INC nor the NDA seems to have formulated. A knee jerk response caters to the Pak deep state allowing them to string along their population as well as strike at will at India.
And I can’t believe Pakistanis and Indian Muslims intermarrying and settling here or there. Certainly defeats the purpose of partition or more sinisterly, down the road creating more faultlines for another one.
If Pahalgam is the turning point vis-a-vis going soft on a terror state, will need to wait and watch on the long term action taken.
I don’t see the point of hardlinism
75 years of soft-pedaling have resulted in body bags of our people including armed forces personnel, Kashmiris and tourists; leaving behind young widows and fatherless children and old parents. Is this price worth it when the enemy just wants your obliteration at any cost including their own annihilation? And this is very much a monotheistic aggressor which wants to stamp out the only extant polytheistic civilization. All other polytheistic faiths have been quashed and relegated to history.
A North Korea cannot be compared to a Pakistan. NK is destroying their own people. It doesn’t have a missionary zeal to destroy SK which is doing well. In fact by abrogating 370, Modi tried to do exactly what you’re saying. Ignore these losers, cut them loose and become an economic superpower. But Pakistan does not think like that. The normalcy in Kashmir triggered them like nothing else, they had to destroy it. And generations of indoctrination have resulted in complete zombies with below average iq that do the bidding of the religious zealots. It would be of academic interest to see how the average IQ has dropped over the last few decades. In Hitler’s Germany, IQ points dropped over 2 generations because of how the Nazis destroyed all books except the ones they deemed appropriate.
I don’t think the Chinese want a war
I am here to record my prediction is once again coming true. India lurches to caste census, moving on to pvt sector quota, my claim of modi being incable of being principled turned out to be correct, I said this in 2019. All this India pakistan fight is a problem of low iq countries fighting each other, when the world races towards AI instead. If pakistan was smart, they would have stayed quiet and let Indias own contradictions to play out , aligned with some caste groups and proceeded ahead. But then, they need to control their intrinsic bigotry, which they cant. when your only world class skill is in terror and nothing else, you tend to use it. Neither country is capable of long term strategic thinking.
The internet has these strange IQ numbers which people then use as proof to come up with horribly racist theories. Nepal shows up with an average IQ of 43. India 76. The IQ threshold for mental retardation is 70, think Forrest Gump. You would not be able to hold an extended conversation with a such a person. How many Nepalis/Indians have you found this to be the case with.
https://www.iosrjournals.org/iosr-jhss/papers/Vol20-issue9/Version-4/D020944446.pdf
Here is a study comparing Urban and Tribal area IQ in Andhra. As you can see the average IQ in an Urban area is well over 100 and in the Tribal Areas averages above 80. It is a separate debate as to how accurate IQ tests are in determining intelligence and outcomes.
Perversely it seems that google provides these junk IQ numbers with no evidence backing them, you would think their horde of Indian engineers would actually do something about it.
around 90 to 95 would be my estimate, that tips over 60% population as low iq. Given the need for perpetual reservations, it shows not just that they have low self esttem, it shows that they have given up any hope of competing at all. assuming general iq is at 105, ashkenazi are about 110-115 iq and no Indian group has matched that degree of success. Why should Indian engineers bother when Indians in India dont bother. Dont you think it is a bit revealing that India scored second lowest in pisa test scores and has been spooked to not take it again, https://thewire.in/education/india-opts-out-of-pisa-2025 , also, those claiming socio-economic conditions, educational infrastructure, coaching are the real difference in terms of not being able to compete with uppercastes could have used iq test as a fairer measure, it tells everything one needs to know that no Indian politician 0r ngo interest group is willing to value this. India needs to value iq test as a fairer means to come to terms with its reality first for its own needs. To understand the impact of unknown toxins, nutrition etc doing damage.
Sadly, I think I agree with you on most points. India desperately needs to test and collect data about IQ and education. It also needs to determine objective criteria of the success of reservations, beyond the political objectives.
There was a window of opportunity for good governance when the AAP got off the ground, until their leader went out of his way to prove how absolutely power corrupts.
IQ can be raised by both education and nutrition. Ideally a govt should focus on this and defence and just ensure the guardrails are there on unfair competition etc, the rest will sort itself out. I have an alternate timeline fantasy where Rajgopalachari’s swatantra party won the election.
105 iq for general is perhaps too much, i would put it to 100 .
IQ is a terrible conversation to be having tbh
by talking about iq, if we fix nutrition, then that boosts iq, and we get equal outcomes, our problems will be solved.
give the stunting and anemia in Indian population,i expect that if this problem is solved, perhaps most of these disparities will disappear. we can live with hope if we focus on the things that need to be done.
I did an IQ test; loaded with cultural anamolies. also like figuring out shapes etc, is that really intelligence?
I feel intelligence is a highly adaptive and dynamic trait
you are happily self delusional, i wish i was like that, would have a more cheery life. Unfortunate to break it to you but one can use culture neutral ravens progressive matrices, digit span etc to estimate a very good iq measure. And in Indian case, at this point IQ is the thing to talk about, otherwise after 75 yrs of Indian Independence and affirmative actions for over 50% population and demands for more.https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/indore/congress-will-remove-50-reservation-cap-rahul-gandhi/articleshow/109900465.cms . There is hardly anything else to talk about other than nutrition,IQ and AI.You see, when one feels like a victim, morally superior and are a majority , one tends to rather accept that the reason things are not equal is because one needs 3000 yrs of reservations to fix things or that one needs 400+yrs of reservations to catch up https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/challenges-faced-by-sc-st-and-obc-students-in-joining-iits-without-reservation/articleshow/112052893.cms#:~:text='It'll%20take%20400%20years,match%20general%20scores%20for%20IITs'&text=A%20report%20showed%20ST%20and,the%20need%20for%20targeted%20policies. , rather than admit perhaps that it is IQ that makes the difference.A position that I deliberately chose to ignore for decade and half because of my need to see goodness in others. The belief that one can manufacture Einsteins(cracking big nationwide tests requires High IQ, there is no getting away from that), by practice, one could create mozart,sachin, messi with just practice, access to top nutrition,education etc. My God the delusion is dangerous, because more they fail, the more their envy and hate increases for others who are successful inspite of being lack of support, infact negative discrimination by state to actually restrict their options for decades.
this is true but India is miles ahead of Pakistan
India lurches to caste census, moving on to pvt sector quota, — given the population mix, there are sufficient obcs in the working population. this is evident in it jobs in bangalore and else where, according to prof. vaidyanathan and my own observation.. the trouble cones when the demand for board seats comes through.
[…] India and Pakistan, Back to the Future.. April 23, 2025 […]