Citizens Point

Tourism Meets Terrorism

On 22nd April, 2025, the world was shaken by a disturbing terrorist attack in Kashmir’s Baisaran Valley, a popular tourist hub. It is located about five kilometers from Pahalgam district headquarters in the northern Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. Also known as the “Mini Switzerland of India,” the picturesque Baisaran Valley sits at a height of 2400 metres, surrounded by lush green pine trees and overlooks the lofty Pir Panjal range. 

Militants Target Tourists by Faith

According to Indian investigative agencies, at approximately 2:50 PM on 22nd April, three militants entered the Baisaran Valley through the woods. Bereft of any security presence, they enjoyed virtually no challenges in subduing the area filled with a multitude of tourists. Tourists were asked to recite the Kalma at gunpoint to ascertain their faith. If they failed to recite the Islamic Verses, the terrorists shot them down, according to eyewitnesses. 25 Indians and a foreigner were shot dead. Hailing from Pahalgam, tour guide Syed Adil Hussain Shah heroically tried to save the tourists but was killed. What made the terror attack stand-out was the tactic employed by the terrorists- they shot only male tourists after questioning their faith.

India’s Post-Pahalgam Response

In the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack, the Government of India felt the need to respond strongly. Each escalation with Pakistan is supposed to raise the costs for Islamabad to deter it from fostering violence in the Kashmir region. In the aftermath of the 2016 Uri attack and the 2019 Pulwama bombings, the Indian military had attacked a limited number of jihadi training camps and launchpads frequented by Pakistan-based terrorists. The latter involved the first-ever air strike on mainland Pakistan at a place called Balakot located in the northern Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. Although Pakistan lost little in terms of value in these strikes; the cross-border military operations impacted the balance of power perception between both countries. New Delhi was clear in signalling that bombing deeper targets within Pakistan will be its de-facto response in case of a major terror attack.

Yet, the theatre of war was limited to Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) region in the previous responses. The International boundary remained largely oblivious to military escalation prior to the Pahalgam attacks. This operational bracket changed with ‘Operation Sindoor’. It has significant strategic ramifications for Pakistan’s security. 

The Indian Government also opened up other avenues of putting diplomatic pressure on Pakistan. The most important step among these steps included putting the Indus Water Treaty in abeyance, till relations improve. Among other steps, India made a blanket cancellation of all Pakistani visas and directed all Pakistani nationals to leave the country in a short timeframe. 

Pakistan’s Kryptonite: Water Dependency on India

Geologically, the Indus River is the jugular vein of Pakistan, not Kashmir. Suspending the Indus Water Treaty, which deals with the sharing of water flowing into Pakistan from western Himalayan rivers was a considerably bold step. The Indus water system provides much-needed water for irrigation to over 80 percent of Pakistanis. The high dependency on rivers flowing through India creates a major vulnerability for Pakistan. 

India has steadfastly abided by the Indus Water Treaty since its signing on 19th September, 1960. Under the treaty, India was given control of Eastern rivers comprising Satluj, Ravi and Beas which flow primarily through its Punjab state. Pakistan got control over the Western rivers such as Indus, Chenab and Jhelum which drain through the state of Jammu and Kashmir. 

However, India had highlighted the need for re-negotiation of the treaty in the wake of modern technology, growing population needs and fairness. On 30th August, 2024, India had formally requested Pakistan for bilateral negotiations based on Article XII (3) of the IWT. This was turned down by Islamabad which intended to stick to the original IWT, while stressing that it is not open to direct government to government negotiations.

   

Initial Military Response: Operation Sindoor

On 7th May, the Indian military conducted limited precision-strikes on nine non-military locations within Pakistan under ‘Operation Sindoor’. ‘Sindoor’ or ‘Vermilion’ is a traditional substance worn by married women in Hindu households. The naming follows the logic that most victims of the Pahalgam terror attack were married Hindu men. 

The Indian military dubbed these nine sites as part of terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan while publicly dubbing its actions as non-escalatory in nature. Official information from both India and Pakistan revealed that this operation was not completely a surprise. Pakistan was well aware that India would mount a military response to the Pahalgam terror attack and it was confirmed by its Defence Minister Khwaja Asif prior to the strikes.

According to a detailed presentation by the Indian Military and Ministry of External Affairs, as well as media reports on the ground in Pakistan, which is further corroborated by independent satellite images; Indian precision strikes were able to hit their intended targets accurately. All the nine targets lay between 10 to 100 kilometers from the LoC and IB as the crow flies. 

Official Images of Strikes by Indian Military inside Pakistan (Source: MoD Press Conference)

The Markaz Subhan Allah camp located in Pakistan’s Punjab province was the deepest of the nine targets. It was also the headquarters of the UN-sanctioned Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorist group. International coverage at the site revealed crumbled roof and devastation. The precision strikes were delivered using a variety of weapons choices. Most of the bombardment was carried out using air-launched precision guided munitions.

Strategic Thought:

We can understand India’s objectives only after the 7th May strikes. India demonstrated a key ability- strike deeper into mainland Pakistan with pin-point accuracy. In addition, there were crucial changes in India’s strategic thinking.  

By choosing to hit mainland Pakistan through its length and breadth, India demonstrated that it doesn’t intend to restrict the theatre of conflict to Kashmir alone. By coupling Kashmir with the International boundary, India intends to raise the costs for Pakistan significantly. This is because the length of the Line of Control (LoC) is approximately 740 kilometers in length; while the International Boundary from Punjab till Sir Creek is 2583 kilometers approximately.

Multiple media reports indicated that the 7th May Operation was preceded by one of the largest showdowns among fighter jets post World War II. However, the extensive use of fighter jets in this operation stands at odds with the later stages of conflict, where both India and Pakistan resorted to the use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) as well as missiles. One plausible way to explain this is the high accuracy of Air-to-Ground munitions launched from fighter planes. The air-launched Brahmos missile also needs the Flanker (Sukhoi 30 MKI) fighter jet platform. Given the sensitivity of India to avoid collateral damages i.e. unnecessary civilian casualties, the use of reliable fighter jets makes sense in the initial stage of the conflict. Most terrorist sites were located in populated towns of Pakistan. However, it also increased the odds as non-stealthy fighter jets are vulnerable to sophisticated long-range anti-air solutions procured by Pakistan post-2019 Balakot strikes.

India and Pakistan: Political Calculations Shape Conflict Response

In a statement by an Indian defence attaché to Indonesia, it was revealed that political constraints led to inhibition of striking Pakistani military assets in India’s response to Pahalgam terrorist attack. However, the multi-pronged Indian strikes were successful despite a full-fledged mobilization of Pakistan Air Force (PAF) assets. In the aftermath of Pakistan’s counterattack on 8th May, the Indian military demonstrated its capabilities to suppress enemy air defences and strike Pakistani air assets at will. It is sensible to understand that political decision-makers did not want to fall in the trap of a protracted conflict with Pakistan. And striking non-military Pakistani assets was a well-planned trap for Pakistani military leadership in which the IAF succeeded meticulously. Thus, the (acknowledged) losses to some IAF assets in the 7th May operation is understandable.

For Pakistan’s leaders, the conflict with India has revived the importance of the Pakistan Army- the single most dominant administrator in the country. During the tenure of ex-PM Imran Khan, the military leadership suffered from a serious loss of confidence among the public. It was not surprising that despite Indian strikes deep inside Pakistan, the performance of the Pakistani military was praised by the captive media in the country. A wave of anti-India sentiment was manufactured in the weeks related to the tensions. Many Pakistani personalities started war-mongering as well.

,The hyped sentiments have settled since the new ceasefire on 10th May. The Pakistani decision makers have also felt an urgent need to sort the Indus Treaty issue through bilateral talks only.

Pakistan’s Military Response After India’s May 7 Strikes

According to Inter-Services Public Relations, Pakistan launched “Marka-e-Haq” in response to India’s allegations over the Pahalgam terror attack. As part of this broader operation, the Operation “Bunyanum Marsoos” which was its military’s escalation response over the initial Indian military strikes inside Pakistan. On 7th May, the Pakistan Army violated the ceasefire in Jammu’s Poonch region targeting widespread civilian infrastructure. On 8th May, the conflict escalated after Pakistan fired a variety of drones targeting 26 locations mirroring its entire border with India. The operations lasted till 10th May with Pakistan using barrages of drones against Indian military and civilian locations. The targeting of civilian locations was widely covered by multiple sources.

Images of damages to a Sikh Gurudwara and an Islamic Madrassa due to Pakistani shelling

Post-conflict official discourses have confirmed that Pakistan used Turkish drones in large numbers to target Indian military installations. These included the YIHA-III, Asisguard Songuard and Bayraktar tb-2 UAVs. In addition, the PAF also used its domestically manufactured Shahpur-II UAVs. In a press conference, the Pakistani spokesperson claimed successful strikes on Indian air bases as well as a S-400 site. However, the Pakistani DGISPR (Director General of Inter-Services public Relations) did not provide any evidence to corroborate these claims. This claim was dismissed as baseless by the Indian side. Independent observers using Satellite data also could not find any merit to Pakistan’s claims.

Debris of Pakistan’s Drones in India

How India Answered Pakistan’s Post-May 7 Attacks

The Indian military responded to Pakistan’s use of drone warfare by conducting extensive bombing of Pakistan’s strategic assets. According to media reports, these operations were mostly SEAD or ‘Suppression of Enemy Air Defence’ in nature, which was achieved using various UAVs in a limited manner. IAF used a variety of UAVs including Israeli and domestic ones to achieve its goals. Indian-made suicide drones were also used effectively.

Deserts, Seas — and PAF’s Skies Now Under IAF Wings

In the following escalation matrix, India used UAVs and missiles to target at least 10 Pakistani Air Force bases. The operation can be understood as a major escalation by the Indian Military with an intent to display its ability to gain air superiority over Pakistan in case of a larger conflict. Later in an official briefing, the Indian Military spokeswomen revealed that they specifically targeted technical infrastructure, command and control centres, radar sites and weapon-storage areas inside Pakistan. The operations bolstered India’s hand in any major escalation by the opponent. Hence, the de-escalation effort was initiated by the Pakistani DGMO (Director General of Military Operations) in the aftermath of 10th May which was agreed by the Indian counterpart.

Images Showing Indian Precision Strikes on Pakistani Airbases

Impact of India-Pakistan Military Operations

In the light of fog of war and misinformation, the only information that becomes reliable is that of independent experts analyzing satellite data as well as local videos capturing the drone strikes on both sides of the border. It would not be far-fetched to conclude that Pakistan’s drone barrage over Indian sites had negligible impact. There is little evidence of any losses to India. 

But the case is widely different when it comes to Indian strikes. Pakistan’s air bases and runways were hit multiple times during the conflict. While the escalation was limited, both sides did not use their full potential. However, it was the first time that offensive drone warfare was practiced by South Asian militaries. The accuracy of Indian-operated missiles and UAVs got battle-proven. And the indigenous air-defence grid that was being developed by India in the past-decade proved its merit against the Chinese and Turkish UAVs. However, without verifiable information, the amount of hits and misses can’t be quantified at the author’s level.

In a recent statement, the Indian military has revealed plans to enhance the coverage of the indigenous air-defence grid to protect important population hubs during future conflicts, while also stating that it is a costly affair. Pakistan resorting to Shelling civilian infrastructure near border areas, including religious sites, was extensively covered by the Indian media. Unless cheaper anti-air alternatives are developed, civilian populations in proximity to the India-Pakistan border are likely to remain vulnerable.

Another important takeaway was the active help provided by Turkey and China primarily during the conflict. Indian Military has confirmed that China was providing live location of Indian assets to Pakistan. Turkey also delivered UAVs when the conflict was underway. In the coming months, mitigating this axis will be crucial objective of the Indian diplomatic effort.

Defence innovation is also another important takeaway from the conflict. Indian military confirmed that the conflict served as a testing ground for weapons. This can be further understood by the Ukraine-Russia conflict where UAVs have been modified by both sides to con prevalent air-defence systems. As Pakistan is closely coordinating with China, the Indian military will be hard-pressed to upgrade assets to retain its edge in the battlefield. Exposed missiles and electronic signatures will be used by both adversaries to develop better solutions. It’s a cat-and-mouse game hereafter.

Global Stakes and Media Narratives in India-Pakistan Conflict

Even before the shadow of war had lifted, the Western and Chinese media outlets were engaged in a poorly-sourced euphoria over downed Indian fighter jets, particularly Dassault’s Rafale fighter jets. In the later stages of conflict, the efficacy of Chinese-made PL-15 missiles as well as HQ-9 air defence systems operated by Pakistan were questioned by the media. The fear of nuclear-armed neighbours going into conflict was also reported widely. Indian strikes inside Pakistan was widely reported as well.

Later, US President Donald Trump’s claims of mediation were widely covered. India has dismissed the mediation claim of Trump, saying that it had no impact on its decisions and that the issues with Pakistan are bilateral in nature. India has repeatedly cleared its stance that it was Pakistan’s DGMO that requested a ceasefire. 

Pakistan has not negated India’s stance. While Islamabad has made no attempts in any global forum to disprove India’s statements on US mediation, it has ramped up diplomatic engagement with the United States. Pakistan became the first country to pitch for a Nobel Peace Prize for President Donald Trump. In addition, a bilateral agreement has been signed between both countries for mining critical minerals in Pakistan as well.

Aftermath

On 24th June, the Pakistani PM Shehbaz Sharif said that Pakistan is willing to talk to India on all outstanding issues. This can be seen as a shift in previous position where Islamabad prioritized its Kashmir claims. India is unlikely to advance talks unless terrorism is completely disowned as a tool for statecraft by the Pakistani military. The Indian government has repeatedly signalled that Operation Sindoor is not over yet. India’s hard posturing is a clear signal to Islamabad to choose good bilateral relations or no relations at all.