India no longer a soft state to suffer Pakistan in silence
For India, terrorism is a lived reality. We have been the victims of a sustained and systemic campaign of cross-border terrorism emanating from Pakistan for decades. Just in this century, names like the Parliament attack, Kaluchak, Mumbai; Pathankot, Uri, Pulwama and Pahalgam are seared across Indian hearts and minds. The pattern in each is unmistakable: state-created and -supported terrorist groups targeting innocent Indians with impunity.
Terror groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), and more recently, their proxies using different names operate with impunity in and from Pakistan. Their ideological roots may differ, but their operational, logistical and financial support stems from a common source — the Pakistan army.
For years, India adhered to what was known as “strategic restraint." This was guided by the desire to prevent escalation, particularly under the shadow of nuclear weapons and a belief that international opinion would see terrorism for what it was and prevail upon Pakistan to modify its behaviour.
We prepared documents as ‘proof’, pleaded our case bilaterally and at international fora. Our pleas fell on deaf ears. There was no change in Pakistan’s behaviour.
But that era is now behind us.
India’s policy towards this threat has decisively changed. A new policy doctrine has emerged, reflecting shifts in public expectation, security calculus and, above all, political will. India is no longer willing to absorb terror strikes or take the high moral ground. The era of muted Indian response is over. Permanently.
The surgical strike in 2016 was the first step and the Balakot airstrike in 2019 reinforced that step, marking the turning points in our counter-terror policy. These were not just military operations; they were strategic messages. India would no longer absorb the blows silently and neither would it be deterred by the nuclear overhang. The cost of sponsoring terror would now be borne by the perpetrators and their enablers.
The massacre in Pahalgam on April 22, when male tourists were identified by religion, as Hindus, and shot in cold blood in front of their families, was in a different league altogether. The brutality and communal nature of the massacre shocked India and because the victims came from different parts of the country, it unified India in demanding massive retribution.
The response was Operation Sindoor — an apt name. India’s strikes on May 7 focussed on terrorists rather than civilians or military infrastructure. It was a decisive and precise manoeuvre, underscoring the seriousness of India’s commitment to responding to terrorism and eliminating cross-border terror infrastructure.
It was when Pakistan escalated to targeting, unsuccessfully as it turned out to be, civilian and military sites that India followed suit and took on Pakistan’s air defence and struck 13 airbases, inflicting substantial damage.
The difference between the two attacks was that while India could show evidence in terms of satellite imagery of the damage inflicted, Pakistan could not show any evidence of the attacks that it claimed. Satellite imagery ensured that Pakistan could neither deny the attacks nor the damage.
Though operational details remain classified and the operation itself has only been paused, it did succeed in degrading terror infrastructure, disrupting cross-border networks, neutralising Pakistan’s air defence and damaging frontline air bases. It was a demonstration of India’s enhanced capability and political will.
PM Modi outlined India’s new security doctrine as:
1. A terror attack on India will be treated as an act of war and there will be a fitting response.
2. Nuclear blackmail will no longer work. India will strike precisely and decisively.
3. There is no distinction between terrorists and their sponsors.
He was blunt: If Pakistan wants peace, it must dismantle its terror infrastructure. There is no middle ground. “Terror and talks can’t go together. Terror and trade can’t go together. Water and blood cannot flow together."
India also took several non-military actions against Pakistan. The major one was to hold the Indus Waters Treaty ‘in abeyance’ with immediate effect until Pakistan ‘credibly and irrevocably’ abjured support for cross-border terrorism.
A whole narrative is being built up that India is starving Pakistan of water. Since India does not presently have the capacity to stop, divert or store water of the three western rivers — the Indus, Chenab and Jhelum — that the treaty allocated to Pakistan, why is Pakistan so rattled that it is threatening war?
The reason is that its own water situation is already precarious due to gross mismanagement over the decades and population growth. Pakistan has literally run its water resources to the ground. According to Pakistan think tanks, the annual per capita availability of water could decline to 500 cubic metres soon. This is absolute water scarcity and could lead to drought-like conditions in parts of the country.
As a result, Pakistan finds it convenient to scapegoat Indian action as an existential threat, calling India’s suspension of the water treaty ‘an act of war’.
The final element in India’s new policy was PM Modi firmly rejecting any third-party mediation on J&K. He conveyed this stance in a telephone call with President Trump during the G7 meeting. He also clarified that cessation of hostilities had been at the request of Pakistan and that Delhi and Islamabad agreed to this through existing channels of communication between the two militaries.
Modi had also made it clear that “if we ever talk to Pakistan, it will be on terror and PoK only."
The main takeaway of the new Indian policy is that it is a policy of action, not of appeasement. India will not initiate aggression, but it will respond with decisive force. India is no longer the soft state that absorbs attack after attack in silence. If Pakistan exports terror, it will have to be prepared to import hard consequences. Pakistan and the international community must understand that the era of impunity is over. India is a rising power, a responsible democracy and a nation that will protect its people.
Views are personal
Tilak Devasher is former Member. National Security Advisory Board.
Comments