Military notes; Indo-Pak conflict: deterrence, pre-battle manoeuvres

Express Tribune

2 days ago

The writer is a retired major general and has an interest in International Relations and Political Sociology. He can be reached at [e-mail] and tweets @20_Inam
Listen to article
We continue to discuss various aspects of the recent Indo-Pakistan military standoff.
Third, deterrence per se. More than a billion lives escaped Modi's madness in a closer than ever nuclear Armageddon. Besides the conventional side of warfare, the more dangerous 'nuclear parity' still overhangs South Asia perilously. With deterrence in 'conventional terms re-established', one hopes India under Modi would avoid another wasteful adventure of humiliation, and resume talks over the table, rather than in the skies and through brinkmanship.
The future India-Pakistan conflict scene will no longer be unilateral. It will be dictated and decided by Sino-Pak military alliance especially in collaboration with China's Western Theater Command. And this would augment deterrence for rational players on the Indian side, if any. Pakistan's Military, in South Asia's modern history, showcased the most integrated defensive strategy and real-time coordination.
And just to reiterate, in military literature, a weaker side is supposed to have won an asymmetrical contest, if it denies outright victory or the attainment of war's aims and objectives to the stronger side, which Pakistan did to a larger India.
So perceptually speaking, deterrence in the Indo-Pakistan context would, henceforth, be defined by the conventional military capabilities plus nuclear arms, and the fragility of psychological threshold on both sides, as discussed in my piece, 'India, Pakistan — redefining deterrence', printed in this space on May 22, 2025. And in Pakistan's context, deterrence would remain to be fortified by the Sino-Pakistani alliance, and the resolve of Pakistan's civil and military leadership, through Islamabad's 'quid-pro-quo Plus' strategy, to never let India prevail.
So, peace, the perusal of which now squarely lies with a mellowed but bellicose India that still pursues its intended water wars, would remain elusive if we do not recognise each other's capabilities, and do not engage each other with dignity, mutual respect and patience, and not with ignorance or arrogance.
Fourth. The Exterior Manoeuvre. Without going into the nuts and bolts of the diplomatic war, the Indian efforts to paint Pakistan into endemically bad light and as a state sponsor of terrorism, had very few takers, regionally and internationally. Indian diplomatic overtures focused on painting itself taller by telling the world its military response was calculated and non-escalatory and that this 'new India' would respond muscularly to the so-called terrorist attacks, without wanting a wider war with Pakistan and its people. Essentially contradictory iterations.
No country condemned Pakistan for the 'alleged' terrorism; none appreciated India's 'carefully calibrated' military response. The world, contrarily, was preoccupied with the IAF's French Rafael jets being shot down by PAF's Chinese J-10C fighters using PL-15 E air-to-air missiles.
Even the US after some initial ambivalence from VP Vance had to forcefully intervene to affect a ceasefire, without giving India the blank cheque of unilateralism and brinkmanship. Russia, India's traditional friend, withheld the 'expected' diplomatic support for India. And Türkiye, Azerbaijan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar and the entire OIC, the UN all called for restraint and then ceasefire.
Major capitals responded with studied neutrality despite India sending seven diplomatic delegations to 32 countries. Beijing's signalling and posturing in support of Pakistan were overtly clear. Washington's ceasefire appeal re-hyphenated the two nuclear neighbours, to India's great chagrin. New Delhi even refused to acknowledge any US role, for which Trump had publicly taken credit.
The paradox of Indian 'Exterior Manoeuvre' was laid bare, as to why was it accepting a ceasefire, irrespective of whether it was reached bilaterally (as India claimed) or under US interlocution (as Trump tweeted), if it had an upper hand militarily.
During the conduct of operations, fiasco after fiasco derided New Delhi's aspirations and outsized ego. From denial to acknowledging downing of planes including Rafaeles, to persistent lies on the state and social media, greatly diminished India's shine, sheen and diplomatic weight. New Delhi's comical effort to influence the World Bank under its Indian-origin president, Mr Ajay Banga, from sanctioning loan to Islamabad failed spectacularly.
The extent of India's hostility towards Pakistan permeated not only its body politics, but also its cultural elite (read Bollywood), its state behaviour; and resulted in a compulsive obsession with Pakistan, whom India's intellectual wizards proudly claim to have pushed into irrelevant ignominy. This paradox - Pakistan's irrelevance and Islamabad being an uncomfortable reality - remains unresolved and has been damaging India's 'perceived' important power aspiration and status, without pundits realising it.
Fifth, The Inner Front. India whipped up its jingoist anti-Pakistan narrative in order to jell its inner front, silencing opposition, muzzling rationality and suppressing truth in the process. And it failed. The Modi Government had to launch Operation "Tiranga Yatra (tricolour journey)" for intense domestic messaging, to manipulate outcomes during Operation Sindoor. From annihilating Pakistan to dominating South Asia as the new hegemon, its efforts, however, could not convince most of its 200 million Muslims, who constitute 10.9 per cent of its population, is the world's 3rd largest Muslim population, and the largest Muslim-minority globally.
Its illegally occupied Kashmir, the expected battle zone, simmers with hate, discontent and a resurgent anti-India sentiment, making operations and rear-area security a nightmare for the Indian Military. Assam, Christian Mizoram, Nagaland, the Naxalite insurgency in the 'Red Corridor', Khalistan Movement in Punjab and abroad, and other insurgencies drive wedges in the India Union.
Even the Brahman-dominated decision-making elite had and have reservations on the direction secular India has taken under Hindutva-laced Modi Sarkar. Indian security sector and armed forces saw removals, arrests and demotions during the stand-off; and its population is still experiencing arrests for supporting Pakistan, as per press reports.
By comparison, Pakistan's inner front jelled like it always does in a crisis with India. RAW-financed terrorism in KP and Balochistan, and the expected political uprising by some political forces against the armed forces, in hilarious formulation of Indian intelligence, failed and failed miserably. Pakistan's national will, determination, resolve and motivation across the political spectrum and across the nation was tougher and firm.
Pakistan's 'relative' demographic homogeneity compared to India's heterogeneity is always an asset and a force-multiplier. Such demographic truism also permeates Pakistan's armed forces, making it a formidable fighting machine.
Continues...