India Pakistan Skirmish- High Stakes for International Community

ByWilliam Favre

May 12, 2025

Share this Article

India and Pakistan reached an understanding to stop all firings and military actions on land, air and sea, with immediate effect from 5 pm, 10 May 2025. Tensions between India and Pakistan reached a critical level following Indian airstrikes on alleged terrorist infrastructure and key military installations in Pakistan. This research article analyses these events within the context of international relations, highlighting India’s motivations, international reactions, and implications for regional stability. By examining the justifications for India’s actions, the responses from the international community and historical dynamics, this article aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the stakes and consequences of this recent escalation.

Introduction

The relationship between India and Pakistan has been characterised by persistent conflict and tension since their partition in 1947. This division, which created two separate states based on religious majorities, laid the groundwork for a series of disputes, primarily centred around the Kashmir region (Chaudet, 2019). The recent escalation, marked by Indian airstrikes and missile strikes on Pakistani territory, has brought these tensions to a critical point. This article seeks to analyse the motivations behind India’s actions, the responses from the international community, and the broader implications for regional stability.

The roots of the Indo-Pakistani conflict can be traced back to the partition of British India, which resulted in the creation of the Dominion of India and the Dominion of Pakistan. The partition was accompanied by large-scale violence and mass migrations, setting the stage for future conflicts (Talbot, 2009). The first major conflict between the two nations occurred in 1947-48, shortly after their independence, over the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. This conflict resulted in the establishment of the Line of Control (LoC), which still serves as the de facto border between Indian-administered and Pakistani-administered Kashmir (Schofield, 2003).

Subsequent wars in 1965 and 1971 further entrenched the animosity between the two countries. The 1965 war was sparked by Pakistani attempts to infiltrate forces into Indian-administered Kashmir, leading to a full-scale military confrontation (Ganguly, 1994). The 1971 war, which resulted in the creation of Bangladesh, was another significant milestone in the Indo-Pakistani rivalry (Jalal, 1995). These conflicts, along with numerous skirmishes and military standoffs, have kept the region in a state of perpetual tension.

The recent attack on April 22, 2025, in Pahalgam, Indian-administered Kashmir, which resulted in the deaths of 26 Hindu civilians, reignited these long-standing tensions. India attributed this attack to militant groups based in Pakistan, particularly Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), and launched retaliatory strikes on nine sites in Pakistan and Pakistani-administered Kashmir (Indian Ministry of Defence, 2025), followed by strikes at airbases and key military sites.

These strikes were described by India as “precision strikes” targeting terrorist infrastructure while minimising civilian casualties and damage to civilian infrastructure (Singh, 2025).

The operation, named “Sindoor,” was presented as a measured and non-escalatory response to the terrorist attacks, aimed at holding the perpetrators of the Pahalgam attack accountable (Indian Ministry of Defence, 2025). According to Gilles Boquérat, a researcher at the French Institute of International Relations (IFRI), this approach reflects India’s determination to respond firmly to terrorist threats while avoiding major escalation (Boquérat, 2025).

The international community, including the United States, France, Germany, and China, called for restraint and de-escalation of tensions. The French Foreign Minister urged both nuclear powers to exercise restraint, while the United States called for a responsible resolution of the dispute (French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2025). Germany expressed concern and established a crisis cell to closely monitor the situation (German Federal Foreign Office, 2025). China declared its readiness to play a constructive role in easing tensions (Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2025).

India’s decision to carry out airstrikes on Pakistani territory was driven by multiple factors, primarily centred around national security and counter-terrorism. The attack on April 22, 2025, in Pahalgam, which resulted in the deaths of 26 Hindu civilians, was a significant trigger. This incident was attributed to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a militant group based in Pakistan, which has been implicated in numerous attacks on Indian soil over the years (Fair, 2014). The Indian government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has consistently emphasised a zero-tolerance policy towards terrorism, particularly when it is perceived to be supported or facilitated by Pakistan (Pant, 2019).

The airstrikes and missile strikes, part of Operation Sindoor, were described by Indian officials as “precision strikes” aimed at terrorist infrastructure as well as a measured response to the drone attack of Pakistan. The objective was to minimise civilian casualties and avoid damage to civilian infrastructure, thereby presenting the operation as a measured and responsible response to the terrorist threat (Indian Ministry of Defence, 2025). This approach aligns with India’s broader strategy of deterrence, which seeks to dissuade future attacks by demonstrating the capability and willingness to respond forcefully to acts of terrorism (Tellis, 2001).

According to Pr Gilles Boquérat, a researcher at the French Institute of International Relations (IFRI), India’s actions reflect a calculated effort to balance the need for a strong response with the imperative to avoid a full-scale military escalation. This strategy is indicative of India’s broader geopolitical objectives, which include maintaining regional stability while asserting its position as a major power capable of defending its interests (Boquérat, 2025).

The international community’s response to the escalation between India and Pakistan has been one of concern and calls for restraint. The United States, France, Germany, and China have all urged both nations to de-escalate tensions and seek a peaceful resolution to their differences. The French Foreign Minister emphasised the importance of restraint, particularly given the nuclear capabilities of both countries, and called for dialogue to prevent further escalation (French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2025).

The United States, while expressing support for India’s right to defend itself against terrorism, also highlighted the need for a responsible resolution of the conflict. President Donald Trump expressed hope that the situation would be resolved quickly and without further violence (White House, 2025). Germany, recognising the potential for a broader regional conflict, established a crisis cell to monitor the situation closely and offered to mediate if necessary (German Federal Foreign Office, 2025).

China, which shares borders with both India and Pakistan, has a vested interest in regional stability. The Chinese government declared its readiness to play a constructive role in easing tensions and called for both nations to exercise restraint and engage in dialogue (Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2025). This stance reflects China’s broader strategic interests in maintaining stability in its neighbourhood and preventing any conflict that could disrupt its economic and geopolitical objectives (Garver, 2001).

India’s proactive approach under Prime Minister Modi reflects a broader strategy of deterrence and defence, aimed at neutralising threats to national security while avoiding full-scale war. This strategy, while effective in demonstrating India’s resolve, also carries the risk of unintended escalation, particularly given the nuclear capabilities of both nations (Tellis, 2001). The international community’s calls for restraint and dialogue highlight the need for a balanced approach that addresses security concerns while preventing further conflict.

Historical Conflicts Between India and Pakistan

The history of conflicts between India and Pakistan is extensive and deeply rooted in the partition of British India in 1947. This division created two separate states based on religious majorities: India, predominantly Hindu, and Pakistan, predominantly Muslim. The partition led to large-scale violence and mass migrations, setting the stage for future conflicts (Talbot, 2009).

First Indo-Pak War (1947-1948): The first major conflict occurred shortly after independence, when Pakistan-backed tribal militias invaded the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. In response, India sent its troops to defend the region, leading to a full-scale war. The conflict ended in January 1949 with a UN-mediated ceasefire, resulting in the division of Kashmir along the Line of Control (LoC) (Schofield, 2003).

Second Indo-Pak War (1965): The second war broke out in August 1965 after Pakistani forces infiltrated Indian territory across the LoC in Jammu and Kashmir. Known as Operation Gibraltar, this covert operation aimed to destabilise the region and provoke local uprisings. India responded with a military counter-offensive, escalating into full-scale combat along the international border. The war ended in September 1965 with a ceasefire brokered by the Soviet Union and the United States (Ganguly, 1994).

Bangladesh Liberation War (1971): The 1971 war was triggered by the Pakistani military’s crackdown on East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and its demand for independence. India intervened in support of the Bangladeshi independence movement, leading to intense fighting on both eastern and western fronts. The war concluded with Pakistan’s surrender and the creation of Bangladesh as an independent nation (Jalal, 1995).

Kargil War (1999): In 1999, India accused Pakistan of infiltrating its territory in the Kargil region of Jammu and Kashmir. The conflict involved intense fighting at high altitudes and resulted in significant casualties on both sides. The war ended with India regaining control of the territory and Pakistan withdrawing its forces (Schofield, 2003).

Role of Superpowers and UN

Foreign countries have played significant roles in mediating and influencing the Indo-Pakistani conflicts. The involvement of external powers has often been crucial in preventing escalation and facilitating peace.

United States: The US has historically played a mediating role in Indo-Pakistani conflicts. During the 1965 war, the US, along with the Soviet Union, brokered a ceasefire. In recent years, the US has continued to advocate for restraint and dialogue between the two nations, emphasising the importance of regional stability (White House, 2025).

Soviet Union/Russia: The Soviet Union was instrumental in mediating the 1965 war, helping to negotiate a ceasefire. Russia has maintained a strategic partnership with India, providing military support and advocating for the peaceful resolution of conflicts (Ganguly, 1994).

China: China, sharing borders with both India and Pakistan, has a vested interest in regional stability. While China has historically supported Pakistan, it has also called for restraint and dialogue in recent conflicts, aiming to prevent any disruption to its economic and geopolitical objectives (Garver, 2001).

United Nations: The UN has been involved in mediating several Indo-Pakistani conflicts, including the first war in 1947-1948. The UN’s role in establishing ceasefires and monitoring the LoC has been crucial in maintaining a semblance of peace in the region (Schofield, 2003).

India: Aspiring Superpower

India is recognised as one of the world’s leading military powers, ranking fourth globally according to the Global Firepower Index 2025. This status is underpinned by a combination of extensive manpower, advanced technology, and significant defence spending. Here, we will explore the various components of India’s military capabilities, including its personnel, air power, land forces, and naval strength

India’s military strength is supported by a substantial number of active and reserve personnel. As of 2025, India has approximately 1.46 million active military personnel and 1.15 million reserves. Additionally, the country maintains a large paramilitary force of around 2.5 million members. This extensive manpower is crucial for maintaining security and responding to various threats. India’s defence budget for 2024 was approximately $86.1 billion, nearly nine times that of Pakistan. This significant investment allows India to modernise its military infrastructure, procure advanced weaponry, and enhance its technological capabilities. The robust defence budget reflects India’s commitment to maintaining a strong and capable military force. In addition, Indian is one of the best missile powers and claims to have an outstanding air defence infrastructure.

Air Power

India’s air force is one of the most diversified and capable in the world. The Indian Air Force (IAF) operates a wide range of aircraft, including:

Total Aircraft: 2,229
Operational Aircraft: 1,672
Fighter Jets: 513 (including Rafale, Su-30mki, Tejas)
Attack Aircraft: 130
Transport Aircraft: 270
Helicopters: 899 (including 80 attack helicopters such as Apache AH-64Es)
Special Mission Aircraft: 74
Aerial Tankers: 6

The IAF’s air superiority is bolstered by ongoing acquisitions and indigenous developments like the HAL Tejas, as well as joint production ventures. This diverse fleet enables India to conduct a wide range of operations, from air defence and ground support to strategic bombing and reconnaissance.

Land Forces

India’s ground forces are among the largest and most experienced in the world. The Indian Army’s capabilities include:

Tanks: 4,201 (including Arjun, T-90, T-72 variants)
Armoured Fighting Vehicles: 8,600
Artillery Units: 4,339 (including 100 self-propelled units)
Rocket Artillery: 700

The Indian Army’s doctrine emphasises swift retaliation and is supported by advanced surveillance, communication, and logistics infrastructure. This allows for rapid mobilisation and effective response to various threats, both conventional and unconventional.

Naval Strength

India’s navy plays a crucial role in projecting maritime dominance, particularly in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR). The Indian Navy’s assets include:

Total Naval Assets: 293
Aircraft Carriers: 2 (INS Vikramaditya, INS Vikrant)
Submarines: 17
Destroyers: 10
Frigates: 13
Corvettes: 22
Patrol Vessels: 139

The Indian Navy’s capabilities are further enhanced by its focus on blue-water operations, allowing it to project power far beyond its shores. The presence of aircraft carriers and a diverse fleet of submarines, destroyers, and frigates ensures that India can maintain a strong maritime presence and respond to threats in the region effectively.

Concerns of the International Community

The recent escalation between India and Pakistan has significant implications for regional stability and international relations. The airstrikes and missile strikes conducted by India were a direct response to the terrorist attack in Pahalgam, which India attributed to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a militant group based in Pakistan, as well as drone strikes by Pakistan across the LoC. This incident underscores the persistent threat posed by cross-border terrorism and the challenges faced by India in ensuring its national security. The Indian government’s decision to carry out these strikes reflects a broader strategy of deterrence, aimed at dissuading future attacks by demonstrating its capability and willingness to respond forcefully to acts of terrorism.

The international community’s response to this escalation has been one of concern and calls for restraint. The United States, France, Germany, and China have all urged both nations to de-escalate tensions and seek a peaceful resolution to their differences. The French Foreign Minister emphasised the importance of restraint, particularly given the nuclear capabilities of both countries, and called for dialogue to prevent further escalation. The United States, while expressing support for India’s right to defend itself against terrorism, also highlighted the need for a responsible resolution of the conflict. President Donald Trump expressed hope that the situation would be resolved quickly and without further violence. Germany, recognising the potential for a broader regional conflict, established a crisis cell to monitor the situation closely and offered to mediate if necessary. China, which shares borders with both India and Pakistan, has a vested interest in regional stability. The Chinese government declared its readiness to play a constructive role in easing tensions and called for both nations to exercise restraint and engage in dialogue.

The airstrikes and subsequent military exchanges between India and Pakistan have significant implications for regional stability. The Kashmir region, long a flashpoint for conflict, remains at the heart of the dispute. The recent escalation underscores the persistent volatility of the region and the potential for localised incidents to trigger broader conflicts. Didier Chaudet, a geopolitician associated with the Observatory of New Eurasia, emphasises that the tensions around Kashmir are deeply rooted in the identity politics of both nations, making resolution particularly challenging. India’s proactive approach under Prime Minister Modi reflects a broader strategy of deterrence and defence, aimed at neutralising threats to national security while avoiding full-scale war. This strategy, while effective in demonstrating India’s resolve, also carries the risk of unintended escalation, particularly given the nuclear capabilities of both nations. The international community’s calls for restraint and dialogue highlight the need for a balanced approach that addresses security concerns while preventing further conflict.

Conclusion

The recent escalation between India and Pakistan has profound strategic implications for both nations. India’s decision to conduct airstrikes and missile strikes on Pakistani territory in response to the terrorist attack in Pahalgam reflects a calculated strategy aimed at deterring future attacks and asserting its military prowess. This approach aligns with India’s broader doctrine of strategic restraint, which seeks to counter terrorism without provoking full-scale conflict. By targeting terrorist infrastructure and avoiding civilian and military assets, India aims to maintain diplomatic legitimacy and moral high ground while demonstrating its capability to respond decisively to threats (Singla, 2025)

For Pakistan, the Indian airstrikes represent a significant challenge to its sovereignty and security. Pakistan’s immediate response, including false claims of shooting down Indian fighter jets and engaging in artillery exchanges along the Line of Control (LoC), underscores its determination to defend its territory and retaliate against perceived aggression. The Pakistani government’s authorisation for military reprisals highlights the high stakes involved and the potential for further escalation (Reuters, 2025). This situation places Pakistan in a precarious position, balancing the need to respond forcefully with the risk of triggering a broader conflict. The strategic implications of this escalation extend beyond the immediate military exchanges. Both India and Pakistan are nuclear-armed states, and any conflict between them carries the risk of nuclear war. The current government and military administration in Pakistan appears to be unstable and can pose a challenge to the ongoing ceasefire.

Title Image Courtesy: NYT

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect the views of the Government of India and Defence Research and Studies