Ceasefire or Intermission?

Peace is not a one-sided burden. And India will no longer pay for it alone.

The world may still be calling it a skirmish. On May 9, 2025, what had long simmered beneath diplomatic surfaces turned kinetic.

The India-Pakistan conflict has escalated into a significant military confrontation, with both nations engaging in airstrikes and missile exchanges. India’s Operation Sindoor targeted Pakistani military installations (the sharpest since the 2019 Balakot airstrikes) in response to a terrorist attack in Kashmir that killed 26 civilians. Pakistan retaliated with Operation Bunyan Ul Marsoos, launching strikes on Indian military bases.

Neither side has declared war. While airspace is being locked down and artillery exchanges intensify, the war is no longer about border posts or LoC shelling. This is about strategy, survival, and the beginning of a new regional order.

This is a high-stakes, multidimensional conflict, fought across geography, cyberspace, information, and alliances. India’s posture is notably different this time. It’s not just reactive, it’s strategic. As noted in a 2024 report by the Indian Ministry of Defence, “Any future conflict will be fought across hybrid terrain, where perception, resilience, and control of the narrative are as critical as control of territory.”

The timing is not coincidental. India’s foreign exchange reserves crossed $750 billion in April 2025, making it the fourth-largest globally. It has emerged as the world’s fastest-growing large economy, and its strategic weight in the Global South is undeniable. From defense deals with France to joint Indo-Pacific exercises with the U.S. and Japan, India is no longer a hesitant regional actor.

And the stakes? They’re no longer confined to South Asia. The China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), Gulf economic interests, Western investment pipelines, and Asian security architecture are all at risk.

News of a ceasefire is trickling in. But like many, I don’t expect it to last, Pakistan is a bonafide rogue state, and its track record leaves little room for trust. The next war isn’t an “if,” it’s a “when”, and when it comes, India will act with clarity, resolve, and legitimacy. And the consequences won’t stop at South Asia, they’ll shake the global order.

Let’s look at possibilities through the lens of geopolitical probability, not wishful diplomacy.

1. Redrawing of territorial maps in South Asia

South Asia’s map was drawn by colonizers. It may now be redrawn by consequence.

If Pakistan loses strategic coherence, militarily, politically, or economically, these suppressed identities could rapidly evolve into breakaway narratives. The war’s outcomes may not just be about territory, but identity reclamation across fault lines ignored for 75 years.

If the war continues and internal unrest intensifies, Pakistan is likely to fragment. India will reclaim Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) as a strategic and constitutional priority. But beyond that, deep-rooted ethnic and regional fault lines, Balochistan’s independence movement, Pashtunistan’s revival, and Sindh’s growing discontent, could break Pakistan into multiple entities. A weakened central government, military overstretch, and economic collapse would accelerate this disintegration.

When Pakistan’s western flank collapses into instability, it will fracture its control over the CPEC corridor, drawing China directly into regional negotiations, not as a benefactor, but as a crisis manager.

2. Global oil markets and trade routes face fresh volatility

South Asia is not only a nuclear flashpoint, it also borders some of the world’s most critical oil shipping lanes. A prolonged India–Pakistan war could:

• Disrupt tanker routes from the Strait of Hormuz
• Spark pre-emptive hoarding and price spikes
• Delay regional supply chains across the Middle East and Southeast Asia

Oil prices have historically spiked 10–15% during major Indo-Pak escalations, with Brent crude crossing $90/barrel during the 2019 standoff. [Source: Reuters Market Data Archive]

Gulf countries will be forced to recalibrate; continue backing a fragile Pakistan, or align closer with India, their largest remittance and trade partner.

3. The China–India–Pakistan triangle intensifies global polarization

If India sustains military pressure, China may be compelled to overtly support Pakistan, through intelligence, cyber operations, or border diversions. But that support comes with its own risks. A fractured Pakistan is a CPEC liability and a potential extremist spillover into China’s restive Xinjiang province.

India, in contrast, will likely gain further traction with the U.S., Japan, Australia, France, and other Indo-Pacific allies, who see this conflict as a means of countering Chinese expansionism.

“The India-U.S. relationship today is not transactional; it is transformational.”
– Antony Blinken, U.S. Secretary of State, Indo-Pacific Forum 2023

We may be witnessing a decisive moment in the realignment of Asia’s security architecture.

4. Turkey’s soft war: Opportunism in the name of solidarity

Turkey’s foreign policy under Erdogan has leaned toward pan-Islamic solidarity, and Pakistan has long been a beneficiary. From joint military exercises to coordinated disinformation networks, Turkey’s alignment with Pakistan is ideological and strategic. Turkey has funded cultural propaganda in Kashmir through NGOs and digital outlets. Turkish drones and military tech have already been supplied to Pakistan under earlier defense agreements.

While Turkey won’t directly intervene, atleast immediately, expect it to be a vocal actor in international forums, pressing the OIC, UN, and EU to condemn India, even as Ankara quietly expands its own influence in the Muslim world.

5. NATO: Exposed, divided, and increasingly sidelined

The India–Pakistan conflict may be outside NATO’s geography, but not its implications. This war could expose, test, and potentially splinter NATO’s relevance and unity:Here’s how it pressures the alliance:

NATO’s jurisdiction is technically limited to the North Atlantic region. South Asia, especially India and Pakistan, is outside Article 5 commitments. Yet, globalized supply chains, nuclear risks, and cyber threats from this conflict directly impact European and American security.

If a nuclear incident in South Asia affects global weather or refugee flows, NATO will be forced to act, despite no legal mandate. This creates a credibility crisis: Can the world’s largest military alliance remain passive while global security is threatened?

NATO members will not agree on how to respond. Turkey will likely side with Pakistan (historical military and ideological ties), France and Greece may call for economic and defense support to India, the U.S. will be caught between a strategic partnership with India and past intelligence ties with Pakistan, while Germany and Eastern Europe may push for neutrality.

This reveals NATO’s deeper problem: a lack of unified strategic will outside of Europe.

Add to it the ongoing tensions in Ukraine, the Baltics, and Africa leave NATO stretched thin. A South Asia crisis may force triaging, undermining its global posture.

“In a multipolar world, alliances will be issue-based, not geography-based.”
– IISS Asia-Pacific Security Conference, 2023

The India–Pakistan war may not destroy NATO, but it will expose its limits, accelerating regional security partnerships outside NATO, such as:

• India–France–UAE trilateral cooperation
• QUAD deepening (India, U.S., Japan, Australia)
• AUKUS (Australia, UK, U.S.) expanding footprint

These agile formations bypass NATO bureaucracy, and may begin replacing NATO in Asian scenarios.

6. Cybersecurity and misinformation become weapons of mass disruption

The digital front is already active. As part of its (mis)information warfare, Pakistan has leveraged bot networks and disinformation to flood platforms with fabricated civilian casualty narratives, drawing international sympathy. During the 2019 Balakot airstrike, over 30,000 fake social media accounts were traced to coordinated campaigns originating from Pakistan and Turkey. [Source: EU DisinfoLab]

India, on the other hand, is deploying AI-driven threat intelligence and multilingual narrative counterstrike tools. ️This conflict is a warning bell: The next world war may not start in trenches but on timelines and dashboards.

The world must be prepared for a new South Asia

India may enter ceasefires, but peace with a state that breeds conflict is not a sustainable strategy. As long as Pakistan continues to shelter terrorists and wage asymmetric warfare, any truce is just a pause, not peace.

But here’s the deeper question the world must confront: Why do global financial institutions continue to fund a state that exports terror?

Between 2019 and 2023 alone, Pakistan received over $20 billion in loans and bailout packages from the IMF, World Bank, ADB, and others, despite being repeatedly flagged by FATF for terror financing and money laundering risks.

Where is this money going? Into economic development, or into weapons, propaganda, and proxy networks?

It’s time global institutions are held accountable. You cannot finance stability and fund a defaulter terror state at the same time.

India has no illusions left. The global order must now choose: Will it uphold peace and principles, or continue to enable a regime built on provocation and deceit? Because peace is not a one-sided burden. And India will no longer pay for it alone.

The global community must recognize that this conflict is not a border dispute; it’s a structural fault line. Pakistan’s fragmentation, the redrawing of strategic maps, and shifts in power dynamics are no longer fringe predictions; they are real possibilities.

The world must be ready. Because India is.

References:
Key insights are based on publicly available data from the IMF, World Bank, Asian Development Bank, FATF, and reporting by Reuters, Al Jazeera, Moneycontrol, and official Indian policy sources. For detailed citations, please contact the author.

#AksaiChin #Balochistan #ceasefireAnalysis #FATFGreyList #globalSecurity #IMFLoansPakistan #india #IndiaDefensePolicy #IndiaPakistanConflict #IndoPakCeasefire #LineOfControl #news #nuclearEscalation #pakistan #PakistanFragmentation #Pashtunistan #politics #proxyWar #regionalInstability #Sindhudesh #SouthAsiaGeopolitics #strategicAffairs #terrorismFinancing

Prepared for War, Focused on Strategy: India After Operation Sindoor

Operation Sindoor was launched as I was finishing this piece, arguing against the case for war. I had to start all over again this morning. And this is the kind of rework that makes me the happiest.

At precisely 01:40 hours on the morning of May 07, India’s tri-services led precision strikes hit nine identified terrorist launchpads across the LoC. These were not speculative targets. They were terror hideouts and camps, carefully selected based on intelligence inputs, surveillance data, and satellite confirmation. The surgical nature of the strike matters, but so does the symbolism.

The name “Operation Sindoor” pays a befitting tribute to the 26 women widowed in the Pahalgam terror attack of April 22, a religiously motivated act of brutality by Pakistan, that took the lives of their husbands. Only Prime Minister Narendra Modi could have named a mission with such deep meaning and purpose. It wasn’t Operation Revenge. It wasn’t Operation Vengeance. It was Operation Sindoor, a mark of dignity, love, and quiet strength.

Now that these precision strikes have been executed with purpose and clarity, the real question is: What next?

A salute to restraint, not weakness

Let me say this upfront: I am impressed beyond measure by the composure and tactical brilliance of the Narendra Modi-led government. In a nation as emotionally charged as ours, not responding to public sentiment with boots and bombs takes immense courage. India’s decision to hold fire, despite having both the capability and the political will, was not about fear. It was about foresight.

Choosing not to go to war with a collapsing, cornered neighbor is not a weakness. It’s wisdom. Let’s not forget that Pakistan today is not a rival with parity. It is a state gasping for economic oxygen, politically unstable, diplomatically isolated, and dangerously desperate.

As former diplomat and strategic analyst Shivshankar Menon once noted, “Desperate states don’t fight rationally. They fight like they have nothing to lose. That’s when things get dangerous.”

Measured retaliation, not escalation

Let’s begin with what this operation tells us. Despite the sheer magnitude of national anger, hawkish media debates, and roaring calls for full-blown retaliation, the government did not target Pakistani military establishments. It did not initiate a cross-border escalation beyond tactical bounds.

Instead, India hit only what it had to: terrorist infrastructure, not sovereign command. That distinction is not accidental. It is intentional and extremely telling.

The message to Pakistan is loud but nuanced: We’re capable, we’re watching, and we will act, but we still don’t want war.

Not because we can’t. But because we shouldn’t.

Make no mistake, India has the political will, public support, and military capacity to launch a full-scale war. But a strong nation is not one that fights every time it can. It’s one that knows when not to.

War with Pakistan at this moment would be giving a collapsing neighbor what it desperately wants, an excuse to reframe its economic failure as patriotic resistance, and its international isolation as victimhood.

Pakistan’s economy is in ruins:

• External debt: $131+ billion (World Bank, 2024)
• Forex reserves: Below $15 billion
• Inflation: Above 23%
• IMF bailout conditions are barely met; another default looming.

A war now would allow Pakistan to seek debt waivers from the IMF, World Bank, and allies like China and Saudi Arabia, arguing “force majeure.” It would divert attention from their governance collapse and let them play the perennial card: Kashmir + victimhood.

Here are 5 good reasons India should not go to war with the rogue state of Pakistan

1. The beggar state’s bait: War as economic escape

Pakistan owes over $131 billion in external debt (World Bank, 2024). Its foreign exchange reserves hover around $9–15 billion, barely enough to cover two months of imports. Inflation is above 23%, and the country is teetering on social unrest. And yet, there’s a perverse incentive to provoke war.

A war gives Pakistan the perfect alibi to plead with the World Bank, IMF, and bilateral lenders to waive or reschedule its debt repayments. In diplomatic circles, there’s already chatter that Pakistan could request “debt relief due to regional conflict.” It’s a trap, one designed to cloak failure under conflict.

Going to war would unwittingly play into that narrative.

2. Military prowess is not the question, nuclear desperation is

India’s defense forces are robust, modernized, and battle-ready. Pakistan’s military, on the other hand, is overstretched and reliant on outdated hardware, external funding, and Chinese hand-me-downs. Militarily, the match is uneven. But this is exactly what makes the situation volatile and dangerous.

A cornered enemy is unpredictable. Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine allows for first use in case of a perceived existential threat. Multiple international analysts, including Vipin Narang (MIT) and Michael Krepon (Stimson Center), have warned that Pakistan may lower its nuclear threshold in desperation.

In blunt terms, they might press the red button not because they hope to win, but because they’ve already lost everything else.

3. A war India cannot afford, not in rupees but in momentum

Let’s do some arithmetic. During the Kargil War in 1999, India spent nearly ₹5,000 crore ($1.2 billion) over two months. Today, a sustained war would drain upwards of ₹25,000 crore ($3–5 billion) per month, given inflation and modern warfare costs. Add the cost of rebuilding infrastructure, displacement, and global investor nervousness, and we’re staring at a 10-year economic setback.

According to S&P and Morgan Stanley, India is poised to become the third-largest economy by 2027. A war with Pakistan would throw that trajectory into chaos, delay key infrastructure and welfare initiatives, and dampen investor confidence.

Why should a fast-moving train care to halt to kick a collapsing donkey-driven cart?

4. Tactical, not emotional: The smarter path to pressure

War is not the only language of retaliation. India has already begun a silent siege, tactically precise and diplomatically sound. Here’s what this playbook includes:

• Suspending the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT): While India has maintained the moral high ground by adhering to the IWT even during the wars of 1965 and 1971, under the Vienna Convention, it did not hesitate to hold it in abeyance now. The reallocation of water would disrupt Pakistan’s already fragile agricultural base.
• Diplomatic isolation: India has mobilized allies across the UN, G20, and OIC to present fresh dossiers on Pakistan’s terror funding, training camps, and role in cross-border militancy. Even traditional backers like the UAE are more muted in support.
• Trade cancellation: India already revoked Pakistan’s MFN status in 2019, reducing bilateral trade to a trickle. Now, further trade embargoes in pharmaceuticals, electronics, and fertilizers are on the table.
• Airspace closure: A repeat of the 2019 strategy, where India barred its airspace to Pakistani carriers, would cost Pakistan millions a month. According to Dawn, PIA’s previous losses due to Indian airspace restrictions exceeded PKR 500 million in just 3 months.
• Port and transit route restrictions: Karachi Port is already choking. India could push for blockade-level economic isolation, including influencing friendly naval allies to reconsider maritime permissions.
• LoC abeyance: Now that the LoC is in abeyance, India is free to selectively retaliate on key launchpads and smuggling corridors, not all-out war, but high-impact precision response.
• Targeted sanctions: India can lead the effort to impose travel bans, asset freezes, and defense restrictions on key Pakistani political and military figures, especially those with offshore holdings.
• Digital bans: India can block and ban all social media channels and handles of Pakistani citizens and media in India.
• Leveraging Balochistan to keep Pakistan on the tetherhooks: For decades, the Baloch have accused Pakistan’s establishment of genocide, disappearances, and cultural erasure. A 2023 report by the UNPO and Human Rights Council of Balochistan documented over 1,300 enforced disappearances in just one year. India need not (and should not) militarize Balochistan. But strategic engagement with Baloch activists, amplifying their human rights demands in global forums, and media visibility of Pakistani oppression in Balochistan can keep Islamabad perennially uneasy. This creates pressure without conflict. It disrupts their internal stability. And it balances the Kashmir narrative with Pakistan’s own darkest secret. In short: What Kashmir is to Pakistan emotionally, Balochistan is to Pakistan existentially.

This is not pacifism. This is modern-day warfare, just by other means.

5. Global optics: The China and Muslim bloc variable

While India enjoys deep strategic relations with the US, France, Japan, and Australia, a war could alter equations, especially if Pakistan spins the conflict into a religious narrative. And knowing Pakistan, it will.

Countries like Turkey, Malaysia, and Azerbaijan have already signaled moral support to Pakistan. China, too, has reiterated its “unwavering support” for Pakistan amid rising tensions.

Worse, a war gives China a pretext to stoke tension in Eastern Ladakh or Arunachal, forcing India into a two-front war, a scenario no strategist desires.

India must keep the moral upper hand. Because in global diplomacy, perception often precedes truth.

Now what? War isn’t our goal. But if it must be, we’re more than ready.

India didn’t take the bait. India responded like a nation aware of its stature and its goals.

We are not a weak nation choosing inaction. We are a strong nation choosing strategy.

With Operation Sindoor now public, we must brace for Pakistan’s next move. It may retaliate with proxy terror. It may resort to LoC shelling. It may just barge into our territory with their fighters. It may press the nuke. Or it may raise the diplomatic pitch at the UN. Or it may choose to be act wise, and lick their wounds in private. Anything is possible.

But now, the burden of escalation lies with Pakistan. India has done what it needed to: precise, proportionate, and public.

India has nothing to establish by bombing bunkers and waving flags on burning borders. Our soldiers remain ever-ready. Our arsenal is loaded. But our brains are sharper. We know that war with a poor, isolated, nuclear-armed beggar-state is not a badge of honor. It’s a drain. On resources. On time. On progress.

Sources

• Economic Times (2025): Can Pakistan fight India on borrowed money
• World Bank (2024): Pakistan Economic Update
• Stimson Center: Krepon, Narang on South Asia Nuclear Risk
• UNPO & HRCB Reports (2023): Human rights in Balochistan
• MEA Briefing (2025): Official statement on Operation Sindoor
• Shivshankar Menon, Choices: Inside the Making of Indian Foreign Policy

#BalochistanIssue #crossBorderTerrorism #history #india #IndiaDefenseNews #IndiaDefensePolicy #IndiaMilitaryResponse #IndiaNationalSecurity #IndiaPakistanBorderTension #IndiaPakistanConflict #IndiaPakistanLatestUpdates #IndiaRetaliationPolicy #IndiaVsPakistan2025 #IndiaVsPakistanEscalation #IndiaSMilitaryDoctrine #IndiaSWarReadiness #IndianAirForceStrikes #IndianAirStrikes2025 #IndianForeignPolicy2025 #IndianGovernmentResponse #IndoPakTensions #ModiForeignPolicy #ModiGovernmentResponse #NarendraModiStrategy #news #nuclearThreatSouthAsia #OperationSindoor #OperationSindoorAnalysis #pakistan #PakistanEconomicCrisis #PhalgamTerrorAttack #politics #precisionStrikesIndia #SouthAsiaDiplomacy #SouthAsiaGeopolitics #strategicRestraintIndia #surgicalStrikesIndia #warPreparednessIndia