.png)
The Pahalgam Payback
Writing for The Indian ExpressP Chidambaram commended the Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, for resisting jingoistic calls for a full-scale war against Pakistan following the Pahalgam terror attack, and instead opting for a calibrated military operation aimed at the terrorist strongholds.
The Indian response did not target civilian habitations or property. Nor was it aimed at Pakistan’s military infrastructure. As expected, Pakistan retaliated in the only manner it could have under the influence of the Army generals and the ISI — firing across the Line of Control (LoC). If Pakistan had started a full-scale war, it would have earned the opprobrium of countries including OIC. However, it would be naive to assume that the military bosses in Pakistan would not retaliate more aggressively in the ensuing days and weeks.
P Chidambaram, for The Indian Express
Though the power struggle between Pakistan’s civilian government and its Army is evident — an impasse that has strained ceasefire efforts — Chidambaram feels the Indian Prime Minister’s messaging has been unambiguous: Should Pakistan choose war, India stands prepared.
Ceasefire Achieved, Way Forward To Consolidate
In his Hindustan Times article, former foreign secretary Shyam Saran draws on historical precedents to underscore Pakistan’s consistent pursuit of optical victories in conflicts, regardless of the actual ground situation. Aligning with its typical narrative, Pakistan’s claim of the ceasefire agreement being a success was true to form.
For Pakistan, its diminishing geopolitical relevance has been galling. Its dire economic situation has compounded its sense of being a marginal regional and global player. Since its creation as an independent State, it has craved parity with India and a permanent hyphenation. This has progressively become untenable as India has raced ahead economically and gained greater international stature. Worse, India could treat Pakistan as an irrelevant actor and begin to ignore it or treat it as a distraction at best. How hurtful this must be to Pakistan’s leaders, particularly to its powerful military, was starkly apparent in the unusual speech made by its army chief, General Asim Munir, on April 16, when he harped on the “two-nation” theory, the unique character of Pakistan as a great Islamic country, and in reviving a phrase to describe Kashmir as his country’s “jugular vein”.
Shyam Saran, for Hindustan Times
Saran cautions India to brace for continued provocation from Pakistan, driven by its diminishing relevance on the global stage and a steeply declining economy, and advocates for de-escalatory measures, urging the nation to be focused on its ascent as a global power.
Noises Off
In his The Telegraph column, historian Mukul Kesavan critiques the Indian media for its performative jingoism, arguing that its theatrics have only exacerbated public anxiety amid an already fraught period. The fourth pillar of democracy, he believes, has collapsed under the weight of overwhelming nationalism, albeit not for the first time.
In times of war, such as the present, this seems to mean competitive hysteria at a level that is hard to parody. In the section of the multiverse inhabited by these channels and their autocue warriors, Karachi port has been bombed and destroyed by the Indian navy, Indian troops have crossed over into Pakistan, and Islamabad is on the verge of being captured. In the midst of this tsunami of truth-telling, the Indian government blocked The Wire for spreading ‘fake news’.
Mukul Kesavan, for The Telegraph
With the Pahalgam attack marking a grim low point in communal terror, Kesavan believes Pakistan has already reached the gloomy endpoint of majoritarian extremism. The troubling question now, however, is whether India is treading a similar path.
No Peace Till Pakistan’s Deep State Dismantled
Writing for Deccan Chroniclehistorian Pavan K Varma has credited India for neutralising Pakistan’s attacks, whose targets included even civilian zones, and precise retaliatory strikes. However, Varma argues that India’s responsibility extends beyond mere reactions, as it must now initiate action.
What is crucial is that henceforth we take charge of the narrative, proactively controlling it rather than forced to react every time. For too long we either did nothing, merely flexed our muscles, or sought certificates of restraint and “good conduct” from the world. The record speaks for itself. When in 1999, there was verifiable intrusion into our borders at Kargil, we managed to finally evacuate the intruders — clearly from the Pakistan army — but at a huge cost in terms of the lives of hundreds of our young officers and military personnel, since the invaders were perched at high vantage points and could easily target our brave army personnel. Any other nation, seeing the number of coffins arriving daily, would have parachuted troops across the LOC and sealed the supply lines to the invaders.
Pavan K Varma, for Deccan Chronicle
Suggesting measures, Varma opines that India must support the Baloch insurgency movement to catalyse Pakistan’s internal fragmentation. Furthermore, the Indus Waters Treaty should remain suspended, leveraging it as a tool of agricultural and economic pressure on Pakistan.
Operation Sindoor Has Drawn a Red Line Pakistan Can No Longer Ignore
Contradicting the previous article, International Relations expert Amitabh Mattoo believes Operation Sindoor was not merely a retaliatory measure, but a decisive and proactive recalibration of India’s zero-tolerance policy towards terrorism. In his piece for The Times of Indiahe asserts that the ceasefire should not be mistaken for an Indian concession, but rather as a strategic opening for Pakistan to reassess its course.
Operation Sindoor was a statement, not just to Pakistan, but to the world. It declared that India is prepared to act decisively, but also to lead responsibly. The ceasefire does not negate that message—it amplifies it. For Pakistan, the choice is now starker than ever: reform or relapse. For the region, the choice is brighter than ever: progress under India’s leadership or be paralysed under Pakistan’s provocations.
Amitabh Mattoo, for The Times of India
Mattoo emphasises the need for India to ensure stability through diplomacy and multilateral dialogue. Pakistan, the author believes, now has the choice to either vehemently reject jihadist extremism or continue on the path of decline. He further calls on the nation’s intelligentsia to rebuff the militaristic dogmatism.
Without Fear, Without Hatred
Using a humorous metaphor of the Yorkshire terrier’s loud bark and an overblown sense of importance, despite its small size, historian Raaja Bhasin, in his piece for The Tribuneargues that the Pakistani Army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) have manipulated its own populace, stoking anti-India hatred through incessant propaganda.
Over the years, the army, the ISI and Pakistan’s politicians have conducted a successful heist on their own people. The result is that Pakistan’s ordinary citizen has been reduced to a dull, grey-brown life with a hatred for India as his primary sustenance. The people of Pakistan have been herded and reduced to become that ‘second nation’.
Raaja Bhasin, for the Tribune
Bhasin believes it is imperative for India to protect itself from the barbaric violence incited by Pakistan, albeit not through enmity and animosity, but by embracing the Sikh ideal of ‘Nirbhau, nirvair,’ which roughly translates to ‘without fear and without hate.’
Time for Pakistan’s ‘Bonsai Democracy’ To Grow Some Deeper Roots
Tavleen Singh, in her column for The Indian Expresscontends that India was left with no option but to resort to forceful retaliation, following the brutal terrorist attack in Pahalgam. The killing of innocent Indian civilians, stresses Singh, should not be viewed as an isolated incident, but as the latest instalment in Pakistan’s long-standing act of encouraging jihadist violence.
The war that India has been forced into this time is a war against jihadi terrorism. It is not at all about Kashmir. Pakistan needs to get used to living without its ‘jugular vein’ and stop bringing up generations of schoolchildren on the mythical possibility that Kashmir will one day become part of their country. Those who subscribe to the ‘Akhand Bharat’ myth privately admit that it is not going to be ‘akhand’ again. And Punjabis like me learned long ago to accept that the homes our parents left behind on the other side of the border are gone for good.
Tavleen Singh, for The Indian Express
Singh criticises the Western nations for their stark indifference towards India’s plight and buying into Pakistan’s erroneous narratives, despite the latter having relentlessly aided terrorism through their acts, ranging from the beheading of journalist Daniel Pearl to harbouring Osama bin Laden and glorifying Hafiz Saeed.
Why Kashmir Must Be Unified and Whole
In his column for The New Indian Expressauthor Ravi Shankar Etteth argues that the territory we know as Pakistan Occupied Kashmir is a product of betrayal, for it was seized illegally, in a blatant violation of the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh in 1947.
Pakistan has no moral or historical claim to PoK. It is stolen land, seized in the fog of Partition through the deployment of tribal militias backed by Pakistan, in direct violation of the Instrument of Accession signed by Maharaja Hari Singh in October 1947: an instrument recognised by India, the British Crown, and even the United Nations. In that moment, Kashmir legally became a part of India. We must step into the past, into the chaotic cartography of Mountbatten’s Radcliffe Line, which split not just the subcontinent but its conscience. The two-nation theory, the flawed seed from which the Partition bloomed, demanded division by religious majority. Kashmir was never just a demographic puzzle.
Ravi Shankar Etteth, for The New Indian Express
Etteth dismisses Pakistan’s claims over the region as lacking both moral and legal standing, asserting that the cultural and spiritual essence of Kashmir — Kashmiriyat — is deeply rooted in India. The writer calls for the reunification of Kashmir, not through war and military action, but via a free and fair plebiscite, wherein the Kashmiris could voice their true aspirations.
Pahalgam to Rawalpindi via DC: Tale of a Conflict
Prashant Jha, in his article for Hindustan Timesargues that India’s firm stance on zero tolerance for terrorism — exemplified by its precise strikes on terror hubs in Pakistan — has forced Pakistan to reassess its strategies.
The principle of zero tolerance for terror, when translated into real policy, means that Pakistan will have to really think hard about whether it wants to incite a wider conflict with India when it sends its boys across the border to shatter the calm in Kashmir or beyond. While one can hope that better sense prevails in Rawalpindi, India will also have to prepare for the worst, boost its military capabilities, plug diplomatic weaknesses, enhance its internal security preparedness given the possibility of terror ground seeking revenge, and prepare its citizens for more frequent bouts of violence, losses and disorder.
Prashant Jha, for Hindustan Times
Despite being inferior on grounds of both economy and military, however, Pakistan has managed to withstand pressure as China continues playing a pivotal role by facilitating India’s neighbours with diplomatic, materialistic, and possibly, intelligence support. Hence, Jha concludes that India must prepare for an intensely volatile situation, in a battle against a nation that has gone rogue.
Published:
