How Pahalgam Terror Attacks Changed India-Pakistan Relations, Could Put Ceasefire At Risk | Insight

Key Concepts

• Kashmir Conflict: The long-standing territorial dispute between India and Pakistan over the Kashmir region.
• Line of Control (LoC): The de facto border between the Indian-administered and Pakistani-administered parts of Kashmir.
• Terrorism: Acts of violence against civilians to achieve political or ideological goals, often attributed to groups operating in or supported by Pakistan.
• Operation Synindor: India's military response to the Pahalgam terror attack, involving strikes on alleged terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan.
• Indus Waters Treaty (IWT): A 1960 water-sharing agreement between India and Pakistan, allocating the use of the Indus River and its tributaries.
• Gray Zone Warfare: A form of conflict that falls below the threshold of traditional warfare, often involving disinformation, cyberattacks, and economic pressure.
• Information Warfare: The use of information to manipulate public opinion and influence decision-making, often involving the spread of misinformation and propaganda.
• Nuclear Blackmail: The threat of using nuclear weapons to deter an opponent from taking certain actions.
• Religious Nationalism: The use of religious identity to promote nationalistic goals, often leading to discrimination and violence against minority groups.

Pahalgam Terror Attack

• On a family vacation in Pahalgam, India-controlled Kashmir, a group of tourists were attacked by five armed men.
• The attackers specifically asked the tourists "Are you Hindu are you Muslim?" and shot those who identified as Hindu.
• 26 people were killed, including Shubam Aduvi, a newlywed.
• The Resistance Front (TRF), believed to be an offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba, initially claimed responsibility but later denied it.
• The attack was described as exceptionally heinous due to the targeting of unarmed civilians based on their religion.

India's Response: Operation Synindor

• In retaliation for the Pahalgam attack, India launched Operation Synindor on May 7th.
• India claimed the operation targeted terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan, striking 21 terror sites at nine locations.
• India maintained that the operation was not an attack on the Pakistani military or society.
• Pakistan viewed the strikes as a violation of its sovereignty and a declaration of war.

Pakistan's Retaliation and Ceasefire

• Pakistan responded to Operation Synindor with missiles, artillery, and drone strikes, targeting Indian air defense systems and air bases.
• There were reports that Pakistani Prime Minister Shabbaz Sharif convened the nuclear body, though this was later refuted.
• On May 10th, both countries announced a ceasefire.
• Despite the ceasefire, the Line of Control remains highly militarized, with persistent firing on an everyday basis.

Suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty

• One day after the Pahalgam attack, India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) of 1960.
• The IWT is a water distribution agreement that grants Pakistan unrestricted use of the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab).
• India's suspension of the treaty raised concerns about potential restrictions on water flow to Pakistan, which relies heavily on the Indus River for agriculture.
• Pakistan protested the suspension, with officials reporting irregular flows of the Indus River.
• Some observers believe the suspension is a bargaining tactic to renegotiate the treaty, which India considers outdated.

Economic and Diplomatic Fallout

• In addition to suspending the IWT, India downgraded relations with Pakistan, shutting the mainland border and revoking visas for Pakistani nationals.
• Pakistan responded by closing its airspace to Indian commercial planes and stopping all trade, including that passing through third countries.
• These restrictions marked the lowest point in India-Pakistan relations in years.

Information Warfare and Disinformation

• The conflict was accompanied by a significant amount of information warfare and disinformation on both sides.
• Fake videos and stories circulated on social media, including a video game clip falsely presented as evidence of Pakistan shooting down Indian jets.
• Mainstream media outlets on both sides reported falsehoods as fact.
• This created pressure on political leaders to take more aggressive action and fueled disharmony within communities.

Religious and Nationalistic Dimensions

• The Pahalgam attack, with its targeting of victims based on religion, was seen as having a religious undertone.
• Pakistan has framed the Kashmir issue as a religious struggle, while India has sought to portray it as a response to terrorism.
• Religious and nationalistic narratives have been used to mobilize populations and fuel pro-war sentiment.
• The Pakistani military has increasingly embraced religious ideology, with some officers linking being a devout Muslim to being a good Pakistani.

Perspectives on Victory and Future Relations

• Both India and Pakistan claimed victory in the conflict.
• Some analysts believe the Pakistani military benefited from the conflict by regaining popular support.
• The conflict highlighted the deep-seated animosity and mistrust between the two countries.
• The best hope for the future is a peaceful resolution of the Kashmir issue and a shift towards normal relations based on mutual respect and cooperation.
• India has made it clear that it will not engage with Pakistan on any issue other than terrorism until Pakistan dismantles its terrorist infrastructure.

Conclusion

The Pahalgam terror attack and the subsequent military confrontation between India and Pakistan have significantly worsened their already strained relations. The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, coupled with economic and diplomatic restrictions, has created a highly volatile situation. The conflict was further complicated by information warfare, religious nationalism, and competing narratives. While a ceasefire is in place, the underlying issues remain unresolved, and the risk of future conflict remains high. A lasting peace will require a fundamental shift in the approach of both countries towards the Kashmir issue and a commitment to addressing the root causes of terrorism and extremism.