India vs. Pakistan: The Kashmir Flashpoint Ignites Again

Recently, an escalation in Kashmir has forced India to reassess its regional posture. While Delhi previously pursued a strategy of containment and integration, the new crisis has pushed the conflict with Pakistan into a more volatile phase.

The goal of India is to reinforce its territorial control over Jammu and Kashmir and deter further instability through sustained military readiness. At the strategic level, India aims to prevent external influence, particularly from Pakistan, from shaping regional outcomes. This includes maintaining political integration following the revocation of Article 370 and ensuring that the region’s status remains an internal matter isolated from international mediation. The reason why India wants to achieve this goal is rooted in decades of conflict over territorial sovereignty with Pakistan. 

In the past, both countries have claimed the region in full, but control it in part. India regards Pakistan’s support for Kashmir’s Muslim population, including political advocacy, diplomatic pressure, and, at times, covert support for armed groups as a direct challenge to its sovereignty. On the ground, this support has found sympathy among segments of the Kashmiri population, particularly those with familial and cultural ties to Pakistan. Delhi’s concern is that Pakistan’s strategic goal remains unchanged: to internationalize the Kashmir dispute and eventually alter the status quo through persistent pressure. Left unaddressed, this dynamic could undermine India’s long-term control over the region and threaten national partnerships.

In recent years, India has focused on tightening administrative control and expanding its counterinsurgency footprint to achieve this goal. Military operations were intensified in areas like Pulwama and Baramulla, with increased deployment of surveillance drones and signal intelligence units.

The National Investigation Agency cracked down on networks suspected of facilitating cross-border movement and illicit funding. At the same time, India invested in infrastructure projects meant to reinforce its presence and provide economic incentives to stabilize the region. Diplomatic efforts were directed at countering Pakistan’s outreach in forums like the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and Delhi reaffirmed its position that Kashmir remains an integral part of India. The result of these actions was a fragile but maintained status quo that kept overt conflict at bay but failed to resolve underlying tensions. 

While the security environment had temporarily improved, unrest persisted in pockets, and cross-line Control incidents remained frequent. 

Pakistan continued to assert its claim diplomatically and militarily, with political leaders reiterating support for Kashmiris and occasionally elevating the rhetoric during periods of domestic or regional tension. Despite intermittent backchannel talks, there was no breakthrough. India’s operations managed to reduce infiltration and limit visible arguments but failed to break the deadlock. 

This changed with a recent attack in Kashmir, which marked a turning point by reactivating the full spectrum of the bilateral conflict. Before the attack, India had seen its posture as stable, if imperfect. The incident, however, prompted a check-up. 

From Delhi’s perspective, the event signaled that Pakistan, either directly or through networks, remained committed to shaping events in Kashmir. 

This shift gave India greater freedom to pursue cross-border operations and assert political control over contested areas, but also risked triggering broader retaliation from Pakistan and international scrutiny that could constrain Delhi’s long-term leverage.

India now had the political shape to intensify its response militarily and diplomatically. There was also momentum to revisit long-standing agreements, including the Indus Waters Treaty, as leverage. But the shift also brought problems. Heightened operations risked alienating the local population and drawing international scrutiny. 

Moreover, Pakistan’s capacity to respond via diplomatic channels, asymmetric means, military signaling, or even nuclear action posed a renewed threat of escalation along the Line of Control.

India’s response has focused on demonstrating military resolve while maintaining strategic calibration. Additional forces have been rotated into sensitive zones, and high-level security coordination has been reinforced across the army, intelligence, and paramilitary units. Surveillance along the Line of Control has been expanded, and counter-infiltration measures strengthened. Delhi has also escalated rhetoric around the Indus Waters Treaty, with officials hinting at reassessing water-sharing norms as part of a broader strategy. Internationally, India has moved to consolidate diplomatic support from key allies, portraying its actions as necessary for national security and regional stability. While escalation risks remain, Delhi is attempting to shape a new balance, one where deterrence is reestablished, and the political status of Kashmir is no longer contested. 

Overall, India’s strategy has entered a more assertive phase, one defined by takeover, deterrence, and strategic signaling. The recent escalation has revealed the limits of low-intensity management and forced Delhi to confront the persistent strategic rivalry with Pakistan. In this evolving security landscape, India aims to lock in control while containing the broader consequences of a crisis that remains one of the most volatile in the region.