Between the night of May 6 and May 7, India launched attacks on five sites inside Pakistan near the shared border between the two countries. In response, Pakistan shot down five Indian Air Force (IAF) fighter jets within Indian territory.
These developments followed the April 23, terrorist attack in Pahalgam, located in Indian-occupied Kashmir, which resulted in the deaths of approximately 18 Indian nationals. Delhi immediately blamed Islamabad, making Indian military retaliation seem inevitable. However, there was still hope that reason would prevail within India’s political and military leadership, and that any military response would be held off until credible evidence linking the attackers to Pakistan was presented.
The Indian strikes on Pakistani territory appeared to be premeditated and carefully orchestrated by the Indian political leadership, led by Hindu nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The speed with which India officially blamed the Pakistani government—particularly its military—for the Pahalgam attack, without providing any substantive evidence, strongly suggests the retaliatory action was already planned. Pakistan denied involvement and offered to assist India in the investigation. It even proposed a joint inquiry, which India refused—an indication that the Modi administration was not genuinely interested in identifying and prosecuting the real perpetrators of the attack.
There were multiple underlying motivations for PM Modi’s decision to order strikes inside Pakistan. First, given his reputation for anti-Muslim rhetoric and policies, Modi likely sought to project strength and decisiveness to the Indian public, especially the Hindu majority. Such actions resonate powerfully with nationalist sentiments, particularly among supporters of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), who often view India as Maha Bharata (Mother India). In this narrative, Pakistan—created through the 1947 partition as a homeland for Indian Muslims—is seen as a severed part of a once-unified nation. Consequently, any aggressive posturing toward Pakistan is often viewed favorably by BJP supporters.
The BJP, fundamentally a Hindu nationalist party advocating for Hindutva—the revival of Hindu cultural and political dominance—derives significant political capital from taking hardline stances against Pakistan. Although India’s economy is currently performing well under PM Modi’s leadership, the BJP’s broader ideological agenda extends beyond economic success. It seeks to restore India’s historical greatness, a goal the party seems to believe is best pursued through antagonism toward Pakistan.
While the ambition to elevate India’s global stature is not inherently problematic, the BJP’s method—framing Pakistan as a perpetual enemy—raises serious concerns about regional peace and long-term stability.
On its part, the current Pakistani government—elected through widely disputed February 2025 elections— largely failed to communicate to the international community the dangers posed by the ideology of the BJP and Prime Minister Modi. Rather than effectively exposing these concerns, Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif recently made a highly irresponsible statement during an interview on Sky News, where he claimed that Pakistan had been involved in “dirty work,” including the preparation of terrorists and militants, allegedly at the behest of the United States. This remark should never have been made.
His statement gave India an opportunity to exploit his words on the global stage. India used his comments at the United Nations to argue that even Pakistan’s own leadership admits to fostering terrorism, and therefore, the international community must take action against the country. This narrative amplified India’s long-standing position accusing Pakistan of sponsoring state terrorism, especially within Indian territory. The timing of Khawaja Asif’s statement also created a favorable diplomatic environment for India to justify its strikes on Pakistani sites on May 7. From Delhi’s perspective, Pakistan had already placed itself on the diplomatic defensive, reducing the likelihood of widespread international condemnation. And so far, this prediction appears accurate.
The situation demands serious reflection from Pakistani strategists. Wars are not won on the battlefield alone; sophisticated, responsible, and proactive diplomacy is crucial for defending national interests on the global stage.
A second motive behind India’s May 7 attacks appears to be its effort to weaken Pakistan both diplomatically and militarily. In India’s strategic calculus, placing Pakistan on the defensive reduces its ability to offer even moral or political support to pro-independence Kashmiri fighters in Indian-occupied Kashmir. Following the Pahalgam attack, India, along with its media and public figures, quickly and aggressively blamed Pakistan, likely with the intent to preemptively justify military action. This approach was also meant to discourage a retaliatory response from Pakistan by putting it on the back foot.
Nevertheless, Pakistan was compelled to respond to these violations of international law to affirm its commitment to national security and territorial integrity. Consequently, India received a strong and direct military response.
Since the Modi government’s decision in August 2019 to revoke the special constitutional status of Kashmir, India has sought to consolidate its control over the region. The local resistance movement has weakened considerably, and the annexation has dealt a serious blow to the morale of the Kashmiri independence movement. The recent Pahalgam attack, attributed to a little-known group called The Resistance Front (TRF), has been used by the Indian government as a pretext for even harsher crackdowns on Kashmiri fighters and political activists.
Whether this strategy of suppression will succeed remains uncertain. However, by escalating tensions with direct strikes on Pakistani territory, the Modi government has taken a dangerous gamble.