It was a demonstration of its counter-terrorism policy and clarity. However, the bellicose narrative emanating from the Pakistani side indicates that it is preparing for an escalation with India through retaliatory strikes. Pakistan’s National Security Committee (NSC) has already authorised a military action in response to Indian precision strikes.
On the other hand, the Indian government informed several foreign envoys in New Delhi that “if Pakistan responds, India will respond.” As Pakistan prepares to retaliate against India under its stated “Quid pro quo plus” military strategy, there are increasing chances of the conflict entering uncharted territory. More importantly, Pakistan Army chief General Syed Asim Munir is looking for a much-needed face saver after India struck deep inside the Pakistani territory despite his tall claims of defence preparedness. Consequently, Pakistan has intensified ceasefire violations in multiple sectors along the Line of Control (LoC) and the International Boundary (IB), arbitrarily targeting the civilian population on the Indian side of the border. This has resulted in several casualties and damage to properties, including religious buildings like a Sikh Gurudwara in Poonch.
In a press briefing on May 7, Director General of the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), Lieutenant General Ahmed Sharif Chaudhary claimed that the Pakistan Army will “avenge every last drop of unjust blood spilled of innocent civilians”. Pakistan’s military establishment is utilising the incident to foster pro-Army sentiments in the country, which have been at an all-time low by conducting a sustained disinformation campaign against India and exacerbating the “revenge” narrative domestically. With Munir’s “hardline” approach towards India, a military escalation looks imminent unless there is an active ‘third’ party mediation or a backchannel communication between the two countries.
Pakistan has already declared itself “victorious” after the events of the night of May 6-7, but still called for military retaliation by referring to Article 51 of the United Nations Charter and its “right to respond, in self-defence, at a time, place, and manner of its choosing.” Since the targets and geographical expanse of Indian strikes were much larger this time compared to the Balakot airstrikes in February 2019, Pakistan would attempt to mirror a similar number of targets and range under its “quid pro quo plus” strategy to re-establish its so-called strategic deterrence against India.
It would heighten the risk of vertical escalation, possibly resulting in further escalation and an increased likelihood of inadvertent actions or accidents, as seen during the Balakot crisis after Group Captain Abhinandan Varthaman’s fighter jet crashed in PoJK, and India reportedly warned of cross-border missile strikes unless he was released immediately from the Pakistani custody. A similar or far worse incident could occur if Pakistan decides to retaliate militarily.
Amidst the fog of war and possible retaliation from the other side, India believes that Pakistan could pick a range of civilian and military targets in the border states. While a ground incursion looks impossible, Pakistan may conduct cross-border airstrikes from its territory through air-to-air missiles on Indian military outposts and control centres, civilian infrastructures, including religious institutions, dams, and financial buildings. It may also consider striking deep inside the Indian territory in response to strikes on Bahawalpur and Muridke terror hideouts in Pakistan’s Punjab province. Notably, Pakistan is aware that it cannot escalate beyond a point, considering India’s military superiority, long-term impact on its dwindling economy, and fears of further escalation, both horizontal and vertical.
Pakistan’s military reaction to the Operation Sindoor will be guided by its “quid pro quo plus” policy. This approach represents a measured yet escalating response that seeks to reaffirm Pakistan’s so-called credibility in conventional deterrence while avoiding further escalation vis-à-vis India. However, Pakistani officials have recently threatened to use the country’s “full spectrum of power,” including the nuclear option, in response to an Indian military strike on its territory in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack.
After the Indian strikes on its mainland and the occupied territories of PoJK, can Pakistan risk the full spectrum escalation against India? It is highly doubtful that Pakistan would attempt to enter an uncharted territory of the military conflict and face “massive retaliation” from the Indian side. However, it would intensify ceasefire violations along the Jammu and Kashmir border, inflicting damage on the border population, military outposts, and civilian infrastructures.
Additionally, LeT and JeM would receive increasing support from the military establishment to carry out attacks in Indian territory and we can potentially see further strengthening of their so-called ‘virtual’ front organisations: The Resistance Front (LeT) and People’s Anti-Fascist Front (JeM). Therefore, Pakistan’s immediate response to Indian strikes is expected to blend targeted military strikes with political signalling while avoiding actions that would internationalise blame or trigger a premature full-scale war between both countries. In the mid to long term, the borders will become hot, and Pakistan’s sub-conventional activities will likely intensify in Jammu and Kashmir, especially against Hindu minorities.
—The authors: Sameer Patil is Director, Centre for Security, Strategy and Technology, at Observer Research Foundation, and Sarral Sharma, is a Doctoral Candidate at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
