[🇵🇰] Everything about latest Kashmir attack

Ceasefire: Has Modi’s ‘operation Sindoor’ backfired?
Saleh Uddin Ahmed
Updated: 11 May 2025, 22: 25


Indian prime minister Narendra Modi at the cabinet meeting over the 'Operation Sindoor.'ANI

The conflict between India and Pakistan is not a new phenomenon. Since 1948, the two nations have intermittently engaged in wars and skirmishes, often initiated by one side or the other, leading to cycles of attack and counterattack. These confrontations typically last for a few days and conclude either through mutual efforts or others’ mediation. The most significant of these was the 1965 war, which lasted 17 days. Although the major battles have ended, the underlying tensions and disputes, particularly over Kashmir, have continued for decades.

Regardless of how these wars begin, the outcomes often follow a predictable pattern. Azad Kashmir remains under the control of Pakistan; Indian-administered Kashmir stays under India’s control; and numerous civilians on both sides lose their lives. Indian generals are honoured with awards like the Param Vir Chakra and Maha Vir Chakra. Pakistani generals receive the “Nishan-e-Haider” and “Nishan-e-Imtiaz”. The suspended Indian Premier League (IPL) the Pakistan Super League (PSL) resume. Everything is alright again.

The question is, why did the war break out at all?

Why do wars take place in other parts of the world? In the Ukraine conflict, Russia aims to annex regions with ethnic Russian populations. Israel wages war to seize Palestinian land because it needs more territory to settle Jews arriving from various countries in their so-called “promised homeland”, Israel.

However, the India-Pakistan conflict does not revolve around territorial conquest. The recent escalation, dubbed “Operation Sindoor” by Indian prime minister Narendra Modi, is more about asserting “Hindu pride” than territorial gains.

The immediate trigger was an attack on Hindu tourists in Pahalgam, Kashmir, on 22 April 2025, which resulted in 26 civilian deaths. This incident led to a war of words between Indian and Pakistani leaders. The issue could have been settled with just a war of words.

But intense pressure began mounting on Modi from radical Hindutva groups to take revenge on Pakistan. Prime minister Narendra Modi practices politics rooted in a hardline Hindu nationalist ideology and has repeatedly become the prime minister with strong support from Hindu voters. If he didn’t respond to the Kashmir attack, his voter base would collapse. So, he instructed his generals to prepare for war. In essence, the main goal of this war was to punish Pakistan and preserve Modi’s 'Hindu pride' and his Hindu vote bank.

Criticism over the war’s cost and effectiveness, as well as Modi’s leadership, will likely come not only from opposition parties but also from factions within the Hindutva movement. Many may begin to say that this marks the beginning of the end of Modi’s political dominance.

Pakistan had also sensed that an Indian attack was imminent. Pakistani generals are almost always prepared to deal with any conflict involving India. In fact, this readiness is a core pillar of Pakistan’s national doctrine. Since its inception, Pakistani generals have used the fear of the “Indian threat” to justify governing the country - sometimes through military rule, and at other times via civilian proxies.

As most clashes with India revolve around Kashmir, this strategy is often referred to as the generals’ 'Kashmir card'. In this case, the Pakistani generals’ 'Kashmir card' confronted Modi’s 'Hindu pride'.

India clearly initiated the war. Observing how the conflict unfolded, many are now questioning whether India did its 'homework' properly before going to war. Did the war turn out the way India had intended? Or has it, in fact, backfired on Modi?

At the very start of the war, within just half an hour, India destroyed several 'Kashmiri training camps' inside Pakistan. India claimed that these camps were used to train militants who carried out attacks in Kashmir. If Pakistan had silently absorbed the initial strike, the war might have ended right then and there. Modi could have presented the success of Operation Sindoor to his supporters as a victory and a restoration of "Hindu pride." But why would Pakistan sacrifice its national pride?

Pakistan responded with counterattacks on equal footing with India. In the first phase of the war, both sides largely targeted civilian areas - though fighter jets, drones, and missiles were all used.

According to a Reuters report, Pakistan had the upper hand in the air battle, shooting down at least two of India’s advanced French-made Rafale fighter jets using its Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighter aircraft. This marked the first time the Chinese J-10C was used in an actual war, which proved to be a strategic gain for China.

In drone warfare, both countries were evenly matched. India used drones manufactured by Israel, while Pakistan employed drones made in Turkey. Both countries also deployed their own domestically produced missiles, using them in equal measure.

Kolkata-based Bengali daily Anandabazar Patrika described a missile attack in Jammu like this: “Red orbs streaked across the skies of Jammu - was it wedding fireworks? The realisation hit like a jolt - those were all missiles!” Unlike the 1965 India–Pakistan war, which was primarily fought over territorial gains, this conflict was not about land. As a result, tanks were barely used.

In the second phase of the war, both Pakistan and India launched attacks on each other’s military targets. At that point, there was hope that global powers would intervene to stop the conflict before it escalated further - especially since both nations possess nuclear weapons. And that’s exactly what happened.

President Trump announced on Saturday that “after overnight mediation by the United States,” India and Pakistan have agreed to an immediate and full ceasefire. Both Pakistani and Indian authorities also issued statements confirming the truce. The war will now come to a halt, and the reckoning of victory and defeat will begin.

During the war, India’s opposition parties remained largely silent, signaling their support. But now questions will arise: What exactly did India gain from this war? Given the strength of Pakistan’s response, it can be said that Pakistan has earned more respect from this conflict than India. And what will happen to prime minister Modi’s so-called “Hindu pride”? It seems Modi’s decision to initiate this war may have severely damaged both his and India’s reputation.

Modi’s party, the BJP, does not have an outright majority in the Lok Sabha. It currently holds on to power through a coalition with Nitish Kumar’s Janata Party in Bihar. In the last election, Modi’s party lost a significant number of seats. Now, in the aftermath of this war, questions will be raised about Modi’s political future.

Criticism over the war’s cost and effectiveness, as well as Modi’s leadership, will likely come not only from opposition parties but also from factions within the Hindutva movement. Many may begin to say that this marks the beginning of the end of Modi’s political dominance.

* Saleh Uddin Ahmed is a teacher and political analyst​

India-Pakistan ceasefire holds after early violations
Agence France-Presse . Poonch, India 11 May, 2025, 23:56


Indian paramilitary soldiers inspect a vehicle in Srinagar on Sunday. India and Pakistan traded accusations of ceasefire violations, hours after US president Donald Trump announced that the nuclear-armed neighbours had stepped back from the brink of full-blown war. | AFP photo

A ceasefire appeared to hold on Sunday between India and Pakistan, hours after the nuclear-armed rivals accused each other of violating a truce that brought them back from the brink of all-out war.

The ceasefire was agreed on Saturday after four days of missile, drone and artillery attacks which killed at least 60 people and sent thousands fleeing, in the worst violence since India and Pakistan’s last open conflict in 1999.

The ‘full and immediate’ halt to hostilities was unexpectedly announced by US president Donald Trump on social media, who said that it followed a ‘long night of talks mediated by the United States’.

Early on Sunday India’s foreign secretary said that New Delhi had retaliated after Pakistan’s ‘repeated violations’ of the truce.

Pakistan said it ‘remains committed’ to the ceasefire and that its forces were handling violations by India with ‘responsibility and restraint’.

Residents of several villages along the Indian side of the Line of Control, the de-facto frontier of divided Kashmir, said heavy Pakistani shelling resumed hours after the ceasefire announcement.

Bairi Ram’s four-room house in the village of Kotmaira was reduced to rubble in shelling and three of his buffaloes were killed.

‘Everything is finished,’ he said.

But by later in the day a senior security official in Muzaffarabad in Pakistan administered-Kashmir said there were ‘intermittent exchanges of fire’ but that situation was ‘quiet since the morning’.

Hazoor Sheikh, 46, who runs a store in the main market in the border town of Poonch, which was the worst-hit in India during the fighting, was one of the first to reopen his shop on Sunday.

‘Finally, after days, we could sleep peacefully,’ said Sheikh.

At least 12 Poonch residents were killed at most of the 60,000-strong population had fled in cars, on buses and even on foot.

On Sunday people were starting to come back, although some remained worried that the ceasefire would not last.

‘Every time India has agreed to such an agreement, Pakistan has ended up violating it,’ Poonch resident Hafiz Mohammad Shah Bukhari, 49, said.

This was echoed on the other side by Kala Khan, who lives in Chakothi in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir and who hid with neighbours in a bunker.

‘India is a deceitful neighbour. You can never trust it,’ said Khan said. ‘I have absolutely no faith in India; I believe it will strike again.’

Praveen Donthi, a senior analyst with the International Crisis Group, was also sceptical.

‘Things are going to remain hostile. Things are going to be difficult,’ he said.

Pro-military rallies were held in cities across Pakistan on Sunday, with the country’s green and white flag draped from buildings and cars.

The alarming spiral towards all-out conflict began before dawn on Wednesday, when India launched missile attacks destroying what it called ‘terrorist camps’.

This followed an attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir on April 22 that killed 26 people and which India accused Pakistan of backing.

Pakistan firmly denied any involvement and called for an independent investigation.

Islamabad immediately responded to the strikes with heavy artillery fire and claimed to have downed five fighter jets — something India has not commented on — before it said it launched its own strikes on Indian cities on Saturday.

Militants have stepped up operations in Kashmir since 2019, when Indian prime minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist government revoked the region’s limited autonomy and took it under direct rule from New Delhi.

Divided Muslim-majority Kashmir is claimed in full by both countries, who have fought several wars over the territory since their independence from Britain in 1947.

Pakistan prime minister Shehbaz Sharif said on X that his country — which has long sought international mediation in Kashmir — ‘appreciates’ the US intervention.

India has consistently opposed mediation, however, and observers were sceptical of the truce.

News of the ceasefire was met with relief from countries including Britain and Iran, as well as the United Nations.

China, which borders India and Pakistan, said it was ‘willing to continue playing a constructive role’ and remained concerned with any escalation, according to state-run news agency Xinhua.

‘The days ahead will be critical to see whether the ceasefire holds and gives way to relative normalcy,’ read an editorial in Dawn, Pakistan’s leading English language newspaper.

‘While foreign friends can certainly help create a conducive atmosphere, it is Islamabad and New Delhi that will have to do the heavy lifting themselves to secure peace.’​

Villagers in no hurry to return to their homes

After spending days in temporary homes and with relatives, people from both sides of the Indian and Pakistani border are sceptical about this weekend's ceasefire and in no hurry to return to their villages.

Indian cites like Jammu and Amritsar, which were spooked by the sounds of explosions after the truce was agreed, remained quieter than normal yesterday with many shops choosing to close and people preferring to stay indoors.

Indian and Pakistani authorities advised people who had left border areas not to return to frontline villages just yet.


A resident inspects his damaged house following cross-border shelling along the Line of Control (LoC) between Pakistan and India in the Jura sector of Neelum Valley, Pakistan-administered Kashmir, yesterday. PHOTO: AFP, REUTERS

After four days of fighting, India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire on Saturday under US pressure, but within hours explosions rang out in border towns and India accused Pakistan of violating the pact.

The arch rivals had been involved in the worst fighting in nearly three decades, firing missiles and drones at each other's military installations and killing almost 70 people.



Vartika, the daughter of an IAF soldier who died in an attack on Udhampur, salutes her father as his body is taken away on the day of his funeral at their home in Mahradasi village, Rajasthan, India. PHOTO: AFP, REUTERS

"URGENT APPEAL: Do not return to frontline villages. Lives are at risk. Unexploded munitions remain after Pakistani shelling," said a police notice in Indian Kashmir.

Hundreds of people were shifted to temporary homes, while others left to stay with relatives far from the border as fighting intensified earlier in the week.

"I want to go back to my village in Bihar. Do not want to go back there (to the border) and die," said Asha Devi, a 22-year- old farm labourer in the Akhnoor region, one of the areas worst affected by shelling in recent days.​