Pahalgam Attack: India’s Aggressive Signaling Could Lead to Inadvertent Escalation

Author: Maryyum Masood

The recent Pahalgam attack in which 26 Indian tourists were killed by terrorists, and the events following it leading to a crisis between India and Pakistan, reveal the fragility of peace in South Asia. The two nuclear-armed archrivals share more than three thousand kilometers long border; therefore, even a minor error could result in inadvertent escalation. Immediately after the attack, New Delhi resorted to blaming Pakistan for conducting cross-border terrorism, as has always been the case. Simultaneously, it began aggressive signaling in three domains: military, economic, and diplomatic, along with irresponsible political statements. On the military front, India began forward military deployments at the Line of Control, deploying its most advanced aircraft carrier INS Vikrant in the northern Arabian Sea near the Pakistani waters, testing its long-range anti-ship missile in the Arabian Sea, and intensifying combat air patrols near the Pakistani airspace. On the economic front, India unilaterally suspended the Indus Water Treaty and discontinued all indirect trade with Pakistan. On the diplomatic front, it started expelling Pakistani diplomats and stopping issuance of visas. On the other hand, Pakistan also demonstrated its resolve, which forced the INS Vikrant to return to the Karwar port of India. Pakistan reciprocated the Indian action against diplomats and movement of people. 

Apart from military posturing, India’s senior officials delivered irresponsible statements. For instance, Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh stated, “We will not only reach those who have perpetrated this incident but also those who, sitting behind the scenes, have conspired to commit such acts on the soil of India.” He further said, “There will be a loud and clear response soon.”  While the situation is ongoing and rapidly developing, any Indian misadventure could start the spiral of escalation. This is because such provocative actions have the potential for accidental confrontation, as a misread radar signal or airspace violation could quickly turn a mere crisis into a full-scale war. 

To better understand the concept of “inadvertent escalation,” several strategists and scholars deliberated upon the underlying causes that lead to it. For instance, Rajesh Rajagopalan, an Indian analyst, is of the view that commanders or military stakeholders usually avoid targeting the adversary’s critical infrastructure even if the location is known to them, owing to the fear of escalation. However, in situations where decision-making windows are short and they must take quick decisions, accidentally attacking sensitive infrastructure becomes a likely occurrence. Another prominent scholar, Barry Posen writes in his book titled Inadvertent Escalation: Conventional War and Nuclear Risks, that when the critical national interests are at stake, states with nuclear weapons may resort to using them rather than making any compromise on their national interests. Further, the concept of “Stability-Instability Paradox” has been proven by the historical incidents. According to this concept, even the stable nuclear deterrence at the strategic level leaves room for risky actions at the tactical level. It means while the presence of nuclear weapons has successfully averted wars, limited conflicts under the nuclear threshold remained a possibility, as evident in the India-Pakistan case. 

Regarding the current situation, it can be argued that the misalignment between perception and intention could occur if Pakistan misperceives India’s mere show of power as an imminent attack. Several other factors contribute to the already complex situation, as the region is already prone to instability. These include a short decision-making window where a ballistic missile would take less than ten minutes to reach its target because of the proximity. India’s risk-taking behavior, possession of advanced technologies, ineffectiveness of communication channels and the absence of crisis management mechanisms are other factors of such escalation. 

Past incidents serve as great lessons. The 2022 Brahmos missile incident, when an Indian dual-capable missile entered Pakistani territory, could have turned into a dangerous situation had Pakistan responded hastily. The 2019 Pulwama Balakot crisis, when India violated Pakistan’s airspace, brought the two states to the brink of war. The situation could have turned catastrophic if Pakistan had not exercised restraint and refrained from taking a quick decision. In the current scenario, the escalation risks have increased manifold. One, if Pakistan misreads a radar signal or falsely intercepts an incoming missile during the heightened tensions along with India’s aggressive signaling, Pakistan will have constrained time to verify the threat and limited options for decision making, increasing the chances of miscalculated decisions which will lead to inadvertent escalation. Second, India’s combat air patrols near the LOC constitute provocative action The very presence of fighter jets near the disputed border, especially during brewing tensions, can be perceived as a hostile action and increase the chances of accidental encounters. Third, India’s deployment of its aircraft carrier near Pakistani waters gives the impression that India is preparing for either an attack on Pakistan’s maritime assets or for a naval blockade. Moreover, Pakistan could perceive it as a threat to its vital sea lines of communication (SLOCs). Military posturing in the maritime domain particularly carries unique dangers. This is because maritime assets such as submarines operate with less or no visibility, unlike air and land-based assets, thereby creating increased ambiguity about the intentions. Consequently, states often end up taking decisions based on mere assumptions. Such assumptions usually lead states to launch preemptive attacks to secure their maritime interests. If India continues to test Pakistan’s resolve by its aggressive signaling in the maritime domain, the same would be responded to and then the entire region would be engulfed in a catastrophe. 

As regards the terrorist incident in Pahalgam, while Pakistan has repeatedly called for a neutral investigation, India resorted to immediately accusing Pakistan of orchestrating the attack. Its immediate response was relentless but not unprecedented, as has happened in past incidents as well. Conducting aggressive signaling in multiple domains especially air and maritime domains demonstrates India’s military preparedness. Apart from military posturing, India’s war rhetoric in the form of irrational statements adds fuel to the fire. Indian stakeholders must understand that crisis once escalated will be irreversible. New Delhi must refrain from dangerously testing Pakistan’s thresholds because even a minor error can lead to inadvertent escalation, as mentioned earlier. 

The way forward for the current crisis is immediate diplomatic intervention by third parties such as the UN or neutral states to initiate dialogue. Additionally, New Delhi must be persuaded to exercise caution and demonstrate responsible behavior. South Asia is already haunted by the lessons of narrow escapes and near misses, and any miscalculation can result in a catastrophe that no side can afford.

The author, Maryyum Masood is a Research Officer & Associate Editor at the Center for International Strategic Studies (CISS), Islamabad.