The rising tension between India and Pakistan, briefly explained
is a senior correspondent at Vox covering foreign policy and world news with a focus on the future of international conflict. He is the author of the 2018 book, Invisible Countries: Journeys to the Edge of Nationhood , an exploration of border conflicts, unrecognized countries, and changes to the world map.
India and Pakistan seem headed for a military conflict in the wake of India's worst terrorist attack in years. The question is what form that clash will take and just how far the confrontation between the two nuclear-armed neighbors could escalate.
The latest crisis in the long-running tensions between the two nations began on April 22, when gunmen killed 26 people in Pahalgam, a popular tourist resort in the Indian-administered region of Kashmir. Pakistan and India each control parts of the region of Kashmir and each claim the entirety of it, a dispute that dates back to the partition of British India in 1947. The two countries have fought several wars and a number of smaller skirmishes over the territory.
The attackers appear to have targeted Hindu men, reportedly asking some of the victims their names or testing if they could recite Quranic verses before killing them. A militant group called the Resistance Front has claimed responsibility for the attack. Indian authorities say the group is an offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group which carried out 2008 terror attacks in Mumbai, and which has widely reported links to Pakistan's security services. Pakistan claims Lashkar-e-Taiba has been essentially dismantled.
Today, Explained
Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day, compiled by news editor Sean Collins. Email (required)
Sign Up
By submitting your email, you agree to our Terms and Privacy Notice . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Amid public outrage over the attacks, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi vowed to 'raze whatever is left of the terror haven,' an implicit threat against Pakistan, which India has long accused of backing terrorist attacks on Indian soil. The Pakistani government has denied any links to the attacks, and the Indian government has yet to publicly present evidence of Pakistani complicity.
Late Tuesday, Pakistani Information Minister Attaullah Tarar posted on X that 'Pakistan has credible intelligence that India intends carrying out military action against Pakistan in the next 24-36 hours,' a claim that followed a statement from Pakistan's defense minister, Khawaja Muhammad Asif, that an Indian attack was 'imminent.'
India and Pakistan's fight over Kashmir, briefly explained
There has been a long-running anti-India insurgency in the parts of Kashmir that India controls, which, despite denials from Islamabad, has been widely reported to be backed by Pakistan.
In 2019, after 40 Indian police were killed in a suicide bombing in Kashmir, India carried out airstrikes against militant targets on Pakistani territory. Pakistan responded with strikes of its own on Indian Kashmir, which led to an air battle and downing of an Indian fighter jet.
A short time after that, India revoked Kashmir's semiautonomous status, putting it under direct control of the federal government, and pushing through a series of controversial legal changes that have stoked resentment among Kashmiri Muslims but which Modi's government credits with tamping down insurgent violence.
Indian authorities have also been heavily promoting Kashmiri sites like Pahalgam, a scenic mountain area known as the 'Switzerland of India,' as tourist destinations, arguing that thanks to their reforms, the region is safe for all.
Sumit Ganguly, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and expert on South Asian politics told me, that as such, India's leaders may feel their response 'will have to be something rather dramatic and visible.'
How far could conflict between India and Pakistan go?
One possibility is that India could send troops into the Pakistan-administered areas of Kashmir, a dramatic response but one perhaps less likely to trigger all out war than an incursion into what India considers Pakistan-proper.
Strikes on alleged terrorist training camps would be one option; attacks on the Pakistani military itself would be a much more dramatic step. And as always, there's no guarantee that a limited war would stay limited.
As has been the case since the 1970s, when the two countries first developed nuclear weapons, the threat of nuclear war looms over the crisis. The two countries have around 170 nuclear warheads each and even a 'limited' nuclear exchange between them could kill tens of millions of people. India has a 'no-first use' policy on nuclear weapons (though some officials' recent statements have cast doubt on that commitment) but Pakistan does not. Asif, the Pakistani defense minister, said this week that Pakistan would only consider using nuclear weapons if 'there is a direct threat to our existence.'
In past blowups over Kashmir, US diplomacy has played a key role in talking the two sides back from the brink.
The State Department said Tuesday that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had plans to speak with Pakistani and Indian leaders. But there's not much indication President Donald Trump is deeply involved. He initially issued a strong statement backing India following the Pahalgam attack, then when asked about the crisis on Air Force One on Friday, said, somewhat nonsensically, that 'There have been tensions on that border for 1,500 years. It's been the same, but I am sure they'll figure it out one way or the other.' (India and Pakistan have only existed as separate countries for 77 years.)
This time around, the comment suggested, the two countries may have to find their own way back from the brink.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
3 hours ago
- The Hill
Trump gripes he won't get Nobel Peace Prize 'no matter what‘ as global conflicts persist
President Trump on Friday celebrated a newly announced deal to end the conflict between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of the Congo but lamented that he may not win a Nobel Peace Prize for his work in the deal, or for other international agreements he helped negotiate in office. The State Department announced Wednesday that Rwanda and Congo will sign a deal to end fighting in eastern Congo, where rebels that Congo has accused Rwanda of backing have seized strategic cities since January. The United States was brought in to assist the peace talks at the request of Congo President Felix Tshekedi. 'This is a Great Day for Africa and, quite frankly, a Great Day for the World,' Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social, calling the agreement 'a wonderful Treaty.' But he also griped that he believed he may not receive accolades for the deal, nor for a host of other conflicts that the United States has helped resolve. 'I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for this, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for stopping the War between India and Pakistan, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for stopping the War between Serbia and Kosovo,' he wrote, also naming conflicts in North Africa and the Middle East. Trump's post came just hours after Pakistan announced that it would nominate him for the Peace Prize. India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire in May after several days of intense rocket fire between the two countries, an agreement that Trump said he played a significant role in. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has sought to downplay Trump's claims. Trump also said repeatedly on the campaign trail that he should be awarded the prize, which former President Obama won in 2009. Pakistan's nomination of Trump marks his fifth nomination. The pool of people who can submit nominations for the award is extensive, including university professors and members of national assemblies such as Congress. Michael Jackson and the international soccer federation FIFA have also been nominated in the past. 'No, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do, including Russia/Ukraine, and Israel/Iran, whatever those outcomes may be, but the people know, and that's all that matters to me!' Trump added.
Hamilton Spectator
9 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Brampton mayor ‘cautiously optimistic' about Bishnoi gang terrorist designation
OTTAWA - Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown said he's 'cautiously optimistic' about the chances of India's Lawrence Bishnoi gang being named as a terrorist group after meeting with Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree. Brown said he and representatives of Peel police met with the federal minister Wednesday after he asked police whether adding the Bishnoi gang to Ottawa's list of terrorist organizations would help with enforcement. British Columbia Premier David Eby sent a letter to Prime Minister Mark Carney earlier this week asking him to designate the Bishnoi gang as a terrorist organization — something the government did with seven other transnational criminal organizations earlier this year. Brown said Peel police told him a terrorist designation 'would be helpful' and that the gang is involved in 'serious criminal activity.' 'We're talking about extortions and murders in our region. I think (Anandasangaree) took it seriously. I'm cautiously optimistic that he's going to make this designation,' Brown said. Asked about Eby's request Wednesday, Anandasangaree said national security officials 'continuously' review whether criminal organizations meet the legal threshold to be named as terrorist groups. RCMP have alleged Indian diplomats shared information about Sikh separatists in Canada with the Indian government and that top Indian officials then passed the information to the Bishnoi gang. Brown said the gang has become more brazen in Brampton and local police have spotted vehicles with Bishnoi-affiliated decals in the Ontario city. 'They have over 700 shooters worldwide. They meet every threshold that is required to be designated as a terrorist organization,' he said. 'And if we can give police this tool to allow them to better combat this threat in Canada, I think that, you know, is a no-brainer.' The Criminal Code defines terrorist activity as a violent act that is, in whole or in part, committed for political, ideological or religious purposes and is meant to intimidate a segment of the public. Lawrence Bishnoi has been in an Indian prison since 2015 and has more than two dozen criminal cases pending against him. He has been accused of orchestrating violent acts of extortion while incarcerated, using a cellphone. The National Investigation Agency, India's counterterrorism agency, said in 2023 that Bishnoi ran his 'terror group from jails in different states' in India and through an associate in Canada. Once a group is listed as a terrorist entity in Canada, any property owned by the group can be frozen by the government and law enforcement can deploy additional tools to probe crimes associated with financing, travel and recruitment. 'If there was someone who came by with a decal on their car or on their jacket that was of Lawrence Bishnoi, and we have seen that, it would give the police tools to embark on an immediate investigation,' Brown said. 'So sometimes the judicial process, because you're seeking warrants or authorization, doesn't move as fast as required to deal with the agility of these criminal networks.' -With files from Fakiha Baig in Toronto This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 20, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Carney defends decision to restore diplomacy with India, calls it 'foundational'
OTTAWA — Reinstating key diplomats in Canada and India is a "foundational" step toward restoring the relationship between the two countries, Prime Minister Mark Carney said Thursday. But Carney still refused to say whether he raised the murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in his meeting with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of the G7 summit in Alberta on Tuesday. Several Sikh organizations, including Sikhs for Justice, have called on the prime minister to be more transparent about what India is doing to co-operate with police investigations here, including the probe into the 2023 murder of Nijjar, a Sikh separatist activist. "I never make it a policy to give a line-by-line transcript readout of exactly what's said in a meeting, and I'm not about to start now," Carney told a press conference on Parliament Hill. Carney said he did talk about transnational repression with Modi and Canada has made it "very clear" that it won't be tolerated from any source. The prime minister also would not say what India has done since Canada expelled six top Indian diplomats in October in response to allegations that agents of India or their proxies engaged in violent crimes against Canadians, including murder, extortion and coercion. India also expelled six Canadian diplomats in October. Carney and Modi agreed in their meeting to appoint new high commissioners. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service identified India as one of the main drivers of foreign interference in its annual report, released publicly on Wednesday. Former prime minister Justin Trudeau and the RCMP have linked agents of the Indian government to Nijjar's murder. Former NDP leader Jagmeet Singh received a "duty to warn" from the RCMP in December 2023 about an imminent threat to his life. According to a recent Global News report, Singh was being followed by agents of the Indian government at the time. Carney said Thursday that exchanging high commissioners is a "basic, first step" in having a relationship with India. "There are very deep ongoing ties, people-to-people, certainly of Indo-Canadians but Canadians as a whole with India. We don't have a high commissioner in India right now. We're not serving Canadians in India right now because of where we are," he said. "So just having a basic level of engagement is in many respects a duty of the government. I'm glad we came to that agreement and understanding." Carney said this "understanding" is based on several factors, including law enforcement co-operation. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 19, 2025. David Baxter, The Canadian Press
