Introduction
In early May 2025, relations between India and Pakistan sharply deteriorated following a series of Indian airstrikes under Operation Sindoor. The military attack was a reaction to the April 22 Pahalgam attack in Jammu and Kashmir that killed a number of civilians.
The attacks prompted immediate condemnation and reprisal by Pakistan, further escalating fears of wider conflict in an already troubled region, where there have long been historical tensions, especially over Kashmir. This report aims to present a neutral, fact-based overview of the events, supported by verified data and a global context.
The Pahalgam Attack: A Catalyst for Escalation
The incident that preceded the airstrikes occurred on April 22, 2025, in the Baisaran Valley of Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. Armed militants opened fire on a group of tourists, resulting in the deaths of 27 civilians. Among them were 25 Hindu pilgrims, one Christian, and one local Muslim. The attackers reportedly asked victims about their religious affiliation before carrying out the shooting.
An organization known as The Resistance Front (TRF), believed to be aligned with anti-India insurgent groups, initially claimed responsibility. Indian authorities alleged links between the group and Pakistan-based elements, leading to heightened diplomatic pressure and public outrage.
Pakistan formally rejected the accusations, calling for independent international investigations and maintaining that it had no role in the violence.
Operation Sindoor: Details of the Indian Airstrikes
On May 6, 2025, India launched a coordinated air operation under the codename Operation Sindoor. According to official statements from India’s Ministry of Defence, the operation was intended as a precision airstrikes on alleged terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir (Azad Jammu and Kashmir).
Reported Targets:
Bahawalpur – linked in Indian reports to Jaish-e-Mohammed operations, Muridke – associated with Lashkar-e-Taiba’s past activities, Muzaffarabad, Kotli, Bhimber, Tehra Kalan, Sialkot – claimed to house logistical and support hubs India utilized Rafale jets equipped with SCALP cruise missiles and AASM guided bombs.
Official Indian sources insisted that the operation was non-escalatory and proportionate in the sense that no Pakistani military facilities were specifically targeted. India utilized Rafale jets equipped with SCALP cruise missiles and AASM guided bombs. Official Indian sources insisted that the operation was non-escalatory and proportionate in the sense that no Pakistani military facilities were specifically targeted.
Pakistan’s Counter-Argument and Response:
The Pakistan military termed the airstrikes as an unprovoked attack, stating that the targets were civilian locations and not militant bases. Pakistani officials reported: 26 civilian deaths, including women and children. Structural damage to a mosque and residential buildings injuries to at least 35 civilians In response, Pakistan’s Air Force claimed to have intercepted and downed multiple Indian aircraft, including Rafale and Su-30 fighters. Apart from that, reports of artillery exchanges were made on the Line of Control (LoC), in which there were casualties on either side.
Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) issued a statement that highlighted Pakistan’s right to defend itself, also adding that Pakistan did not wish for escalation. Civilian Impact and Human CostIn all armed conflicts, the lives of civilians bear the disproportionate burden. The air strikes and follow-up shelling resulted in Displacement of scores of families along the LoCOver burdened medical facilities in Muzaffarabad and Kotli Schools, mosques, and dwellings damaged, as per local authorities and humanitarian agencies
International human rights observers demanded access to the affected areas and raised an eyebrow at the usage of sophisticated weapons in populated areas.
International Reactions
United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres called on both countries to use maximum restraint.The United States Department of State was concerned about possible regional destabilization
- China called for diplomatic engagement and emphasized that military actions must be avoided.
- The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) condemned the loss of civilian life and called for an impartial investigation.
- None of the major powers openly endorsed either nation’s actions, instead urging a return to dialogue and peaceful dispute resolution.
Strategic and Political Considerations:
Although both governments portrayed their actions as defensive or preemptive, analysts identify underlying political dynamics:
In India, the strikes were carried out during a politically sensitive time, giving rise to speculation regarding the domestic reasons behind the operation.
Pakistan’s reaction was viewed by some as an attempt to send a message of deterrence, especially since the nation continues to experience economic and security woes.
The Kashmir conflict, unresolved for over seven decades, remains central. It continues to serve as a flashpoint for both nations’ military postures and political rhetoric.
Nuclear Overhang and Regional Stability
The stakes of any conflict between India and Pakistan are heightened by their roles as nuclear powers:
- India is estimated to have approximately 164 nuclear warheads
- Pakistan has around 170 nuclear warheads
These arsenals, and a lack of profound diplomatic contact, have been of concern to international institutions. While the May 2025 exchange did not escalate into full-scale war, the incident highlighted the fragility of deterrence in South Asia.
Conclusion
Operation Sindoor was one of the most dramatic recent military confrontations between India and Pakistan. While India described the move as an anti-terrorism action, for Pakistan it was a violation of sovereignty with a high civilian price tag.
The evidence shows a perilous pattern: local hotspots, if confronted with immediate military action, have the potential to escalate into wider conflict. In the future, the international community’s focus continues to be on de-escalation, openness, and renewed dialogue.
