On 22 April, a terrorist attack in Besaran Meadow near Pehhalgam killed 25 tourists and one local triggered an Indian response. India quickly took responsibility of terrorist groups in Pakistan, suspended the Indus Water Treaty, expelled Pakistani diplomats and canceled the travel visa.

The Modi government deployed these measures as part of a bold terrorism theory and claimed that he indicated a new limit of strategic resolution. But whatever it was, instead of demonstrating strength, has developed in a strategic and a strategic Diplomatic defeat Of quite quantity.

On May 7, India’s ability to project aerial attack across the Line of Control was designed and it was displayed that the continuous use of asymmetric war through Pakistan’s own terrorist network would no longer be tolerated. However, what was intended as a calibrated message quickly invites a tremendous and sophisticated Pakistani military vengeance. Within the first hour of the struggle, India allegedly lost several fighter jets, possibly including Rafael. The alleged debris was not only aired on Pakistani media, but was widely broadcast on digital platforms.

Was the cases worse Most harmful entry By the Indian Army. In an interview with Bloomberg TVOn the occasion of Shangri-La dialogue in Singapore, India’s leading defense employees admitted that the Indian Air Force was effectively on the ground for about two days after Pakistan’s counter attacks. This extraordinary concession of airpower’s disability severely reduces the story of India’s strength and control.

Then the ceasefire came, not through the established bilateral crisis management channels, but by direct American intervention. On 10 May, President Donald Trump unilaterally announced that India and Pakistan agreed to end the full end, credited with US diplomacy to prevent a full -scale nuclear confrontation. Publicly strengthened the perception of the Trip administration’s ceasefire that both India and Pakistan are destabilizing the nuclear-host powers that require external supervision.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Foreign Affairs Minister S. Jayashankar’s challenge or even Trump’s failure to qualify for repeated claims that his arbitration seemed to have a nuclear war like music for Pakistani ears. In the absence of any Indian fragrance, an perception quickly admitted that the Modi government had cited strategic autonomy for a superpower media, a belief that has not only ranked Indian strategic thinkers, but also adopted the Citizen-Celebration Class of Islamabad.

In the story, this rapid upsurge could not come to India in a worse time. Away from stopping Pakistan or the establishment of escalatery dominance, Modi’s poorly conceived military gambit inadvertently provided Pakistan’s military establishment with an unexpected political wind. The most beneficial from this reversal was no one other than Asim Munir, General of Pakistan Army employees.

By the May events of May, Munir was probably the most modified Pakistani army chief since the 1971 war. He was seen as the mastermind of a political architecture designed to keep Imran Khan-Pakistan’s most popular political leader-and Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) to keep out of power from a hook or crook. From Pakistani youth to foreign migrants, Munir was disintegrated for abolishing civil space, imprisoning political opponents and taking care of post -democratic orders.

However, India’s bottled military action gave Munir a political revival. He presided over a fast and effective military reaction, and through the machinery of state media and digital platforms, a lion as a fearless patron of national sovereignty.

Not satisfied with public praise alone, Munir honored himself with a rare five -star rank of Field Marshall, symbolically on his supreme military authority. In doing so, he not only sought institutional dominance, but also symbolic height for the Panthanians of the National Services of Pakistan.

The Pakistani people, especially in Punjab and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, embraced this change with striking enthusiasm. In cities where Munir’s posters were removed once, they are now observed in rallies, patriotic music and even prayer teachings. From the lowest rank of the army to the drawing room of Rawalpindi, Munir has turned himself into a strategic bull against Indian aggression, a savior that was not in front of Modi’s dangers.

At the same time, India has faced a terrible story collapse. While the international community initially expressed sympathy to the victims of the Pahalgam attack, the attention was rapidly transferred to the struggle management and nuclear stability from terrorism management. Modi’s aggressive signaling minus maintained strategic diplomacy, only increased the possibility of growth. Once Trump publicly declared a ceasefire, India is no longer considered a victim of terrorism, but as a uniform partner in an unstable regional cycle of provocation and vengeance.

Given a strategic opening, Pakistan has rapidly capitalized on India’s diplomatic paralysis. with strong support Already safe from China, Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif launched a high-profile diplomatic aggressive in the entire region, which connects the Kashmir issue with widespread concerns such as environmental decline, water rights and regional equity. Speaking at the International Conference on the conservation of glaciers in Dushanbe, he argued that unilateral suspension of India’s Indus Water Treaty gave the amount of dangerous weapons of an important trans-boundary resource.

The visit to Sharif to Türkiye, Iran, Azerbaijan and Tajikistan underlined this diplomatic speed. At the Lachin tripartite summit, the Kashmir issue was clearly associated with other frozen struggles such as Nagorno-Karabakh and Northern Cyprus. Türkiye and Azerbaijan offered public support to Pakistan’s “measured” response and committed to increase defense cooperation. Iran, in turn, offered rhetoric and condemned India’s aggression.

In contrast, India’s diplomatic retaliation has been taken and has become ineffective. The Ministry of External Affairs has hurriedly sent 59 politicians to more than 30 countries in parliamentary delegations. These delegations have been branded as a symbol of bipartisan unity, but were chosen without consulting opposition parties and often failed to secure meetings with senior officials.

In many cases, these delegations have found themselves limited to interaction with junior diplomat, diaspora groups or policy think tanks. The very promoted American delegation led by Shashi Tharoor failed to secure the reach to a senior senator or executive branch member by reducing India’s low profit in Washington.

Back home, Modi resorted to optics: public address, roadshow and an aggressive social media campaign. Nevertheless, these symbolic gestures could not hide any tangible diplomatic success or absence of meaningful military preventive. The gap between dramatic nationalism and strategic consistency has never been seen much.

Perhaps the most permanent loss lies in the long -term implications of the crisis. Modi’s actions did not continue to use Pakistan its proxy network. If anything, he helped Islamabad show his military skills and political resolutions. Is there more disturbing, he rehabilitated and lioned a deep unpopular army chief, which gave him unprecedented control over the political and military institutions of Pakistan.

Modi’s dependence on the spectacle, the force on foresight, and unilateralism on strategic coalition-building have repeatedly reduced India’s long-term interests. If New Delhi wants to achieve strategic credibility, Modi should jet the theater of muscle nationalism and develop a strong diplomatic framework anchored in strategic foresight.

Anti -terrorism can not succeed without narrative control, and narrative control cannot be achieved without smart diplomacy. As long as India does not learn this lesson, there will be no avoiding attack from across the border, but there will be another cycle of strategic embarrassment and international margins.

Views are personal

Ashok SwainThere is a professor of peace and conflict research at Uppsala University, Sweden. There may be more about their writingFound here