AS India reflects the result of a brief military conflict with Pakistan in early May, it may be meaningful to consider the current reality that even in the context of a civilization in the form of a civilization of India’s cultural diversity and history, it is unique, it is prone to the attacks of countries and beyond countries around it. An infallible Pakistan is constantly searching for ways and meaning in every few years to incite a struggle, and despite being the worst in each of these conflicts and wars, a thousand cuts are demanding bleeding of India with a thousand cuts.
The great existence of a secular democratic India seems to be an orphan to Pakistan. As India moves towards becoming a global power (it is already the fourth largest economy in the world), Pakistan is coming to anarchy. Nevertheless, this neighbor is dominated by a military mindset, promising to find ways and means to reduce India’s progress. Peace for India, therefore, depends on who rule in Pakistan, which is almost always army. There is no easy solution to this problem, and India needs to prepare for war all the time.
Today’s Pakistan
Today, it is fashionable to talk about the disintegration of the world system. The deaf silence of the world for the ‘massacre’ in Gaza, killing innocent citizens at a dangerous rate, contradictions with dinner and noise – and many attempts of peace – being designed to end the Ukraine conflict. This dualism of the approach stems from a serious truth or reality, that is, that the world’s different standard is when it comes to the assassination of Asian and European people. If there is any more evidence to be demonstrated that the international order is falling and that ‘may be correct again’, one only has to see the struggle provoked by Pakistan, which was snatched by the West after the end of Pakistan’s loser once in the West.
An important ‘sub-text’ is also now available to intervene in big countries to end the conflict between small institutions. For example, Ukraine’s President Volodmi Zelancesi has stopped its important mineral resources to gain American support in the war against Russia. In the context of Pakistan, it is now understood that American interest in claiming to bring peace between Pakistan and India (despite the subsequent refusal) stems from Pakistan’s important minerals such as lithium, copper, and American interest on the rare earth. In addition, the internal fact for this is that the army in Pakistan, which is an important player in the regional sweepstake, is unlikely to forget the ‘gesture’ of the US President, even if there are very little substances for its claims.
Peace in the subcontinent today is a major casualties, and not only small (recently) not due to India-Pakistan struggle. Today in India and the region, a military faces Pakistan which has shed the cloak of democracy and today is a virtual military dictatorship. It has a title civilian Prime Minister, Shahbaz Sharif, who stands for his brother (Nawaz Sheriff), legally forced to hold an election office.
More important, the government is in ‘Hawk’ for the Army, and later after giving Imran Khan an opportunity to contest the election, now showing its true color. A few weeks ago, the current Army employees, General, now Field Marshal, Asim Munir announced that Pakistan is not a democracy, but a religious unit. He said that in the history of humanity, there were only two states based on ‘Kalima’. The first was Riyasat-e-Madina. 1,300 years later, second was Pakistan. He said that ‘Pakistan is different from Hindus in every possible aspect of life – religion, customs, traditions, thoughts and ambitions’ and that ‘Kashmir was a jugular vein’. The rest is history – a future in which further struggles should be estimated.
What do you expect next
Therefore, it can be useful to explain what one can expect from India-Pakistan struggle recently. It is certain that religious nationalism will recur not only in Pakistan, but in parts of South and West Asia. Next, the effect of the technical revolution is – limited conflict may occur. The conflict has exhibited criticism to ensure ‘growth dominance’ in the shortest time. Furthermore, one should recently see conflict as a ‘proxy struggle’, which is between military suppliers from both sides. For example, how his devices performed-Rafael vs. for the performance of the J-10 C of China, is more concerned than each other-expected to find better answers to their respective electronic signature during the operation of the future.
In addition, India and Pakistan have demonstrated their ability to flood the sky with cheap expenditureable reconnaissance and strike vehicles. Above all, there is a feeling that was known to the war of drones till date.
Recently, the Turkish lyricist drones of Pakistan and the use of J -10 C of China have been written during the conflict. It is said that India has responded using Kamikes drones and such. It is clear from all that air defense today includes many multi -level air defense systems. However, unproven, whether Pakistan can integrate an Indian target to a Pakistani ground radar, which can hit its goal to launch its target to launch its missile to enable a Chinese J-10C fighter as both China and Pakistan have been excluded. The latter is completely under the purview of speculation – essentially by Pakistan and China – although the vigorous and clearly revealed is the versatility of airborn early warning systems and system integration in place. All this has brought a new dimension to the air war. Today’s ‘noise’, therefore, is about all air-to-air engagement, which contains speculation whether the Chinese-origin weapons and air defense mechanisms have a measurement of India’s Rafale fighters and Western equipment. For equipment manufacturers, it is the effectiveness of ‘Kill Chain’ that matters the abilities of specific fighters, or more important.
However, it is proved that the Aacash quick response-to-Hawa missile provided India more than a sufficient cover by Russia’s S-400 and Barak (jointly developed with Israel). India was probably not needed to provide employment or display its last weapon, Brahmos (jointly developed with Russia). Pakistan has no answer clearly. Both sides, however, showed a better ability to enter the enemy’s jamming and stolen strategy for electronic counter-counter measures.
Technical war of future
Conflict, however, was displayed in without any uncertain terms that future wars would be compulsorily technical in nature. Technical dominance and speed with which increase will determine the curriculum of future wars. Currently, there is a lead over Pakistan in India as far as dominance is concerned, but it is not always a matter. It is also important to remember that in a fragmented, multipolar, geo -political environment, there will be very little scope or time to put restraint on a party, once a big struggle begins. Arms control agreements can also have very little relevance in future wars. Worse than, it is already the most famous mystery that new atomic warheads and cruise missiles are being designed and kept in readiness for use. The feeling needs to be dawn that the nuclear limit is becoming increasingly narrow.
It is German to mention here that while India’s land, sea and air position is more than enough to deal with a Pakistan, the situation can turn into a two-faceted war situation in both China and Pakistan. In such a situation, India will need to balance the joint capabilities of Pakistan and China and will throw some neglected aspects such as India’s dedicated satellite system and a shortage of satellite-based monitoring networks. This tolerates repetition that modern war depends on rapid space-based assets that it acts as an early warning system and for a variety of functions in addition to trekking and communication. This lacuna will need to remove in real time before the next outbreak of a major conflict, whether it is with Pakistan, China, or any other country. To repeat, India cannot afford to ignore its insufficiency as far as space-based capabilities are concerned. Space is a new domain of war, and India should be fully prepared for this event.
MK Narayanan, former Director, Intelligence Bureau; Former National Security Advisor; And former governor of West Bengal
Published – May 31, 2025 01:26 AM IST