Ceasefire Brings a Pause, Not Peace
India-Pakistan tensions are just below the surface after a recent ceasefire. While open hostilities have ceased, India has signaled that the war against cross-border terrorism is far from being won. In Brussels, External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar served a stark message, making India’s stance unambiguously clear.
“It [Pakistan] is a nation highly steeped in its employment of terrorism as a tool of state policy. That is the entire problem,” Jaishankar said.
His words are indicative of India’s consistent position: that peace can never be achieved until terrorist groups, purportedly backed by Pakistan, continue to function.
Terror in Pahalgam Triggers Military Clash
The heightened conflict lately was a fallout of a terrorist act at Pahalgam, one of Kashmir’s most popular tourist resorts, where 26 civilian Hindus were killed. The savagery of the act shocked the nation and elicited fierce condemnations. India responded immediately, destroying suspected hideouts of terrorists within its side of the border through drone attacks, missiles, and aerial bombing.
The Indian army initiated a wave of attacks as part of Operation Sindoor, intended to destroy what it termed as terror outfits’ infrastructure in Pakistan-occupied lands. In response, Pakistan also attacked back militarily and the stand-off had four charged days of clashes.
“We Hit Deep. And We’ll Do It Again.”
As backroom ceasefire negotiations were underway, India attacked a number of Pakistani airfields. Jaishankar remembered the precision and intensity of the Indian response.
“As far as I’m concerned, whether the Rafale was effective or quite frankly whether other systems were effective — to me the proof of the pudding is the destroyed and disabled airfields on the Pakistani side… The fighting ceased on the 10th for one reason and one reason only, which was that on the 10th morning we struck these eight Pakistani… airfields and disabled them.”
In spite of Pakistan’s allegations of shooting down Indian aircraft, Jaishankar claimed that the Indian military had the edge with surgical and continuous targeting.
A Harsh Warning to Islamabad
Jaishankar was clear in his threat that India will not hold back on terrorism anymore.
We are not going to live with it… if you keep doing the kind of barbaric things which they did in April, then there is going to be retribution… And we don’t care where they are. If they are deep in Pakistan, we will go deep into Pakistan.
His statement bore not only a threat, but a promise that any subsequent attack will trigger a strong reaction—irrespective of global frontiers.
Pakistan Puts Pressure on Talks, But on Wider Terms
On the other hand, Pakistan has indicated it is receptive to talking to India. But Islamabad has declared that the talks have to be comprehensive—touching not only terrorism but also trade, water rights, and the future of Kashmir. Pakistani leaders painted their stance as “ready but not desperate” for talks.
They condemned India’s actions to restrict the Indus Waters Treaty, granting essential water flow to Pakistani agricultural fields, and approached U.S. leadership for engagement to broker a greater peace accord.
Global Powers Weigh In
India’s strong stance has met with comprehension in certain quarters of the world community. The United Kingdom has more recently committed better counter-terrorism coordination with India in response to the conflict. Jaishankar is set to hold discussions with France to enhance mutual cooperation on fighting terror, in the meantime.
India welcomed the U.K. for unambiguously denouncing the Pahalgam attack, reiterating the need for international cohesion in resisting terror.
“Won’t equate perpetrators of evil with victims… thanks UK for condemning Pahalgam attack.”
A Fragile Truce in a Volatile Region
The new ceasefire has suspended fighting temporarily, but levels of tension remain high on both sides. India’s message is clear: terrorism will be met with swift, forceful response. Pakistan is calling for diplomacy, but the gap between their narratives remains wide.
In a neighborhood blanketed by nuclear threats and centuries of hatred, even a momentary cease-fire can be like dancing along a tightrope. As each nation thinks ahead to its next step, the world waits—hoping that diplomacy will triumph over destruction, and that threats do not turn into bombs.
