A recent seminar at the Pakistan Institute of International Affairs explored various dimensions of the ongoing Pakistan-India conflict, highlighting critical political, military, and environmental issues.
The session underscored the importance of diverse perspectives, especially from younger voices, on the recent escalation between the two countries. It traced the recent developments, noting how India attributed responsibility to Pakistan for the Pahalgam attack on April 22 without substantial evidence—an intelligence failure attributed to India. This led to India suspending the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960, with Pakistan responding by suspending the Simla Agreement of 1972.
Further escalation occurred with India’s Operation Sindoor on May 7, followed by Pakistan’s retaliation on May 10. A ceasefire was eventually brokered after intervention by the U.S. administration.
A detailed analysis of water resources revealed the complexities surrounding the Indus River system. While India has the theoretical capability to restrict water flow to Pakistan, doing so would risk flooding its own upper regions and would require massive infrastructure investments spanning years and billions of dollars. During dry seasons, however, water scarcity remains a critical concern for Pakistan’s agriculture, potentially impacting crop yields.
The seminar also discussed the concept of “weaponizing” water, where the upper riparian state controls sudden water releases to cause downstream flooding. In this context, Pakistan is the lower riparian state relative to India, while India holds the lower riparian position vis-à-vis China on the Brahmaputra River—indicating that China could similarly restrict India’s water supply.
Military and political interests were analyzed through the lens of Pakistan-China cooperation, highlighting the deployment of Chinese-origin technologies by Pakistan to challenge Indian surveillance and communications. This shift reflects Pakistan’s strategic innovation and challenges long-standing perceptions of military asymmetry in the region.
Cyber warfare emerged as another critical front, with both Indian and Pakistani intelligence agencies, along with civilian actors, engaging in hacking, data breaches, and misinformation campaigns. The seminar stressed the significance of the “War of Narratives,” where public perception often holds more weight than the short-lived actual conflict.
The Kashmir situation remains tense, with reports of intensified crackdowns and detentions by Indian authorities following the Pahalgam incident, a trend likely to continue.
Media misinformation on both sides was highlighted, including false reports of attacks and captures that exacerbate tensions and confusion among the public.
Finally, the seminar addressed broader regional and global responses, emphasizing that the conflict’s complexity extends beyond military actions to include economic, diplomatic, and political dimensions. While recognizing the professionalism of Pakistan’s armed forces, participants called attention to the pressing need for improved governance within the country.
A notable takeaway from the session was an ironic acknowledgment that Indian policies have, in some ways, fostered greater unity within Pakistan.
