AS the world bears witness to the simmering tensions between two nuclear-armed neighbours, what emerges is not merely a geopolitical standoff, but a troubling reflection of a deeper malaise, a cycle of accusation, retaliation, and entrenched mistrust that imperils not just the fragile peace of South Asia, but the moral conscience of the global order.
The unfortunate events of April 22, 2025, in Pahalgam, where many lives were lost in the troubled valley of Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK) have not only deepened the wounds of a long-disputed land, but have become a mirror to the region’s unresolved past and an ominous signpost to what the future may hold if wisdom does not prevail.
The Indian government was swift to accuse Pakistan of having cross-border links to the attackers, despite provid-ing no verifiable evidence.
The newly emerged militant group, Kashmir Resistance, took responsibility for the attack, yet India went ahead with retaliatory diplomatic actions.
Pakistani diplomats were expelled, Indian diplomats were recalled, the Indus Waters Treaty was suspended, and even the vital Wagah border crossing was closed.
These actions speak of calculated aggression.
They also underline a worrying trend, India’s tendency to use tragic incidents to escalate tension, pursue aggressive nationalist policies, and galvanize domestic political support, even if it comes at the cost of regional stability.
Pakistan, by contrast, responded with measured indignation.
At a meeting of the National Security Committee chaired by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, the Pakistan not only rejected India’s politically motivated and legally baseless accusations, but also reaffirmed its peaceful intentions.
In a dignified but firm tone, Pakistan declared its right to protect its national interests, especially regarding the water rights granted under the Indus Waters Treaty, which is now being unilaterally jeopardized by India.
The NSC’s statement was clear, any attempt to disrupt Pakistan’s water flow will be treated as an act of war, not a declaration of one, but a reminder of the seriousness of such provocation.
Crucially, this is not the only example of the volatility Pakistan has endured with remarkable restraint.
In March 2025, a deadly attack on Jafar-Express in Balochistan, killed dozens of innocent Pakistani citizens.
The intelligence and investigative authorities gathered credible, verified evidences directly linking the attack to Indian-backed elements.
And yet, in a demonstration of political maturity and diplomatic patience, Pakistan did not immediately rush to blame or seek retaliation.
The incident was not used to incite hatred or mobilize international outrage, instead, Paki-stan chose to proceed silently, focusing on the victims, on justice, and on regional peace.
This contrast underscores the differing approaches of India and Pakistan in crisis management.
India, under Prime Minister Modi’s leadership, often adopts a confrontational stance, exemplified by the 2019 revocation of Article 370, which intensified Kashmiri alienation.
While India claims development, the reality is one of repression and economic hardship.
Pakistan, in contrast, upholds Kashmiris’ right to self-determination through diplomacy and moral support, despite provocation and state-sponsored terrorism, as evidenced by Commander Kulbhushan Jadhav’s confession.
Pakistan’s commitment to peace and justice sharply contrasts with India’s escalation.
The Kashmir crisis originates from Partition’s unhealed wounds, the denial of democratic rights to Kashmiri Muslims, and rising exclusivist nationalism in India.
Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state with one of the finest armies in the region, does not fear India.
But it also knows, as should India, that true strength lies in restraint, and real victory is peace.
Pakistan, despite facing security, economic, and diplomatic challenges, continues to act as the responsible party.
It has shown restraint in Balochistan.
It has appealed to international law in Kashmir.
And it has remained committed to peace, even when provoked.
It is not Pakistan, but the world that must now ask: who truly benefits from continued conflict?
Who seeks to distract from domestic failures with cross-border chaos?
Let the tragedy of Pahalgam not be used to poison an already fragile environment.
Let Jafar Express incident serves as a quiet testament to Pakistan’s moral patience.
Let the subcontinent not drift into another abyss of war.
Let wisdom prevail, Pakistan’s military strength is undeniable, its people resilient, and its will unshaken, but power, when not tempered by wisdom, becomes dangerous.
That is why Pakistan chooses peace, not because it lacks options, but because it values lives over leverage.
This region does not need more battles, it needs better choices, and Pakistan is making them.
But make no mistake, peace is Pakistan’s offer, not its obligation.
If provoked beyond reason, it has the capability and the resolve to defend its sovereignty with full force.
So the message is clear, do not mistake restraint for weakness, nor patience for passivity.
Pakistan chooses peace but peace must be mutual.
For if pushed, Pakistan knows how to respond.
And when it does, it won’t be a question of capability, only of necessity.
In this game of borders, blame, and balance, Pakistan stands firm, not to conquer, but to coexist.
It chooses peace, but it is prepared for every possibility.
Let the wiser path be taken.
Let this region prove that strength and peace can walk hand in hand.
—The writer is PhD in Political Science, and visiting faculty at QAU Islamabad. (zafarkhansafdar@yahoo.com)
