SURAJ NANDREKAR
In light of the recent Pahalgam terror attack, India faces a critical juncture that demands a strong response, particularly from its leadership under Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
The call for retaliation is not merely a cry for vengeance; it is a testament to the need for India to assert itself against the cycle of violence that has claimed too many innocent lives.
The facts are clear: every significant terrorist act in India, particularly in volatile regions like Jammu and Kashmir, has deep-rooted ties to Pakistan.
This connection is not just anecdotal; historical patterns reveal that the origins of these attacks often trace back to the territories and groups Pakistan sponsors.
While Pakistan frequently disclaims direct involvement, the overwhelming evidence points to a systematic approach where non-state actors are armed, trained, and financed by entities within Pakistan, particularly the military and intelligence establishments.
As Modi contemplates his options, the question arises: who must India retaliate against? The answer is unequivocal—Pakistan.
While Pakistani authorities might argue about non-state actors and the complexity of their political landscape, it becomes increasingly evident that the line separating state-sponsored terrorism from independent acts is too blurred to ignore.
The reality is that when violence originates from within Pakistan, the country must bear the responsibility for the consequences.
Moreover, the perennial excuse of plausible deniability employed by Pakistan, invoking non-state actors as scapegoats, has become stale and unconvincing.
The notion that such actors operate entirely independently of the state apparatus is a narrative designed to obscure the truth and evade accountability. Historical instances, such as the Kargil incursion, reinforce the argument that the Pakistan army and government often operate in tandem with known terrorist factions.
By asserting that they were unaware of such actions, they inadvertently highlight the chaotic and convoluted governance structure that pervades Pakistan.
Given this context, there is a compelling case for a decisive and effective military response to the Pahalgam attack.
Such retaliation must be short, swift, and strategically calculated, aimed at minimizing civilian impact while sending a strong message that terrorism has dire repercussions.
The success of prior operations, like the 2019 Balakot airstrike, reflects a growing recognition within the Indian establishment that timely action supersedes the potential backlash from international observers.
Ultimately, Modi’s decision will echo beyond the borders of India—it will signal to both allies and adversaries that the nation is resolute in its pursuit of justice for its citizens.
A failure to act decisively risks emboldening terrorist groups and perpetuating a disturbing status quo of violence and suffering.
The imperative for India is clear. The nation must stand united in the face of terror and demonstrate that such acts will not go unanswered. Retaliation is not merely a matter of retribution; it is a necessary strategy in the broader pursuit of peace and stability in the region. India’s response to the Pahalgam attack must reflect its commitment to safeguarding its citizens and asserting its sovereignty against the scourge of terrorism.
