Responding to the Terror Attack in Pahalgam: Embracing Escalatory Credibility

The terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, which tragically claimed 26 lives, primarily tourists, represents a significant security challenge for India. Occurring during the peak tourist season and coinciding with a high-profile visit, the attack appeared strategically calculated to inflict maximum casualties and disrupt the return to normalcy. This incident, following other attacks in the Jammu region like the Reasi massacre, highlights an evolving militant strategy focused on targeting civilians and disrupting normal life. India has attributed the attack to Pakistan-backed cross-border terrorism, a claim denied by Pakistan. In the immediate aftermath, India initiated a series of stern diplomatic and economic measures. This context necessitates a critical examination of India’s response framework, particularly the argument for embracing a strategy of escalatory credibility – not escalation for its own sake, but the credible ability and demonstrated willingness to impose substantial costs when red lines are crossed.

Context of the Pahalgam Attack and India’s Response Calculus

• The Pahalgam terror attack in 24th April 2025 resulted in the deaths of 26 people, predominantly tourists, making it one of the deadliest attacks on civilians in the region in years. Pahalgam terror attack claimed 26 lives, mostly tourists.
• The timing during the peak tourist season and a high-level foreign visit suggests a deliberate attempt by perpetrators to maximise impact and garner international attention. The attack occurred during the tourist season and a US Vice-President’s visit, suggesting a calculated move. 
• The attack follows other recent incidents in the Jammu region, indicating a potential shift in the geographical focus and targets of militant activities.
• India promptly attributed the attack to Pakistan-backed cross-border terrorism, a charge Pakistan denied. 
• Prime Minister Narendra Modi stated that those responsible would be identified, tracked, and punished. 
• India immediately implemented stringent diplomatic and economic measures against Pakistan.
• These immediate actions signal India’s resolve to impose tangible costs on Pakistan for its alleged support of terrorism and link such support directly to bilateral relations.

India’s Immediate Diplomatic and Economic Responses Post-Pahalgam

•  India suspends Indus Water Treaty: India decided to put the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, stating its continuation was contingent upon Pakistan ceasing support for terrorism. 
• India closes Attari border : The Attari-Wagah border was closed for all movement, including trade and passenger traffic, significantly impacting bilateral economic and human exchanges. 
• India cancels visas to Pakistanis: Visas issued to Pakistani citizens were cancelled, restricting cross-border movement. 
• India expels Pakistani defense advisors: Pakistani defense advisors were expelled from India, a clear diplomatic downgrading. 
• India reduces embassy staff in Islamabad: Embassy staff in Islamabad were reduced, further scaling back diplomatic ties.

These multi-pronged actions represent a significant shift from relying solely on condemnation, demonstrating India’s capacity and willingness to utilize diplomatic and economic levers to impose costs.

The Framework of Escalatory Credibility in Indian Strategy

• Definition: Escalatory credibility is the demonstrated capability and political will of a state to systematically increase the costs imposed on an adversary in response to hostile actions, particularly state-sponsored terrorism.
• Core Objective: The fundamental aim is deterrence – to modify the adversary’s behaviour by making the perceived costs of supporting terrorism significantly higher than any perceived benefits.
• Evolution of India’s Stance: Historically, India largely adopted a posture of strategic restraint in response to major terror attacks. However, significant incidents like the 2008 Mumbai attacks, followed by the Uri (2016) and Pulwama (2019) attacks, prompted a re-evaluation of this approach.
• Post-Uri and Pulwama Shift: The surgical strikes following Uri and the Balakot airstrike after Pulwama marked a crucial shift towards lowering the threshold for kinetic responses against terrorist infrastructure within Pakistan. India’s counter-terrorist air strike within Pakistan marks a paradigm shift in its security strategy. These actions were intended to demonstrate India’s resolve and establish a credible threat of punitive retaliation.
• Essential Components: Building escalatory credibility necessitates clearly defined ‘red lines’ (even if not always publicly articulated) whose violation triggers a response, and possessing the requisite diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and potential covert capabilities to execute such responses effectively.

Tools for Exercising Escalatory Credibility

A comprehensive framework of escalatory credibility employs a diverse range of tools across multiple domains to impose consequences on the adversary:

• Diplomatic Means:
  • Involves isolating the sponsoring state on the global stage through bilateral and multilateral engagements.
  • Post-Pahalgam measures like downgrading diplomatic relations and expelling officials are direct diplomatic costs. India announces robust diplomatic measures against Pakistan after Kashmir attack.
  • Persistent efforts to list Pakistan-based terrorist entities and individuals under international sanctions regimes, such as those by the UN Security Council.
  • Highlighting the adversary’s non-compliance with international counter-terrorism norms in various global forums.
• Economic Means:
  • Leveraging economic instruments to impose financial or trade-related costs.
  • The decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty, while complex and subject to international law, signals a willingness to review foundational bilateral agreements based on security concerns. India suspends Indus Water Treaty.
  • Closing key trade routes like the Attari-Wagah border inflicts direct economic pain and disrupts normal commerce. Pakistan halts trade and India revokes visas as retaliatory measures ramp up after Kashmir killings.
  • Working through international bodies like the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) to pressure the adversary on terror financing compliance.
• Covert Means:
  • Involves deniable or unacknowledged operations targeting terrorist infrastructure, leadership, or capabilities.
  • While rarely officially confirmed, reports in prominent international media, such as The Washington Post, have alleged Indian involvement in targeted killings within Pakistan. RAW linked to assassinations in Pakistan, report exposes India’s covert campaign.
  • Historical accounts and strategic analyses have discussed the potential use of covert capabilities for counter-retaliation. From the India Today Archives (2016): How to punish Pakistan.
  • The utility of covert means lies in their potential deniability, which can help manage escalation, but they carry significant risks of exposure and unintended consequences. Not War, Not Peace: Motivating Pakistan to Prevent Cross-Border Terrorism.

Defining and Responding to Red Lines

• Identification of Red Lines: While India does not typically articulate specific red lines publicly, major terrorist attacks resulting in mass casualties, particularly those targeting civilians or critical security assets, function as de facto red lines that necessitate a response beyond routine counter-terrorism operations. Major terror attacks causing significant casualties often serve as de facto red lines. The Uri, Pulwama, and now Pahalgam attacks fall into this category.
• Response Calibration: A credible response to crossing a red line must be carefully calibrated to achieve multiple objectives:
  • Impose significant and palpable costs on the sponsoring entity/state.
  • Ensure the adversary perceives the response as directly linked to their hostile action.
  • Deter future attacks by raising the perceived risk and cost for the adversary.
  • Crucially, avoid triggering uncontrolled or disproportionate escalation, especially given the nuclear backdrop. Responses need to be calibrated to demonstrate resolve and impose costs without triggering disproportionate escalation.

Challenges in Implementing Escalatory Credibility

Operationalizing an escalatory credibility framework between nuclear-armed neighbours like India and Pakistan is fraught with inherent challenges:

• Nuclear Overhang: The presence of nuclear weapons on both sides places an undeniable ceiling on conventional military escalation and necessitates extreme caution to prevent inadvertent escalation to the nuclear level. India and Pakistan on a steep escalatory ladder to war?
• Risk of Miscalculation: Accurately predicting the adversary’s response to calibrated actions is inherently difficult, increasing the potential for miscalculation that could spiral into unintended conflict. Be Prepared for an India-Pakistan Limited War?
• International Constraints: Escalatory actions often attract immediate attention and calls for de-escalation from global powers, potentially limiting India’s strategic autonomy and operational choices. Escalatory actions often draw international attention and calls for de-escalation from global powers.
• Intelligence Gaps: Effective targeted responses, whether kinetic or covert, rely heavily on precise, real-time, and actionable intelligence, which remains a persistent challenge in hostile territories.
• Maintaining Secrecy: The efficacy of covert means is dependent on maintaining secrecy; any exposure can lead to significant diplomatic fallout and complicate the overall strategy.
• Domestic Political Compulsions: Governments often face strong domestic pressure for a robust response after major attacks, which can influence decision-making processes and potentially constrain flexibility.

Way Forward: Refining the Response Strategy

To effectively counter cross-border terrorism and enhance escalatory credibility, India needs a multi-faceted approach:

• Integrated Response Mechanism: Develop a seamless coordination mechanism integrating diplomatic, economic, intelligence, and security agencies for a unified, calibrated, and timely response.
• Strategic Communication: Refine strategic communication to clearly signal India’s red lines and the consequences of crossing them, aimed at deterring the adversary while managing domestic and international perceptions.
• Enhancing Capabilities: Continuously invest in and enhance intelligence gathering, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities. Develop specialized, agile units capable of conducting targeted, rapid response operations across various domains.
• Deepening International Partnerships: Continue to build a global coalition against state sponsorship of terrorism and utilize multilateral platforms like the UN, FATF, and others to isolate the adversary and impose collective costs.
• Understanding Adversary Dynamics: Foster deeper understanding of the internal political, economic, and military dynamics within the adversary state to better anticipate reactions and manage escalation risks.
• Focus on Long-Term Deterrence: The ultimate goal is not merely punitive retaliation but establishing a credible, long-term deterrent framework that makes the cost of sponsoring anti-India terrorism prohibitive for the adversary.

Conclusion

The tragic terror attack in Pahalgam underscores the enduring threat posed by cross-border terrorism and necessitates a robust and dynamic response strategy. Embracing a framework of escalatory credibility – demonstrating the ability and willingness to impose increasing costs through diplomatic, economic, and potentially covert means when red lines are violated – offers a crucial pathway to deter future attacks and enhance India’s security posture. While India’s immediate response post-Pahalgam showcased the use of diplomatic and economic levers, successfully operationalizing a comprehensive escalatory credibility framework requires navigating the complex challenges posed by the nuclear environment, potential miscalculation, international dynamics, and the imperative for precise intelligence. The focus must remain on calibrated, impactful actions that effectively impose pain on the adversary’s calculus without triggering unintended, wider conflict, thereby building a sustainable deterrent against terrorism.

Source :

1. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/pahalgam-terror-attack-india-responds-with-5-stern-actions-pakistan-on-edge-top-developments/articleshow/120569883.cms
2. https://www.dhakatribune.com/world/south-asia/379519/india-targets-pakistan-with-diplomatic-moves-after
3. https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20250424-india-will-identify-track-and-punish-kashmir-attack-perpetrators-modi-says
4. https://www.gulftoday.ae/news/2025/04/23/india-announces-robust-diplomatic-measures-against-pakistan-after-kashmir-attack
5. https://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-acts-pakistan-pahalgam-attack-indus-water-treaty-attari-9961676/