Deterrence on a Deadline: India, Pakistan, and the New Escalation Paradigm
India and Pakistan are now embroiled in their most serious military confrontation in years, with hostilities expanding across air, land, and unmanned domains. Following the May 7 cross-border strikes under Operation Sindoor, India launched a calibrated military offensive on Thursday targeting Pakistani air defence radars in Lahore. The move came after Pakistan attempted coordinated drone and missile attacks on six Indian military bases — an act New Delhi described as a significant escalation warranting a “domain- and scale-matched” response.
India maintains that its posture remains retaliatory and proportionate. But the reality is clear: both sides are now operating at higher rungs of the escalation ladder — with little buffer between crisis management and open conflict.
Tensions between India and Pakistan have reached their highest point since the 2019 Balakot airstrikes, with the unfolding crisis now entering a volatile and dangerous phase. What began as a measured Indian response to the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack has since evolved into a broad-spectrum confrontation involving precision airstrikes, drone warfare, missile exchanges, and sustained cross-border artillery fire. As Operation Sindoor enters its second week, the space between deterrence and escalation is narrowing rapidly, testing the strategic thresholds of both nuclear-armed states.
From Targeted Retaliation to Multi-Domain Conflict
India's initial response on May 7 was framed as a calibrated strike on terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoJK), targeting nine sites affiliated with Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and Hizbul Mujahideen. The operation was described as focused, non-escalatory, and designed to avoid civilian and military targets. However, the conflict has since deepened following a wave of Pakistani retaliatory actions.
On the night of May 7–8, Pakistan launched a large-scale assault involving over 50 drones, loitering munitions, and missile strikes against Indian military bases in Awantipura, Jammu, Amritsar, Ludhiana, Bhuj, and Srinagar. India's air defence forces successfully intercepted the attacks using a combination of L-70 guns, Schilka platforms, Zu-23mm cannons, and counter-unmanned aerial systems (UAS). The drone swarm marked Pakistan’s most sophisticated use of asymmetric airpower to date. In response, India launched fresh retaliatory strikes targeting Pakistani air defence installations in Lahore, marking a doctrinal shift from striking non-state actors to hitting state military infrastructure. According to the Ministry of Defence, the strikes were precise and proportionate, aimed at avoiding civilian harm while signalling India’s intent to match the scale and domain of any Pakistani provocation. This was followed by intense firing along the LoC and International Border (IB) by Pakistan on late May 8. Pakistan reportedly used swarm drones to take down key Indian infrastructure including Jammu airport. Local media reports suggest that India was able to neutralise all threat along the LoC and IB. Worth noting is that the fighting is not localised to the LoC anymore and now spread across the complete border (including states of Rajasthan and Punjab).
Deterrence Under Pressure
At the heart of this confrontation lies a critical question: can deterrence be preserved without escalation? India’s evolving doctrine under Prime Minister Modi has moved decisively away from the strategic restraint model of previous decades. Instead, it reflects a willingness to impose real costs on Pakistan’s military establishment when faced with proxy attacks or cross-border aggression.
Operation Sindoor exemplifies a shift toward active deterrence—a strategy that blurs the lines between response and pre-emption, especially when faced with rapid, multi-domain threats. The Indian military’s ability to intercept drone swarms and conduct retaliatory strikes with minimal collateral damage suggests a more agile, responsive posture. However, it also risks compressing the escalation ladder, reducing the space for diplomatic pause or recalibration.
Pakistan, for its part, faces a credibility dilemma. Its military spokesperson has denounced India’s actions as "cowardly" and claimed the downing of Indian aircraft and damage to key installations. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has called India’s strikes an "act of war," while vowing to respond "at a time and place of Pakistan’s choosing."
Though nuclear rhetoric has resurfaced, Pakistan’s actual responses remain conventional. The utility of invoking nuclear thresholds has diminished, particularly given past patterns of behaviour, such as the 2019 post-Balakot episode where nuclear posturing did not translate into action.
Domestic Constraints and Regional Volatility
Civilian casualties and internal political dynamics are further complicating crisis management. India has reported 16 civilian deaths due to Pakistani shelling in Jammu and Kashmir, with numerous others injured across Kupwara, Uri, and Poonch. Pakistani state media has focused on civilian deaths allegedly caused by Indian strikes, creating a charged narrative environment on both sides. Public opinion and domestic politics constrain strategic decision-making. In India, the Modi government faces pressure to demonstrate strength without inviting a prolonged conflict. In Pakistan, the military’s internal legitimacy is fragile, especially after the contested 2024 elections. For General Asim Munir, the confrontation with India provides a politically expedient rallying point.
Markets and logistics are already affected. India’s Sensex fell over 700 points during the latest flare-up, while Pakistan’s KSE-30 index plunged over 7%, triggering a halt in trading. Aviation and supply chains across border states remain disrupted, with airspace closures on both sides.
The Shortening Escalation Ladder
Perhaps the most alarming development is the compression of the escalation ladder. In past crises, action and reaction were spaced over days or weeks, allowing for signalling, backchannel diplomacy, and international mediation. In this crisis, the timeline has collapsed: drone attacks are launched, intercepted, and retaliated against within hours. The strategic danger lies in miscalculation. With both militaries operating on high alert, even a limited tactical error could trigger a disproportionate strategic response. The erosion of time and space for crisis management is now the central risk factor.
India has briefed key allies including the US, UK, Russia, and Saudi Arabia, framing its actions as defensive and proportionate. But with global attention divided, international actors have so far refrained from formal mediation. China has aligned more closely with Pakistan’s narrative, calling for a "neutral investigation."
Outlook: Measured Resolve or Uncontrolled Escalation?
New Delhi continues to insist that its goal is de-escalation—but only if Pakistan halts its aggression. Foreign Minister Jaishankar has warned that any further attacks will be met with a "very, very firm response," signalling a willingness to escalate further if required. The coming days will test whether this crisis stabilises or escalates further. India’s doctrinal shift suggests it is prepared to fight short, sharp engagements to impose deterrence costs without triggering a full-scale war. Yet Pakistan’s counter-options are narrowing, and the risk of a miscalculated overreaction remains high.
What remains uncertain is whether both sides can re-establish a credible buffer between military action and strategic collapse. As Operation Sindoor evolves, the Indo-Pakistani conflict is no longer about a single provocation—it is now about the future of deterrence in an increasingly compressed and volatile landscape.