THE four-day war between India and Pakistan ended in a ceasefire through the American president’s mediation.
Although embarrassed Indian officials have been denying the ‘mediatory’ aspect of the ceasefire and pretending that Pakistan ‘begged’ for one during the DGMOs’ talks, the message was clear — India’s denials notwithstanding, Pakistan had established its air superiority and the US had played a role in the ceasefire.
The debate in India’s Lok Sabha was equally telling as the main opposition party, Congress, tore apart the Modi government’s entire modus operandi when it launched Operation Sindoor against Pakistan. Therefore, it turned out to be a joust between the opposition and the government to score brownie points and address their respective domestic constituencies, rather than focusing on the India-Pakistan war. However, Donald Trump’s repeated assertion that he mediated between Pakistan and India became the main bone of contention.
There is a lull between Pakistan and India, but Mr Modi calls it a ‘pause’ in Operation Sindoor, implying that New Delhi may resume military operations against Pakistan. For Pakistan, India’s action of holding the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance and blocking water to Pakistan would be tantamount to an act of war. Both sides have drawn the battle lines, creating an explosive situation with potentially serious consequences. Unfortunately, there is no viable mechanism that can intercede between the two countries to maintain peace, a challenge that is becoming increasingly serious for the two nuclear states.
In the past, whenever India and Pakistan went to war, they employed mediating approaches to cool tensions, and the senior generation on both sides exercised a calming effect. However, with time, this window of opportunity is closing; at least this is the impression that informs the present environment between the two countries.
The generational gap has emerged as a significant factor in creating distance between the two countries; the new generation is unaware of their shared past and remains susceptible to the poisonous narratives each side feeds to its populace. In doing so, both are getting sucked into a potentially destructive exercise in one-upmanship. The social media debate between Gen Z in the two countries is reflective of this cancerous menace. The cumulative impact, if unchecked, would be the annihilation of adversaries with no remorse. Mutual hatred, powered by AI, will lead to immeasurable consequences.
In the past, whenever India and Pakistan went to war, they employed mediating approaches to cool tensions.
What are the remedies available to the two countries to pre-empt a future conflagration? While many attempts have been made in the past to address the thorny issues, and there were occasions when the two could have reached an agreement, something or the other would happen to mire them in a Sisyphean dilemma (recall Siachen in 1992 and Musharraf’s four-point formula).
Nevertheless, the two neighbours, with mutually assured destruction capabilities, cannot afford to remain disengaged or ignore each other. While the Modi government may be loath to engage Pakistan in a meaningful way, it cannot ignore Pakistan if India is interested in peace and stability in the region — the four-day war was ample proof of Pakistan’s resilience and prowess.
Despite discouraging vibes and the Hindutva dispensation’s chokehold on the country’s narrative, the ground realities leave little option for the Indian establishment but to continue the stalemate or alter the ground situation from a military perspective.
The following steps are worth trying out in order to address each other’s concerns:
First, the role of Track II has always been important in defusing tensions or at least providing an opportunity to understand each other’s point of view, adjust positions, and try to evolve a common language to iron out differences. The hard-line positions adopted by the two governments have created a significant vacuum that requires immediate reconsideration. Influential voices representing major stakeholders on both sides should meet in a Track II format to attempt to break the stalemate. A dialogue among think tanks in the two countries can also be explored.
Second, the two countries should consider exchanging high commissioners without further delay, restore the hotline between the foreign secretaries, earnestly implement the CBMs already agreed upon by the two sides, initiate action to resume bilateral trade and work on religious tourism.
Third, the issue of terrorism should be resolved comprehensively, with the two countries addressing each other’s grievances. The national security advisers of the two countries should chart out the future course of action.
Fourth, there is a three-way competition in which Pakistan and China are on one side, and India on the other, leaving the latter isolated and vulnerable in a two-front situation. This dilemma can be resolved through a trilateral mechanism between Pakistan, China and India. Such an arrangement already exists between China, India and Russia, although it is currently dormant. Recently, Afghanistan and Pakistan met through Chinese mediation to resolve their issues, with a positive outcome. This would require a change in mindset to prioritise dialogue as equals and eschew the pretence of hegemony.
The above proposals may not be new, but they merit serious consideration. Here, India will have to realise that its rhetoric of ignoring Pakistan or making it ‘irrelevant’ has backfired, as evidenced in the four-day skirmishes and international support for Pakistan’s narrative based on transparency and its offer of neutral inquiry in the Pahalgam incident.
Mr Modi will have to shun brinkmanship and his ‘new normal’ for Pakistan, which has proven twice (Balakot and the recent four-day war) that it has the capacity and will to take India head on. Hence, for India, repeating tried and failed tactics would be counterproductive. The best course is to strive for a détente for the good of the two neighbours and the region.
The writer is a former ambassador of Pakistan in Iran and the UAE. He is a former special representative of Pakistan for Afghanistan and currently serves as a senior research fellow at the Islamabad Policy Research Institute.
Published in Dawn, August 9th, 2025
