The attack on Pahalgam has reignited old fault lines in South Asia, dragging two nuclear-armed neighbors once again into a cycle of accusation, countermeasure, and global concern. As the world marks the International Day of Multilateralism and Peace, what is unfolding between India and Pakistan illustrates how fragile regional stability remains, especially when long-standing disputes are mishandled or manipulated for political advantage.
On April 22, armed militants stormed a tourist site in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, killing 26 people. The victims, mostly Indian nationals and one Nepali citizen, were visiting what has been portrayed by the Indian government as a new hub of peace and tourism in the region.
This act of violence was horrific, but what followed has raised even more questions. Within minutes of the attack, without any credible investigation or evidence made public, Indian authorities directly blamed Pakistan. This immediate reaction did not stem from an ongoing inquiry or international cooperation but appeared to serve a political script that had already been prepared for such an incident.
Pakistan, in response, condemned the killings unequivocally and expressed sorrow over the loss of life. The Foreign Office issued a statement rejecting all accusations and distancing the Pakistani state from any involvement. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif convened a National Security Committee meeting the following day, bringing together military and civilian leadership to formulate a considered response.
Unlike India’s immediate actions, Pakistan’s posture has sought to frame the situation in terms of legal responsibility and regional stability. The government reiterated that any attempt to manipulate the Indus Waters Treaty would constitute an act of war and not be tolerated. Pakistan also announced reductions in diplomatic ties, closure of the Wagah border crossing, and a ban on Indian aircraft using its airspace.
Read More: Brink of War: How Many Times India & Pakistan Came Close to All-Out War
What makes the situation more serious is not simply the attack but India’s swift invocation of the Indus Waters Treaty. This 1960 agreement, brokered by the World Bank, has survived full-scale wars, political upheaval, and regional crises. Its abrupt suspension, absent any bilateral consultation, has introduced a new variable.
According to Pakistan’s former federal law minister Ahmer Bilal Soofi, this move violates several provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. It is not a symbolic gesture. Pakistan’s economy relies heavily on the Indus River system for its agricultural base. By undermining the treaty, India is not just escalating diplomatically it is pressing on Pakistan’s most critical vulnerability.
On the legal side, the unilateral “holding in abeyance” of the treaty lacks precedent. The Indus Waters Treaty does not allow for suspension or partial implementation. Under international law, as structured by the Vienna Convention, any such action must involve consultation and mutual agreement. India has done neither. There was no evidence of breach on Pakistan’s part. No consultations were initiated. And there has been no move toward international arbitration, as provided under Article IX of the treaty. These actions are therefore being interpreted in Islamabad as a hostile act, one designed to pressure Pakistan under the guise of security concerns.
This escalation has not taken place in a vacuum. In recent weeks, provocative speeches from Indian officials and television commentary have suggested a desire to settle scores well beyond the usual boundaries of political discourse. Defense Minister Rajnath Singh’s remarks about reaching not only the attackers but also those “behind the scenes” have only added fuel.
Read More: India Can’t Mask Terror Role, Oppression in IIOJK: Pakistan
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Modi’s early return from his foreign tour to chair a Cabinet Committee on Security meeting projected urgency and determination. However, what was lacking from the Indian side was any evidence, any substantive call for joint investigation, or any outreach to neutral observers.
Within Pakistan, the incident has sparked strong public debate. Many citizens and analysts see this episode as another attempt by India to bury the Kashmir dispute under the language of counterterrorism. The revocation of Article 370 and the continuous suppression of political voices in Jammu and Kashmir have not delivered the results India had promised. Attacks like the one in Pahalgam rupture the carefully cultivated image of normalcy.
The central Indian narrative that Kashmir is fully integrated and secure is now under renewed scrutiny, especially when security failures are met with foreign policy aggression instead of internal accountability.
There are also growing questions in India’s own public forums. Analysts have pointed out that the Baisaran picnic spot, where the incident occurred, had been open to tourists for months. Reviews, photographs, and social media posts prove this. The claim that security forces were unaware of its status is implausible.
If the area had been operational for so long, why was there no preventive deployment? Why were risk assessments not adjusted, especially with a high-profile visit from the U.S. Vice President taking place in the same timeframe? These are not small oversights. They point to deeper administrative contradictions between what is presented and what is actually happening on the ground.
Pakistan’s position has also gained quiet support in international legal and diplomatic circles. At a recent nuclear policy conference hosted by the Carnegie Foundation in Washington conversations among diplomats and scholars focused not on the Iran or Korean Peninsula files but on the renewed risk of a South Asian crisis. The concern was not theoretical.
Read More: Pakistan Rejects India’s Kashmir Claims as Baseless
Many attendees described this as the most serious threat of escalation since the Balakot episode in 2019. While world leaders, including those from the United States, the UK, France, and China, have expressed condolences to India, they have also avoided echoing Delhi’s accusations. There has been no global endorsement of India’s claim of Pakistan’s involvement, which itself signals a recognition that evidence must precede judgment.
As multilateral diplomacy is being celebrated around the world, it is worth asking why this crisis is not being used as an opportunity to return to dialogue. The structures exist. There are forums, treaties, and legal instruments in place. What is missing is political will. For Pakistan, the priority must be to push this issue through those multilateral routes—to bring the matter before the United Nations, to demand accountability through the World Bank’s arbitration framework, and to engage regional allies in quiet diplomacy that reinforces peace, not paralysis.
The attack in Pahalgam was tragic. But the way forward should not be written in haste or emotion. It must be shaped by law, diplomacy, and responsibility. Pakistan has signaled its openness to peaceful resolution while guarding its strategic interests. That approach deserves recognition, especially at a time when the alternative is loud rhetoric, unilateral moves, and spiraling consequences.
The region cannot afford another miscalculation. The people of South Asia deserve more than recycled hostility. They deserve leadership that knows how to pause, assess, and act with clarity.
*The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of TDI.
Dr. Farhat Asif
The writer is President, Institute of Peace and Diplomatic Studies. The writer teaches Conflict and Cooperation in South Asia to MPhil Students in IR Department. Riphah International University. The views expressed are her own and do not represent those of the Institutions she represents.
