Recent military tensions between India and Pakistan highlight significant religious undertones shaping national sentiments and policies. The Modi government reframes conflict narratives while both nations develop drone capabilities for warfare. Global diplomatic efforts are underway but face complexities, raising concerns for the future prospects of peace in the region.
The recent military skirmish between India and Pakistan has shown how deeply entwined religion is in these tensions. As India employed its air force to strike Pakistan in early May, the public sentiment within Pakistan became a significant factor when the government contemplated its response. Many citizens expressed their approval of the military’s counteractions against India, particularly in light of perceived injustices against the substantial Muslim minority in India. In the capital, Islamabad, officials encouraged community members to volunteer for civil defense efforts. Meanwhile, world powers like the United States and China urged diplomatic resolutions, ambiguity surrounding leadership roles in those discussions remained.
Efforts to de-escalate the situation involved Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who spoke with both Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar and Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. “At this moment in time, there is one thing that has to stop which is a back-and-forth and a continuation,” said State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce at a May 8 press briefing, highlighting the urgency of the matter. Other nations, keen on maintaining peace in South Asia, also intervened. Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi minister of state for foreign affairs, made a surprise visit to India, as did Iran’s foreign minister, Syed Abbas Aragchi.
In India, the Modi administration worked steadily to frame the conflict to its advantage, leaning heavily into religious narratives. The military operation against Pakistan was referred to as “Sindoor,” an emblematic symbol often associated with Hindu brides, hinting at a deeper emotional resonance linked to the complex relationship between the two nations. Pravin Sawhney, an editor of an Indian defense magazine, voiced concerns over the religious implications of the operation’s name, suggesting that such politicization could hurt military unity. “A political message was being sent to the people of India, that Hindus were killed in Kashmir, so we have to take revenge,” he argued.
On May 7, an incident occurred that raised alarm among journalists when the Indian publication The Hindu retracted a social media post that suggested Indian jets had been downed, citing lack of official confirmation. This incident sparked fears about increased censorship under the Modi government. The Global Government Affairs team on X reported that they had been instructed to block over 8,000 accounts in India, an act they deemed detrimental to free speech rights. Beyond these developments, intense exchanges of artillery fire continued across the Line of Control in Kashmir, with civilians there anxiously preparing for another night of violence.
Residents on both sides of the border expressed escalating frustration. An account from The New York Times described how residents felt that this latest cycle of violence was among the worst they had faced in decades. “It’s better that both countries go for a nuclear war and kill us all,” lamented a 70-year-old man from Kashmir, reflecting the sheer desperation felt by many. He emphasized the need for an end to the constant fear and unrest.
India’s response to the conflict has likely exacerbated local resentment, particularly through actions that seen as heavy-handed. Reports indicate demolitions of homes believed to belong to those discontent with Indian rule, alongside a push for Hindu resettlement in this contested area. This demographic shift seems aimed at diluting the Muslim-majority presence. As both nations further develop their drone capabilities and use them actively, tensions remain high. On May 10, a day after claiming drone incursions over Indian skies, Pakistan accused an Indian airbase of missile strikes, signaling a continuation of hostilities.
The drone warfare aspect is particularly noteworthy. Both countries have significantly expanded their drone technologies and capabilities, drawing from domestic manufacturing and foreign support. Yet, neither has the capability to deploy nuclear munitions via drones. James Patton Rogers, a drone expert from Cornell University, acknowledges the gravity of conflict escalation but observes that drones typically serve as a measured response within military strategies. With this being the first instance of direct drone engagement between India and Pakistan, many analysts wonder how it could alter global perceptions of their long-standing rivalry, akin to the shift witnessed post their entry into the nuclear domain in the 1990s.
The interplay of religion and militarized conflict between India and Pakistan is becoming increasingly pronounced, as evidenced by the recent military exchanges and public reactions. The Modi government’s framing of the conflict through a religious lens raises alarms over potential long-term consequences for secular governance in India. Meanwhile, the introduction of drone warfare has transformed traditional combat dynamics, prompting new concerns and responses. Overall, these developments underline a complex and heightened state of affairs in South Asia.
Original Source: tribune.com.pk
