Even after facing a moment of profound embarrassment at the hands of Pakistan, India’s political and military leadership appear to be learning all the wrong lessons. The drums of war still beat loudly in Indian media studios, echoing with nationalist zeal and fanciful calls for vengeance. From the comfort of their studios, anchors and pundits wax lyrical about cross-border strikes, air raids, and imagined victories. But war, unlike myth, does not unfold with divine interventions or heroic certainty. The Mahabharata might offer drama and moral dilemmas, but modern warfare requires intelligence, strategy and, above all, restraint. India, at this juncture, would be wise to pause and reflect—not on ancient epics—but on its place in a rapidly shifting geopolitical landscape.
The recent military confrontation, however fleeting, delivered unexpected benefits for Pakistan. Beyond defending its airspace, Pakistan has managed to reposition itself on the global stage with a renewed sense of purpose and strategic clarity. For a nation often painted into a corner—accused, misunderstood, and diplomatically isolated—this episode has acted as a sharp counter-narrative. Countries that had once flirted with India for economic or political advantage are now reviewing their assumptions. Arab states, in particular, which had seemed increasingly enamored with India’s size, markets, and polished diplomacy, are now blinking into the bright light of reality. That reality suggests that beneath India’s charm offensive lies a deeply exclusionary ideology.
This ideological foundation cannot be divorced from India’s current domestic and foreign posturing. The Bharatiya Janata Party, steered by the RSS’s hardline vision of Hindutva, has fused religion with governance in a manner that should alarm even India’s closest allies. Ceremonies involving coconuts and lemons to ‘sanctify’ French fighter jets ‘Rafale’ are not simply symbolic quirks. They are signs of a nation drifting away from rational statecraft, and towards a form of governance guided more by ritual than reason. For the Gulf nations, many of which had tried to build bridges with India by sidestepping the BJP’s growing intolerance, this brief flare-up may well have acted as a turning point. The schism between India’s strategic ambitions and its ideological framework has been laid bare.
In contrast, Pakistan’s calibrated and restrained response to Indian aggression has served to highlight its maturity on the world stage. By choosing to de-escalate, even while demonstrating military competence, Islamabad projected itself not only as a credible deterrent but also as a responsible actor in an unstable region. For a country long accused of fostering instability, this reversal of roles is nothing short of remarkable. Where India resorted to rhetoric, Pakistan turned to diplomacy. Where India mythologized its military moves, Pakistan focused on precision and messaging. It was a reminder that sometimes, restraint is the most potent form of power.
Yet perhaps the most telling aspect of the crisis lies in how global media responded. Unlike in previous conflicts, there was no blind acceptance of India’s narrative. Serious voices, both journalistic and diplomatic, called for a thorough investigation into the Pahalgam incident. They demanded evidence, not emotion; facts, not fervor. This shift in global tone is not accidental. It stems from the growing realization that India under Modi is not the pluralistic democracy the world once admired. It is a nation in the grip of ultra-nationalism, where dissent is demonized and minorities live in fear. The BJP’s India is no longer the India of Gandhi or Nehru—it is something else entirely, something narrower, angrier, and far more dangerous.
This internal transformation has international consequences. When a country as large and influential as India begins to rewrite its identity, the ripple effects are felt well beyond its borders. For Pakistan, this presents both a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge lies in resisting the temptation to mirror India’s aggression with its own. The opportunity lies in offering the region a different vision: one rooted in pragmatism, inclusivity, and genuine cooperation.
Indeed, there is now a real chance for Pakistan to reassert not only its military deterrence, but its diplomatic and economic independence. If the spirit of unity and resilience shown during this standoff can be channeled into broader national reform—fiscal responsibility, institutional transparency, regional engagement—then Pakistan could finally emerge from the long shadows of dependency. That means reducing reliance on emergency IMF packages or the fluctuating generosity of Saudi and Chinese partners. It means becoming a state that not only demands respect but earns it through integrity, stability, and vision.
Such a vision must include renewed engagement with Afghanistan. Before the clouds of conflict with India had gathered, there were promising signs of rapprochement between Islamabad and Kabul, aided significantly by Beijing’s quiet diplomacy. These initiatives were no small matter. They marked a shift towards mutual growth, shared prosperity, and a collaborative regional future. The conflict with India, while disruptive, also served as a moment of clarity. It reminded both Afghanistan and Pakistan of the perils of distraction and the necessity of focus. Afghanistan’s own economic renaissance—slow and fragile though it may be—stands as proof that progress is possible when the guns fall silent and trade, education, and connectivity are prioritized.
Among the most meaningful of these is the renewed potential for improved relations with Bangladesh. With the departure of Sheikh Hasina from power, a political shift has created an opening for reconciliation and reconstruction between Dhaka and Islamabad. This isn’t about rewriting history, but about writing a new chapter—one that acknowledges the past without being imprisoned by it. The people of both countries, despite historical wounds, continue to express love and fraternity. Shared culture and familial bonds have outlived political divides. There is affection there still—quiet, undramatic, but real. This affection could be the soil in which new roots of trade, diplomacy and regional solidarity take hold. A Pakistan-Bangladesh partnership—grounded in equality and mutual respect—could serve as a stabilizing force in a region too often torn by mistrust. They can stand together not just to balance India’s influence, but to create an independent South Asian ethos that values cooperation over conflict.
