In a dramatic overnight operation, India started missiles and raids in nine regions across Kashmir, managed by Pakistan and Pakistan, and aimed to be armed with “reliable intelligence.”
The strike, which lasts 25 minutes between 01:05 and 01:30, sent a shock wave through this area on Tuesday (19:35-20:00 GMT), and the residents woke up with terrible explosions.
Pakistan insisted that only six were hit and shot down five Indian fighters and drones.
Islamabad said that 26 people were killed and 46 were injured in an Indian raid that crossed India and Pakistan, the border of the border. Meanwhile, the Indian Army reported that Pakistan was actually killed by 10 civilians by the Pakistan bombardment.
This rapid escalation occurred after a fatal armed attack on Kashmir’s Pahalgam tourists last month, pushing the tension among nuclear weapons risks into a dangerous new height. India argued that there is obvious evidence of connecting the attacked terrorists and external actors with the attack. Islamabad also pointed out that India did not provide evidence to support the claim.
Does this attack display a new escalation?
After 19 Indian soldiers died in the URI in 2016, India crossed the LOC to “surgical strike.”
In 2019, PulWama Bombing, who died of 40 indian military agents, triggered the raids with Balakot, the first action inside Pakistan since 1971.
Experts say that retaliation for Pahalgam attacks is a wider range, and the goal is to both the infrastructure of three major Pakistan -based armed groups.
Indians hit nine armed goals throughout Pakistan and Pakistan Kashmir, and are deeply immersed in the main hubs of Lashkar-E-TAIBA (LET), Jaish-E-Mohammed, and Hizbul Mujahideen.
According to an Indian spokesman, the nearest goal of the sialkot was only 6-18 km from the border.
India, the deepest popularity, is said to be Jaish-E-Mohammed headquarters from Bajahahalpur, 100 km away from Pakistan. Muzaffarabad’s Let Camp and Pakistan’s Casumir, 30 km away from the breast, are related to the recent attacks of Kashmir, Indian, the spokesman said.
Pakistan denied six areas, but claimed that there was a terrorist camp.
Srinath Raghavan, headquartered in Delhi, told the BBC, “This time, this time, the goal of India has expanded beyond the past patterns, and strikes, such as Bala Court, focused on the border of Pakistan, such as Balla Court, focused on the military border.
“This time India has crossed the international border and hit Pakistan Fun Zab. Aim for terrorist infrastructureThe headquarters and known positions of Bahawalpur and Muridke are connected to Lashkar-E-TAIBA. They also hit Jaish-E-Mohammed and Hizbul Mujahideen Assets. This suggests a wider and more geographically vast reaction, sends a signal that several groups are on the cross -line of India, and sends a wider message. “
India-Pakistan International Borders Officially recognized boundary It extends from Gujarat to Jammu to remove the two countries.
AJAY BISARIA, a former Indian high -ranking officer in Pakistan, said that the BBC said, “It is a balla coatplus reaction aimed at balla coats and terror hubs, but it is accompanied by a powerful escape message.”
“This strike is more accurate, target and noticeable than in the past, so we can’t reject it by Pakistan.”
Indian sources said the strike aimed at “reconstruction”.
Professor Raghavan said, “The Indian government thinks that the suppression established in 2019 has become thinner and should be rebuilt.
“This seems to reflect the doctrine of Israel that the deterrence requires periodic and repeated strikes. But if we assume that we will stop terrorist attacks by ourselves, there is a risk of giving all incentives to retaliate all incentives in Pakistan.”
Can this spiral fall into a wider conflict?
The majority of experts agree that Pakistan’s retaliation is inevitable and diplomacy will come out.
Bisaria said, “Pakistan’s response will definitely come, and the challenge is to manage the escalation of the next stage, which is an important place for crisis diplomacy.
“Pakistan will be advised to exercise restrictions, but after Pakistan’s response, the core will be diplomacy to prevent the two countries from quickly climbing the escalation ladder.”
Pakistan -based experts, such as La Hour, a political and military analyst, Ejaz Hussain, said that surgical strikes in India, such as Muridke and Bahawalpur, were “expected to be greatly prolonged.”
Dr. Hussain thinks retaliatory strike is possible.
“The decision to solve the media investigation and scores of Pakistan’s military was decided to solve retaliation in the form of surgical strikes that cross the border,” the BBC said.
But Dr. Hussain worryed that surgical strikes on both sides could “expand into limited wars.”
Christopher Clary at Albani University, USA, reported that Pakistan is likely to retaliate, considering the size of India’s strike and “visible damage on major sites.”
“Otherwise, Delhi will be dissatisfied and the Pakistani army will give India the authority to attack Pakistan when it is opposed to the promise of retaliation with the Quid Pro Quo Plus.
“We granted the goals of Indian organizations and facilities related to Indian terror and armed forces. I think Pakistan is likely to be limited to the attack on India’s military goals.“He said.
Even if the tension is high, some experts still have hope for withdrawal.
Clary said, “We are likely to avoid this crisis as the launch intensifies along a single stand -off strike and control line.”
However, the risk of additional escalations is still higher, adding that it has become a “most dangerous” Indian -Pakistan crisis since 2002 and is much more dangerous than the 2016 and 2019 standoffs.
Is Pakistan retaliation now inevitable?
Experts in Pakistan pointed out that the situation could change rapidly despite the lack of war hysteria leading to a strike in India.
Umer Farooq, an analyst -based analyst and a former defense week, based on Islamabad, said, “We have a deeply fractured political society with the most popular leaders of this country. Imran Khan’s imprisonment has caused a strong anti -military disclosure backlash.
“Today’s Pakistan’s public is eager to support the army compared to 2016 or 2019. But the wave of general war hysteries is noticeably lacking, but the public opinion of Central Fun Jabb, which is more widely India’s feelings, may increase the civilian pressure on the army.
Dr. Hussain repercuses similar emotions.
“I think that the current confrontation with India provides an opportunity to regain public support from the middle class of the city, especially the Pakistani army, which has been criticized for the recent political interference.”
“The active defense posture of the army is already amplified through alcohol and social media, and some stores argue that six to seven Indian jets have been shot down.
“These arguments guarantee independent verification, but they play a role in strengthening the image of the military among the public sectors that are traditionally gathered around the defense narrative during the external threat.”
Can India and Pakistan withdraw from the crisis?
India is once again walking on a fine line between escalation and restraint.
Immediately after the attack in Pahalgam, India quickly retaliated by closing the major border crossings, stopping water sharing treaties, expelling diplomats, and stopping most of the visas for Pakistanians. The army on both sides exchanged a small inorganic fire, and India banned all Pakistan aircraft in the airspace to reflect the initial movement of Pakistan. As a result, Pakistan stopped the peace treaty in 1972 and took its own retaliation.
This quickly withdraws Pakistan’s largest state status, reflecting the behavior of India after the 2019 Full and Was attack, and suspended major trade and transportation links.
The crisis increased as India started the air raid in Bala Court and the capture of Pakistan’s air strikes and Indian pilot Abinandan Varthaman. However, the diplomatic channel eventually withdraws when Pakistan loosened the pilot in the gesture of good faith.
Last week, Visaria said, “India achieved strategic and military goals, and Pakistan insisted on the concept of victory for domestic audiences.”
