On September 22, 1965, throughout a speech on the UN Safety Council, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who was then a part of the Ayub Khan administration, declared that Pakistan “will wage a conflict for 1,000 years” in opposition to India. Years later, Gen. Zia-ul-Haq, who captured energy in a 1977 coup by toppling Prime Minister Bhutto (who was later executed), turned Bhutto’s ‘1,000 years of conflict’ right into a ‘Bleed India by a Thousand Cuts’ doctrine — use low-intensity and sub-conventional warfare with militancy and infiltration to proceed to bleed India. Pakistan suffered a humiliating defeat within the 1971 conflict, which noticed the creation of Bangladesh. The Pakistani army, having failed in standard warfare, turned to this oblique method. The doctrine gained traction after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan. Pakistan, with assist from the U.S. and Saudi Arabia, had efficiently utilized the ‘Thousand Cuts’ tactic in Afghanistan in opposition to the nation’s communist regime and its Soviet backers. Bled out by the Pakistan and U.S.-backed mujahideen’s thousand cuts, the mighty Soviet troops withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989.
The identical yr marked the start of a surge in militancy within the Kashmir valley. By the early 2000s, terror was exported to different elements of the nation. India’s Parliament was attacked in December 2001; and in 2008, Mumbai, the nation’s business hub, suffered a significant terrorist assault. By then, Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba, two anti-India terrorist outfits with shut hyperlinks to Pakistan’s safety institution, had constructed sprawling networks in Pakistan. The Pahalgam bloodbath of April 22, 2025, through which 26 individuals, principally civilian vacationers, had been brutally gunned down by terrorists, was the newest signal that the ‘Thousand Cuts’ doctrine stays alive in Rawalpindi’s strategic considering. The assault got here days after Pakistan’s army chief Gen. Asim Munir mentioned “Kashmir is our jugular vein”. The Resistance Entrance, which India believes is a entrance of Lashkar-e-Taiba, initially claimed duty for the assault, however later denied any function.
Till 2016, India’s technique for coping with terrorist assaults linked to Pakistan largely relied on three measures: diplomatic efforts to isolate Pakistan internationally, financial penalties associated to terror financing, and strain on Islamabad to crack down on terror networks. This method noticed restricted success as Pakistan was briefly placed on the ‘gray checklist’ of the Monetary Motion Activity Power (FATF), an intergovernmental physique established to fight cash laundering and terror financing, and was compelled to take some face-saving actions in opposition to terrorist entities. However India stopped in need of taking direct army retaliation, as a result of it didn’t need an all-out conflict between the 2 nuclear powers. India’s diplomatic and financial responses didn’t cease assaults by Pakistan-based terrorists. Islamabad-Rawalpindi continued to wage the Thousand-Cuts marketing campaign with low value and excessive immunity. Each would change quickly.
Doctrinal change
India adopted a doctrinal shift in its response technique following the Jaish-e-Mohammed assault on the Indian Military Brigade headquarters in Uri in Jammu and Kashmir on September 18, 2016, which killed 19 troopers. Ten days later, the Indian commandos performed a cross-border operation focusing on terror launchpads and protected homes in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, in line with the army. This marked a big departure from India’s earlier posture. Along with the diplomatic and financial measures, India would additionally take direct army steps focusing on terror infrastructure throughout the Line of Management in response to assaults.
This strategic shift didn’t instantly set up a powerful deterrent. The Uri response didn’t stop the lethal suicide bombing in Pulwama in February 2019. Equally, the Balakot airstrike that adopted Pulwama didn’t deter the assault on civilians in Pahalgam. However, what’s essential is that by launching army operations inside Pakistan in response to terror assaults, New Delhi has successfully established a brand new regular in India-Pakistan relations.
Till just lately, Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent had constrained India from pursuing standard army responses to terror assaults. India additionally got here underneath excessive worldwide strain to de-escalate each time tensions flared due to the identical nuclear angle. This allowed Pakistan’s Generals to stick with the ‘Thousand-Cuts’ doctrine with minimal value. However that dynamic has begun to shift. With every flare-up, India has stepped up its response in each scope and scale. If the 2016 surgical strike was restricted to Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, the 2019 Balakot strike was prolonged to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. And this time, India struck 9 areas, together with Bahawalpur and Muridke in Punjab, Pakistan’s heartland, marking its largest aerial operation on Pakistani soil since 1971.
Dangers of latest regular
India’s evolving technique carries important dangers. In 2019, following the Balakot strike, Pakistan scrambled its fighter jets, triggering an aerial dogfight through which an Indian plane was downed and its pilot captured (he was quickly returned house, which helped de-escalate the disaster). After Operation Sindoor, as India’s army response to the Pahalgam bloodbath known as, Pakistan selected to escalate by focusing on what India’s Ministry of Defence mentioned “army stations at Jammu, Pathankot & Udhampur” with drones and missiles, which had been “swiftly neutralised”. India launched its counterattacks “in the identical area and similar depth as Pakistan”, in line with the Ministry. Pakistani media reported that India fired at the least 77 drones in two days. In essence, the killing of 26 Indians in Pahalgam by terrorists has introduced India and Pakistan dangerously near the brink of an all-out conflict.
Even when the present tensions subside, India-Pakistan relations have been essentially altered. India has established a brand new regular, one the place it straight targets terrorist infrastructure inside Pakistan in response to assaults. In flip, Islamabad-Rawalpindi’s retaliatory responses are aimed toward elevating the prices of this technique for New Delhi (and thereby defending its Thousand Cuts marketing campaign). This can be a lengthy sport that may take a look at the strategic endurance of each nations.
The rising establishment is undoubtedly riskier. Pakistan might provoke India sooner or later with extra terror assaults. Future Indian governments will doubtless come underneath larger home strain to take direct army actions every time. However the message from New Delhi is evident: the period of waging sub-conventional warfare in opposition to India underneath the protecting cowl of deterrence is over. India appears able to play by the brand new guidelines it has set since 2016, even when doing so dangers full-scale escalation. However can Pakistan — already grappling with Islamist militancy in its tribal areas, a separatist insurgency in Balochistan, a damaged polity at house with the nation’s hottest politician being in jail, and an financial system sustained by an IMF bailout — afford to battle “a thousand years of conflict” in opposition to India?
Revealed – Could 09, 2025 07:10 pm IST
