Key Points: The May 2025 clashes between India and Pakistan—sparked by a terrorist attack in Kashmir—revealed dangerous gaps in military readiness, outdated doctrines, and inadequate frontline defenses.
-As both nations escalated from drone swarms to missile strikes, negligence by commanders became evident. India’s decisive strikes exposed weaknesses in Pakistani strategic defenses and nuclear facilities, prompting international mediation.
-The conflict showcased a diverse array of foreign weaponry yet highlighted critical shortcomings requiring immediate force restructuring and tighter civilian oversight.
-These lessons underscore the urgent need for both sides to modernize doctrines, secure strategic assets, and manage escalations effectively to avoid future nuclear brinkmanship.
Negligence and Need for Force Restructuring in the 2025 India-Pakistan Clashes
The 2025 India-Pakistan clashes were the most intense since 2019 and could have escalated to levels not seen since the 1999 Kargil War. The backdrop of the 2025 Pahalgam attack, Indian-Pakistani relations, already turbulent, further deteriorated.
Both sides conducted numerous probing operations to assess each other’s defenses. Still, the escalation ladder continues to climb as Islamabad and New Delhi refuse to look weak to one another. Each side used numerous foreign weapons in the clashes, and frontlines shifted beyond Kashmir, with signs that defenses were not adequately prepared. Negligence by military commanders is at the forefront of frontline battles.
Prelude to Armed Conflict
On April 22nd, 2025, militants, assumed to be from the Resistance Front, an offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba, conducted a terrorist attack on Pahalgam in Indian-controlled Jammu and Kashmir, killing and injuring dozens. The attack shocked the world and Indian society as the military of India deployed upwards of 200,000 troops in Kashmir to protect its citizens in the disputed region.
In the aftermath of the terrorist attack, diplomatic talks between New Delhi and Islamabad ceased, with India suspending the Indus Water Treaty, which could cripple Pakistani agriculture and aquatic resources. Furthermore, visa cancellations and suspension of trade, including third-party countries, were implemented.
Pakistan, already in a major economic downward spiral, is facing a looming crisis with the suspension of the Indus Water Treaty. Perhaps India calculated that the Pakistani government would either have to respond harshly to present itself or face internal pressure from citizens.
Responding to militant training camps, many of which are known and supported by Pakistani intelligence (ISI), India would launch Operation Sindoor on May 7th to destroy infrastructure and potential launching grounds of extremist groups in Kashmir.
The May 2025 Clashes
The first missile strikes and drone swarms between both countries were held at the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir and were measured as neither India nor Pakistan used their air forces in each other’s airspace. Due to the information space, there are unverified reports of other warplanes being damaged or destroyed by Chinese-made J-10s under the service of the Pakistan Air Force, such as the French-made Mirage-2000 and Rafale.
Potentially feeling emboldened by the first day’s success and wanting to establish its superiority over India, Pakistan would launch mass drone swarms at Indian cities to probe their defenses. The drone swarms prompted India to use its S-400 system for its first combat use.
In return, India would target Pakistani bases in Pakistan proper in key cities such as Lahore and Karachi, using Israeli-made Harop loitering munitions. Pakistan would up the escalation by deploying ballistic missiles over Indian airspace, which not only threatened military bases but also civilian centers.
The Turning Point
Despite neither side engaging in actual ground combat operations, the Pakistani ballistic missile strikes were seen by New Delhi as escalations that prompted a decisive response. On the night of May 9th into May 10th, the Indian Air Force struck strategic Pakistani air bases, eliminating a prominent squadron commander and threatening critical assets, such as the National Command Authority (NCA).
The turning point came when the Indian military decisively struck Pakistan’s Noor Khan base, which not only hosts nuclear weapons but also its whole command structure for the use of atomic weaponry. India effectively escalated its approach to Pakistan without triggering the latter’s red lines on nuclear weapons usage.
Chinese-made defense systems such as the HQ-9, LY-80, and FM-90 failed at deterring India’s decisive strikes on Pakistan’s nuclear facilities, which forced Islamabad to maneuver to draw in international mediation. The fear of potentially losing strategic nuclear assets prompted Pakistan to reach out to the U.S. government to help mediate a ceasefire, with Turkey, Saudi Arabia, China, the UK, and the UAE also playing further mediating roles.
AMCA Fighter India. Image Credit: Industry Handout.
India’s Security Laws and Pakistan’s Need for Reconstitution of Forces
India and Pakistan displayed a wide array of international weaponry while simultaneously showing flaws in their doctrines that will need to be updated. Weapons originating from France, China, Turkey, Russia, and Israel were all used in the 2025 clashes, with the NYT reporting that American-made F-16s in Pakistani service were not used for fears of being shot down.
New Delhi’s ability to adapt, keep composure, and respond decisively towards strategic assets is critical and a significant objective for the Indian Armed Forces for future conflicts against Pakistan. Nevertheless, Indian citizens and tourists in Jammu and Kashmir may not feel safe even with 200,000 garrisoned troops along the LoC with ISI-supported militant groups, which will be a test for Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
Furthermore, Modi gave field commanders and general staff autonomous decision-making during the clashes. Though these movements allow for more prompt measures to counter enemy combatants in a region rife with sectarianism, any drastic determination by a field commander that could negatively involve civilians in Kashmir would only increase ethnic and religious tensions in South Asia.
Pakistan faces a significant dilemma with not only India’s ability to use water resources as a form of hybrid warfare but also current capabilities that could be exhausted in less than a few weeks of full-scale war. Islamabad may be inclined to heighten nuclear rhetoric in any future conflict after now realizing that atomic saber rattling, knowing international mediation by major power brokers would come immediately.
Lessons for Future Conventional Conflicts
The 2025 Pakistani-Indian clashes displayed measured responses in modern warfare while gradually moving up the escalation ladder. In a potential future armed conflict between the United States and China, whether it’s over Taiwan or the South China Sea, both sides will try to employ measured responses akin to India and Pakistan to avoid dangerous escalation between nuclear powers.
Simultaneously, India was able to conduct major air and missile strikes on key Pakistani bases without triggering Islamabad’s ‘red lines’ over nuclear weapons usage. Ukraine has already displayed Russia’s nuclear bluff card in future conflicts; the United States, with a measured response, could target key bases, logistics, and command structures without countries such as China and North Korea being forced into their own ‘red lines.’
The 2025 Indian-Pakistani clashes hold valuable lessons about preparing for security gaps, force restructuring, more civilian control over armed forces, and maintaining deterrence without pushing a nuclear-armed state to the brink. Despite a ceasefire, future armed altercations will undoubtedly occur between New Delhi and Islamabad, and due to political instability in the region, international mediators must prepare to act more decisively and in a timely manner.
About the Author: Julian McBride
Julian McBride is a forensic anthropologist and independent journalist born in New York. He is the founder and director of the Reflections of War Initiative (ROW), an anthropological NGO which aims to tell the stories of the victims of war through art therapy. As a former Marine, he uses this technique not only to help heal PTSD but also to share people’s stories through art, which conveys “the message of the brutality of war better than most news organizations.” Julian is also a new 19FortyFive Contributing Editor.
