\n
<\/p>\n
The terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir<\/a> last week that killed 26 tourists has laid bare the persistence of militant threats in the region, exposing serious lapses in Indian security and intelligence.<\/p>\n Amid growing calls in India for military action against Pakistan, which New Delhi accuses of backing the militants involved, the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi is once again posturing<\/a> toward cross-border retribution. Yet more than a week after the attack in Pahalgam, India has not made a major military move. It suspended its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty, and both countries have expelled each other\u2019s diplomats and military attaches.<\/p>\n India\u2019s main diplomatic challenge is to secure legitimacy for its actions under international law. It must prove that Pakistan is directly responsible for sponsoring the attack and similar acts of terrorism, as it has in the past.\u00a0But India has not publicly provided any evidence, while Pakistan has called for an independent investigation. Indian media initially accused a group called the Resistance Front (TRF), which Indian officials say is a proxy of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba<\/a>, but TRF later denied responsibility.<\/p>\n In the days since the attack, India has launched an aggressive campaign aimed at building a strong case and gaining international legitimacy for a possible military strike.\u00a0According to multiple sources within India\u2019s foreign and security establishment, the government is preparing a dossier of evidence linking militants whom it accuses of conducting the Pahalgam attack to Pakistan\u2019s intelligence services.<\/p>\n India has previously adopted a similar strategy, including after the 2019 suicide bombing in Pulwama, Indian-administered Kashmir, that killed 40 Indian security forces. In the wake of that attack, it shared a dossier among global interlocutors. India retaliated with a cross-border airstrike in Pakistan, which was followed by a military standoff<\/a>.<\/p>\n In that case, New Delhi presented evidence to the United Nations detailing Pakistan\u2019s support for terrorist groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammed, which claimed responsibility for the Pulwama attack. It focused on garnering support from global powers and countered Pakistan\u2019s attempts to condemn India\u2019s cross-border strike.<\/p>\n As India works to shore up support this time around, it faces some roadblocks.\u00a0Pakistan, which is currently a nonpermanent member of the United Nations Security Council, this week managed to successfully block India\u2019s attempts to name TRF in the Security Council\u2019s statement condemning the Pahalgam attack, aided by China. Though the final statement<\/a> demanded accountability and condemned the \u201creprehensible act of terrorism,\u201d it did not name the perpetrators or explicitly refer to the Indian government\u2019s jurisdiction\u2014a diplomatic win for Pakistan.<\/p>\n But India is also quietly lobbying both permanent and nonpermanent members of the Security Council, seeking backing\u2014or at least neutrality\u2014if it invokes Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, which permits self-defense in the face of armed attacks.<\/p>\n Ajai Sahni, the executive director of the Institute for Conflict Management in New Delhi, said that though India will present forensic and testimonial proof linking Pakistan to the Pahalgam attack, \u201cno amount of evidence is going to change the fact that China is not going to support any action \u2026 which would adversely affect Pakistan,\u201d due to geopolitical interests and its U.N. veto power.<\/p>\n Behind closed doors, Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has spoken with his counterparts in Algeria, Greece, Guyana, Panama, Sierra Leone, Slovenia, and Somalia\u2014including several currently serving on the Security Council. These calls were preceded by a significant diplomatic outreach in which India briefed dozens of foreign diplomats in New Delhi about Pakistan\u2019s alleged complicity in the recent attack.<\/p>\n Jaishankar said he also received a call from U.N. Secretary-General Ant\u00f3nio Guterres. \u201cAppreciate his unequivocal condemnation of the terrorist attack in Pahalgam. Agreed on the importance of accountability. India is resolved that the perpetrators, planners and backers of this attack are brought to justice,\u201d Jaishankar wrote<\/a> in a post on X.<\/p>\n India has also stepped up pressure on Pakistan at the United Nations. New Delhi\u2019s deputy permanent representative, Yojna Patel, used a recent U.N. forum to accuse Islamabad of \u201cfueling global terrorism,\u201d citing a recent Sky News interview<\/a> in which Pakistan\u2019s defense minister appeared to acknowledge the country\u2019s historic support for militant groups.<\/p>\n \u201cThe whole world has heard the Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif admitting and confessing Pakistan\u2019s history of supporting, training and funding terrorist organizations in a recent television interview,\u201d Patel said<\/a> at the U.N. forum.<\/p>\n Indian media has also cited<\/a> a controversial speech in which Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir described Kashmir as his country\u2019s \u201cjugular vein\u201d days before the killings in Pahalgam, linking the statement to the attack.<\/p>\n Indian officials maintain that New Delhi abides by international law, but the challenge lies in securing legitimacy for a military strike, which requires demonstrating enough evidence and then enough support to justify such an action.<\/p>\n Citing an official policy document, an Indian security official told Foreign Policy<\/em>: \u201cIndia overwhelmingly tends to issue diplomatic condemnation of military intervention by major powers that are not authorized by the U.N.,\u201d adding that any strike inside Pakistani territory would have to be justified as an act of self-defense under international law.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, Pakistan is preparing<\/a> to escalate the dispute through international legal channels over what it sees as India\u2019s unilateral suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty\u2014a decades-old water-sharing agreement brokered by the World Bank that has survived three wars between the countries.<\/p>\n If India went ahead with a strike against Pakistan, it would not be without precedent. In 2016, Indian troops crossed the Line of Control, the countries\u2019 disputed frontier in Kashmir, in retaliation for an attack on an Indian Army brigade in Uri; they said they inflicted heavy casualties on militant camps. And after the Pulwama attack in 2019, Indian fighter jets carried out an airstrike in Pakistan\u2019s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, triggering a brief aerial dogfight.<\/p>\n In both cases, the strikes were politically popular for Modi\u2019s government despite ambiguity about their military effectiveness.<\/p>\n In the wake of the Pahalgam attack, Sahni called instead for a \u201cprotracted conflict\u201d strategy spanning cyber, economic, diplomatic, and covert measures to deter Pakistan.\u00a0\u201cYou cannot allow four or six terrorists \u2026 to so completely dominate your policy cycle,\u201d he said, warning against retaliation driven by \u201cdomestic and political pressure \u2026 whipped up for partisan political ends.\u201d<\/p>\n India\u2019s success in securing international legitimacy might hinge on how many U.N. members it can persuade that the Pahalgam attack qualifies as an act of cross-border aggression. Jaishankar\u2019s conversations with counterparts in Guyana and Greece\u2014both of whom expressed support for India\u2019s right to pursue justice\u2014suggest that he is gaining traction. However, with China allied with Pakistan and Pakistan itself serving on the Security Council through 2026, the council\u2019s endorsement is unlikely.<\/p>\n In the short term, eyes will be on the stance adopted by key global players, including the United States, which has not appointed ambassadors to either India or Pakistan since President Donald Trump took office in January. Unlike in 2019, the United States no longer has troops in Afghanistan, whose safety could be threatened by instability in the region.<\/p>\n On Wednesday, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke with officials in India and Pakistan. In a call with Jaishankar, he expressed<\/a> \u201csorrow for the lives lost in the horrific terrorist attack in Pahalgam\u201d and reaffirmed Washington\u2019s commitment to counterterrorism cooperation with New Delhi. According to a State Department spokesperson, Rubio also encouraged India to engage with Pakistan to \u201cde-escalate tensions.\u201d<\/p>\n In a separate call with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, Rubio stressed<\/a> the need to \u201ccondemn the terror attack on April 22 in Pahalgam\u201d and pushed for Islamabad\u2019s cooperation in the investigation. \u201cBoth leaders reaffirmed their continued commitment to holding terrorists accountable,\u201d according to the State Department readout.<\/p>\n On Thursday, U.S. Vice President J.D. Vance brought some clarity on Washington\u2019s position, signaling that it won\u2019t oppose an Indian response as long as it does not lead to a \u201cbroader regional conflict,\u201d he said in an interview<\/a> with Fox News.<\/p>\n After the 2008 Mumbai attacks, which were carried out by Lashkar-e-Taiba and killed 166 people, the FBI aided Indian authorities with intelligence cooperation. New Delhi is likely to seek similar help this time.<\/p>\n With both nuclear-armed neighbors now led by governments under intense domestic pressure, the possibility of rapid escalation is very high\u2014even as international calls to step back from the ledge grow. For now, the message from New Delhi is clear: The Pahalgam attack will not go unanswered.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n