As India will react to Kashmir’s murder

Blob on Tuesday in the mooning – where at least 26 tourists were killed in a hail of firing – notes the most deadly attacks in Kashmir since 2019.

The victims were not soldiers and officials, but civilians on vacation in one of India’s most colorful valleys. Only this does this blow, both cruel and symbolic: calculated not only on life but also in a gentle sense of normality, the Indian state worked on designing in a controversial region.

Given the rich Kashmir history – in full stated by both India and Pakistan, but every partially managed – India’s reaction is likely to be as much precedent as the pressure, experts say.

To start Delhi rapidly took a number retaliation: Closing the main crossing of the border, suspension of the critical contract of water distribution and exile of diplomats.

More substantially, Defense Minister Rinat Singh promised “Strong answer”, “” Promising the action not only against the guilty, but also the inspirers for “moody actions” on Indian soil.

Analysts say there will be no military response – but when and how it will be reflected and at what price.

“We will probably see a strong answer that signals the domestic audience and actors in Pakistan. Since 2016 and, especially after 2019, the threshold of revenge was installed on cross-border or air strikes,” said military historian Schrrate Ragan.

“The government will be difficult to act below.

Mr. Raghavan hints at the two previous major revenge of India in 2016 and 2019.

After The deadly attack URI In September 2016, when 19 Indian soldiers were killed, India launched what they call “surgical strokes” through actually the border – also known as the control line (LOC) – focusing on the fact that he was launched in Pakistan Kashmir.

And in 2019, after At least 40 paramilitary staff died in Pulvam. India got to allegedly a warlike camp in Balakota with air strikes . Both sides demonstrated strength but avoided a full -scale war.

Two years later, in 2021, they agreed to ceasefire LOCWhich he has largely conducted – despite the repetitive attacks of militants in Kashmir, headed by India.

Michael Kugelman, a foreign policy analyst, believes that the combination of high levels of mortality and orientation to Indian civilians in the last attack “suggests a great opportunity for Indian military response against Pakistan if Delhi determines or simply involves any level of Pakistani.”

“The main advantage of such a reaction for India will be political, as public pressure will respond greatly in India,” he said BBC.

“Another advantage when revenge successfully takes terrorist targets will be restraining and humiliating the threat of anti -India. The disadvantage is that revenge risks a serious crisis and even conflict.”

What are India’s options?

The hidden action offers a refusal, but cannot satisfy the political need to significantly restore the restraint, says Christopher Claire from the university in Albania in the US.

This leaves India with two possible ways, he notes.

First, as a result of the ceasefire, Loc 2021 was defeated, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi would be able to return to cross-border shooting.

Secondly, airstrikes or even ordinary cruise missile strikes, as in 2019, are also on the table – each of which is at the risk of spiral retaliation, as is observed in air contractions.

“No way without risks. The United States is also distracted and may not be able to help control the crisis,” said the BBC G -Clair, who studies South Asia’s policy.

One of the most serious risks in any crisis of India and Pakistan is that both sides are nuclear armed. This fact throws a long shadow at every decision, forming not only a military strategy but also political calculations.

“Nuclear weapons are a danger, and restraint-they make persons who make decisions on both sides, act with caution. Any response will probably be presented as accurate and focused. Pakistan may avenge in kind, and then look for an off-road ramp, says Mr. Ragan.

“We have also seen this picture in other conflicts, such as Israel-Iran-Kalibrid strikes, after which the de-escalation efforts. But the risk is always that everything will not go through the scenario.”

Mr. Kugelman says that one of the pulsa crisis lessons is that “every country is comfortable using a limited confrontation.”

“India will need to weigh the political and tactical benefits of revenge with the risk of serious crisis or conflicts.”

Hussein Hakani, a former Pakistani ambassador to the US, believes that escalation is possible this time, and India probably considers limited “surgical strikes” as in 2016.

“The advantage of such strikes in terms of India is that they are limited in scale, so Pakistan does not need to respond, and yet they demonstrate the Indian public that India has acted,” said Mr. Hakani, senior employee of the diplomatic academy Anvars and Hadson Institute.

“But such strikes can also invite retaliation from Pakistan, which claims to be accused of knee reaction, without any investigations and evidence.”

No matter what India chooses – and as a Pakistan replied – every step is rich. The threat of escalation emerges, and at the same time the weak peace in Kashmir slips further.

At the same time, India should be considered security failures that allowed to attack first. “The fact that such an attack occurred during the peak of the tourist season,” Mr. Raghavan said, “indicates a serious interval – especially in the trade unions, where the federal government directly controls the right and order.”