As tensions between nuclear-armed neighbors India and Pakistan deepen following the deadly Pahalgam terror attack, a familiar yet ominous ritual has resurfaced: military posturing through missile tests. Pakistan’s latest move, a training launch of the Abdali Weapon System — a short-range, surface-to-surface ballistic missile — has sparked concerns of escalation in an already volatile region. While the missile launch is officially described as a routine exercise to validate technical parameters, its timing and symbolism leave little doubt that it was intended as a direct message to New Delhi.
According to a statement by the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), the military’s media wing, the Abdali missile was launched during ‘Exercise INDUS’, a drill aimed at “ensuring operational readiness” and testing the missile’s “advanced navigation system and enhanced manoeuvrability.” The test was witnessed by high-ranking officials, including the Commander of the Army Strategic Forces Command and scientists from Pakistan’s strategic organizations.
What makes this test particularly significant — and provocative — is not just the missile’s capability, but its name.
Named after Ahmad Shah Abdali, the 18th-century Afghan ruler known for his repeated and brutal invasions of the Indian subcontinent, the missile serves more than just a military purpose. It is a psychological and ideological tool. The name evokes deep historical memories, especially in the Indian context, of foreign aggression, plunder, and conflict. Abdali, who led multiple campaigns into northern India, is infamous for the 1761 Battle of Panipat, which resulted in one of the bloodiest defeats in Indian history.
Ironically, modern-day Pakistan lies within the very regions that Abdali invaded. His campaigns were not just directed toward present-day India but ravaged Punjab and Sindh — parts of Pakistan today. Naming a missile after a figure who inflicted devastation on the land that is now Pakistan might seem contradictory. Yet, in the context of Pakistan’s post-1947 national identity, such symbolism has a calculated logic.
The Abdali missile isn’t an isolated case. It fits into a broader pattern in Pakistan’s strategic nomenclature. Several Pakistani missiles are named after Muslim conquerors who invaded the Indian subcontinent:
-
Ghaznavi (Hatf-III), named after Mahmud of Ghazni, an 11th-century invader known for razing the Somnath Temple in Gujarat.
-
Ghauri-I and II, named after Muhammad of Ghor, who laid the foundation of the Delhi Sultanate after defeating Prithviraj Chauhan.
-
Babur (Hatf-VII), after the founder of the Mughal Empire.
-
Alamgir, a frigate named after Aurangzeb, the Mughal emperor infamous for his religious intolerance and destruction of Hindu temples.
-
Muhammad bin Qasim, commemorated via ports and installations, was the Arab commander who conquered Sindh in the 8th century.
Each of these names is a deliberate nod to figures who established — often violently — Islamic dominance in South Asia. These choices serve dual objectives: strategic signaling to India and ideological reaffirmation within Pakistan.
Naming missiles after invaders who targeted Hindu kingdoms reinforces the ideological foundation of the Two-Nation Theory — the basis for Pakistan’s creation. The theory posits that Hindus and Muslims constitute distinct nations with irreconcilable differences, thus justifying the 1947 partition. By choosing names tied to Muslim conquerors, Pakistan’s military establishment embeds this ideology into its national defense posture.
It’s also a form of historical revisionism. These rulers — many of whom launched their campaigns from lands that are now Afghanistan or Central Asia — are rebranded not just as Islamic heroes but as ideological ancestors of Pakistan’s military mission.
The timing of the missile launch under the banner of Exercise INDUS is equally symbolic. It comes in the wake of India putting the Indus Water Treaty (IWT) in abeyance following the Pahalgam terror attack, a suicide bombing that killed dozens of Indian soldiers in Jammu and Kashmir. The treaty, signed in 1960, governs the distribution of the Indus river’s waters and is considered a cornerstone of India-Pakistan relations.
By naming its drill after the Indus — a river of civilizational importance to both countries — Pakistan is issuing a reminder that tampering with the treaty could provoke a military response. Islamabad has previously warned that revocation or significant alteration of the IWT terms would be considered an “act of war.”
In this context, the missile launch becomes more than a tactical exercise; it’s a geopolitical signal.
Technically speaking, the Abdali Weapon System is the renamed Hatf-II missile. Developed by Pakistan’s Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO), it entered service in 2005. It’s a solid-fueled, road-mobile, single-stage missile capable of delivering both conventional and nuclear warheads up to 450 km — enough to strike deep into Indian territory, including key military installations in Jammu, Punjab, and Rajasthan.
Weighing 1,750 kg and standing 6.5 meters tall, the missile has a Circular Error Probable (CEP) of 150 meters, making it relatively precise for its class. Its use of solid propellant allows for quicker launch times, a strategic advantage during short-notice conflicts.
What’s striking is the absence of any local, indigenous heroes in the naming of Pakistan’s weapon systems. None of the missiles, tanks, or naval vessels are named after Punjabi, Sindhi, Pashtun, or Balochi figures who might have historical or cultural significance within Pakistan’s current borders.
Instead, the preference is overwhelmingly for foreign Muslim figures — often Turkic, Arab, or Afghan — whose relevance lies more in their Islamic conquest narratives than any tangible connection to Pakistan’s diverse cultural history.
This reflects a broader trend in identity formation within Pakistan: a preference for an Islamic, Arabized, and pan-Muslim identity over South Asian roots. Critics argue that this is an attempt to distance the modern state from its Hindu, Sikh, and Buddhist heritage, which was deeply rooted in the Indus Valley and Gandhara civilizations.
Another telling pattern is the linguistic choice in naming: Arabic and Persian dominate, while Urdu, Punjabi, Balochi, Pashto, and Sindhi are conspicuously absent.
Missiles like Nasr (Arabic for ‘Victory’), Shaheen (Persian for ‘Falcon’), and Ababeel (Arabic for a bird mentioned in the Quran) show a deliberate tilt toward Islamic languages. Tanks like Al-Khalid and Al-Zarrar are named after Arabic warriors from early Islamic history. The Pakistani Navy frigate Zulfiquar is named after the sword of the Prophet Muhammad.
This is not just about choosing powerful or exotic-sounding names. It’s a strategic decision that cements Pakistan’s identity as a state rooted in the Islamic world, not the South Asian milieu from which it emerged.
India, by contrast, has taken a markedly different approach. Despite having a rich pantheon of Hindu kings and warriors who fought Islamic invasions, India has avoided overtly religious or antagonistic names for its weapons.
Instead, Indian missiles are often named after natural elements or figures from epic literature:
-
Prithvi (Earth) and Akash (Sky) denote geographical elements.
-
Agni (Fire) and Vayu (Wind) reference Vedic deities.
-
Arihant means ‘Destroyer of Enemies’ but also has Jain connotations of spiritual conquerors.
-
Tejas (Brilliance) and Prachand (Fierce) reflect qualities rather than individuals.
Some weapons are named after characters from epics like the Mahabharata — the Arjuna and Bhishma tanks — but even these do not symbolize conquest over specific religious foes.
The Indian Navy’s INS Vikramaditya, an aircraft carrier, is named after a historical Hindu king — but not one known for fighting Muslims. Even India’s adoption of Persian terms like Shamsher (sword) and Bahadur (brave) shows cultural pluralism rather than ideological exclusivity.
The difference in naming isn’t just semantics. It reveals the foundational principles and political philosophies of the two nations.
Pakistan, built on a religious identity, continues to embed Islamization in its national defense strategy. Naming weapon systems after historical Islamic conquerors and religious symbols reinforces that self-conception.
India, built as a secular republic, has consciously avoided naming its weapons in ways that may alienate religious minorities. This restraint — whether motivated by pluralism or political calculation — is evident in the diversity and neutrality of its military nomenclature.
In times of rising tension, symbols matter. The naming of a missile after Ahmad Shah Abdali — especially when accompanied by intelligence warnings of an imminent Indian military response — becomes more than provocative. It is a rhetorical escalation that risks real-world consequences.
Military analysts warn that such actions, though technically non-lethal, are deeply destabilizing in a region where both countries possess over 100 nuclear warheads and have fought multiple wars, including one in 1999 that began with similar low-level provocations.
Pakistan’s test of the Abdali missile is not just about showcasing military preparedness. It’s a mirror reflecting deeper national insecurities, ideological commitments, and identity choices. In choosing to name its missile after an invader who pillaged both Indian and Pakistani territories, Islamabad signals that the ideological boundaries it draws are not necessarily geographic — they are religious and civilizational. In contrast, India’s choice to emphasize ancient language, literature, and elemental forces in its military naming conventions reveals a commitment to a secular, albeit complex, national narrative.
