In a stark escalation of regional tensions, Pakistan has sounded alarms over what it describes as an imminent full-scale incursion by Indian military forces. The warning follows the deadly security incident in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, where 26 people were killed in an attack Indian authorities have attributed to Pakistan-linked elements. Islamabad, increasingly vocal about perceived Indian military intentions, is preparing for what it believes could become a major cross-border confrontation.
Pakistan’s Defence Minister, Khawaja Muhammad Asif, speaking to Reuters from his Islamabad office, confirmed that the country’s armed forces have been placed on the highest state of operational readiness. Reinforcements have been deployed, military briefings delivered to civilian leadership, and strategic decisions made under the presumption that conflict is no longer a question of “if,” but “when.”
“We have reinforced our forces because it is something which is imminent now. So in that situation, some strategic decisions have to be taken, and those decisions have been taken,” Asif said, signaling the seriousness with which Islamabad views the threat.
Notably, Asif underscored that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal would remain a “last resort” option, to be considered only if the country’s existence is threatened. His words, measured but unambiguous, carried a gravity that resonated far beyond Pakistan’s borders.
Meanwhile, in India, military activities have surged. Although Indian officials maintain that recent military maneuvers are routine, defense analysts are reading the situation differently. The Indian Air Force (IAF) has initiated large-scale exercises, involving frontline Rafale fighters in high-tempo missions under “Exercise Aakraman” (“Attack”). Simultaneously, the Indian Navy has showcased its operational prowess with missile tests in the Arabian Sea.
India’s visible military preparations have been broad and deliberate. The IAF’s Exercise Aakraman notably deployed Rafale fighters—India’s most advanced multirole aircraft—into operational scenarios that closely mimic the rugged terrain of the Line of Control (LoC) with Pakistan. Missions involved deep-strike sorties, ground attack simulations, and long-range operations using precision-guided munitions.
Air Force assets from bases across India were repositioned to maximize strategic flexibility, highlighting a multi-front readiness. The choice to bring elite “top gun” squadrons into these drills, focusing on high-intensity conflict scenarios, has fueled speculation that India is moving beyond symbolic posturing.
Naval activity mirrored this trend. The INS Surat, a Visakhapatnam-class destroyer, successfully conducted multiple live-fire tests of the Medium-Range Surface-to-Air Missile (MR-SAM) system—co-developed with Israel. The tests demonstrated the Navy’s growing emphasis on layered air defense capabilities and interoperability with indigenous and allied technologies.
“The Indian Navy ship successfully executed multiple missile tests, demonstrating platform readiness, crew competence, and the capability to conduct long-range strikes,” the Navy posted on its official X (formerly Twitter) account.
The MR-SAM system, capable of intercepting threats at distances up to 100 kilometers, adds a vital layer of protection against both air and missile threats. The system’s Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) radar allows it to operate effectively even in heavily jammed environments, a key asset amid modern electronic warfare.
India’s demonstration of coordinated sea and air power serves not only as a show of strength but also as an implicit warning to any potential adversaries. Historically, such maneuvers have preceded periods of intensified conflict along the India-Pakistan frontier.
On its part, Pakistan has responded by showcasing its upgraded aerial capabilities. New images reveal Pakistan Air Force (PAF) JF-17 Thunder fighters equipped with PL-15 long-range air-to-air missiles, a Chinese technology considered among the most advanced in the world.
The PL-15 missile, boasting a range exceeding 300 kilometers and Mach 4 speeds, substantially extends Pakistan’s ability to challenge Indian aerial supremacy. With an active AESA radar seeker, the PL-15 can lock onto and destroy targets at distances that outmatch many of India’s current air-to-air missiles.
This upgrade, combined with the integration of PL-10 short-range missiles on JF-17s, transforms Pakistan’s air combat doctrine. Instead of operating defensively within its airspace, the PAF could now engage Indian aircraft at far greater distances, potentially altering the aerial balance in South Asia.
Defense sources indicate that China has expedited the transfer of PL-15 systems to Pakistan under an emergency security framework, reflecting deepening Sino-Pakistani military cooperation amid deteriorating India-China relations.
The induction of the PL-15 poses a significant tactical dilemma for India. Engagement envelopes for platforms like the Rafale and Su-30MKI must now be recalibrated. India’s BVR (beyond visual range) combat strategies, once comfortably dominant thanks to Meteor and Astra missiles, will face stiffer resistance.
In response, India may accelerate efforts to field the Astra Mk II missile—designed to bridge gaps with adversaries like the PL-15—and ramp up procurements of advanced Electronic Warfare (EW) systems.
What makes the current situation even more volatile is the growing complexity of the Indo-Pakistani-China triangle. Any escalation between India and Pakistan carries the inherent risk of involving China, directly or indirectly, thereby broadening the conflict’s scope.
Both Indian and Pakistani leaderships are being closely briefed by their military establishments. In Pakistan, Asif confirmed that strategic decisions have been taken to prepare for a range of scenarios, including full-blown conventional warfare.
Sources in India similarly suggest that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been actively engaged with military chiefs, receiving situation reports and assessing potential military and diplomatic responses.
The situation draws uncomfortable parallels with the 2019 Pulwama-Balakot episode, where a terror attack triggered Indian airstrikes inside Pakistani territory and subsequent aerial engagements. However, the scale and tone of current preparations suggest that any new confrontation could be broader and more destructive.
Global powers have so far maintained a cautious distance. The United States has called for restraint, urging both nations to resolve differences through dialogue. China’s response has been predictably neutral, urging “stability in the region,” even as it quietly supports Pakistan.
Russia, increasingly a diplomatic partner to India but maintaining defense ties with Pakistan, has also emphasized dialogue but refrained from overt criticism of either side.
The United Nations, traditionally a forum for Indo-Pakistani disputes over Kashmir, remains sidelined, given the bilateral nature of the recent tensions and India’s longstanding objection to international mediation in Kashmir-related matters.
What separates this standoff from conventional border skirmishes is the ever-present nuclear shadow. Both India and Pakistan possess sizeable nuclear arsenals, with established doctrines that contemplate nuclear use under certain scenarios.
Pakistan’s doctrine emphasizes “first use” in the event of a conventional military defeat or existential threat. India’s “no first use” policy is more restrained, but Indian military planners have increasingly signaled a more flexible interpretation in recent years.
Thus, even a limited skirmish carries outsized risks. Miscalculations, accidental engagements, or preemptive actions could trigger a chain reaction difficult to control.
Defense analysts warn that unlike the Cold War model of “assured destruction” between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, the Indo-Pakistani nuclear equation is less stable, less formalized, and more susceptible to crisis-driven decision-making.
As spring deepens across South Asia, the temperature along the LoC continues to rise, both literally and figuratively. Troop movements, aerial patrols, and naval deployments intensify.
Yet, both nations recognize—at least at the highest strategic levels—that open conflict carries risks that far outweigh any short-term political or territorial gains. Past crises, including the Kargil War in 1999 and the 2019 Balakot strikes, offer sobering reminders of how quickly things can spiral.
Still, the current environment—marked by upgraded capabilities, less political space for de-escalation, and heightened nationalist sentiment—means that the chances of miscalculation are arguably greater than ever.
