Dr Bilawal Kamran
In a dramatic and dangerous escalation of tensions between two nuclear-armed neighbors, Pakistan launched Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos in response to what it termed unprovoked and illegal Indian missile strikes across its territory. The operation, announced early Saturday by Pakistan’s Foreign Office (FO), was carried out under Article 51 of the UN Charter, which recognizes a nation’s right to self-defense.
This development follows a wave of BrahMos missile attacks launched by India on various Pakistani locations, including military and civilian infrastructure. These strikes, according to Islamabad, not only violated international law but also inflicted severe human and material damage—including the deaths of women, children, and the elderly.
Despite the grave provocation, Pakistan maintained that its counter-offensive was calibrated, targeted, and restrained. The FO spokesperson stated that only those Indian military installations and command centers directly involved in the aggression were targeted. Among them were airbases such as Udhampur and Pathankot, which were reportedly used to launch the initial missile attacks on Pakistan. The government claims it has presented irrefutable evidence to the international community to support its actions.
The rapid deterioration of peace in the region is especially troubling given the volatile history and unresolved disputes between India and Pakistan. According to Ambassador Shafqat Ali Khan, India ignored Pakistan’s repeated offers for a neutral international investigation into the missile attacks and instead chose to escalate tensions further. Between May 7 and 10, India allegedly launched waves of killer drones and additional missile strikes across Pakistan, including areas near the federal capital.
These attacks, said the ambassador, were not only a breach of Pakistan’s airspace and sovereignty but also a grave threat to regional stability. The intensity and precision of India’s military action resulted in heavy civilian casualties and widespread fear among the population, prompting a massive public demand for a decisive counter-response.
Remarkably, even in the face of severe provocation, Pakistan’s military response was intentionally measured. The government emphasized that civilian areas were deliberately avoided during the retaliatory strikes and that all actions taken were focused solely on neutralizing the threat without widening the scope of conflict.
Such restraint from Islamabad, despite being under attack, is being framed as a demonstration of maturity and responsibility—a message to the international community that Pakistan has no interest in a prolonged conflict but reserves the right to defend its people and sovereignty.
While India’s recent actions may appear isolated, Pakistan argues they are part of a broader pattern of hybrid warfare and destabilization tactics. The FO points out that India has, for years, sought to exploit Pakistan’s internal security challenges—particularly along its western borders where it has been engaged in fighting terrorism.
Ambassador Shafqat stressed that India has orchestrated proxy attacks and carried out a relentless disinformation campaign to paint Pakistan as the epicenter of global terrorism. Ironically, this narrative tends to intensify just as Pakistan makes major gains in its internal counterterrorism operations.
He warned that using the “terrorism” label as a political tool not only misrepresents reality but also hampers genuine efforts at peacebuilding. The Kashmir dispute, which remains the core unresolved issue, is often mischaracterized by India as a terrorism problem, despite it being an internationally recognized issue of self-determination.
The recent escalation has once again highlighted the fragile state of peace in South Asia, and Pakistan has called on the international community to intervene—not to take sides, but to ensure that the cycle of violence and provocation does not continue unchecked.
The FO reiterated Pakistan’s commitment to dialogue and peaceful resolution of all disputes, including Kashmir, but made it clear that national sovereignty and security are non-negotiable. The situation, if left to fester, poses a direct threat not only to the two nations involved but to the stability of the entire region and beyond.
In conclusion, the exchange of missile fire and drone strikes between India and Pakistan marks a disturbing low point in their already fraught relationship. Pakistan’s Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos may have restored some balance in the immediate aftermath of the Indian aggression, but it has also exposed the dire need for a comprehensive and sustained peace process.
The world cannot afford to ignore this crisis. Two nuclear states edging toward open conflict is a scenario with catastrophic consequences. Pakistan’s measured response is a stark reminder that while military strength is a necessary deterrent, diplomacy is the only path to lasting peace.
If this moment doesn’t trigger international introspection and action, then what will?
