MEDIA, MISSILES AND MISTRUST

Absence of structured communication channels deepens suspicion, provoking overreaction, leading to an escalation spiral

- LIEUTENANT GENERAL D.S. HOODA (RETD)

The military relationship between India and Pakistan has long operated in a narrow space between restraint and retaliation. Each recent crisis—from Uri to Pulwama and Pahalgam—has tested deterrence, political will and strategic signalling. Yet with each iteration, the climb up the escalation ladder becomes swifter and more precarious.

What once unfolded over days or weeks of diplomatic signalling and military posturing now plays out within hours. This drastic compression of response time carries significant risks, shrinking the space for de-escalation, considered decision-making and backchannel diplomacy. There are three primary drivers of this rapid escalation.

The first driver is the conduct of war from a distance, which lends it a detached quality. Drones, long-range stand-off weapons and missiles enable precision strikes to be executed without endangering one's own forces. Viewing strikes through monitors far removed from the battlefield dulls the sensory shock of close-quarters combat.

This insulation from the battlefield encourages leaders to perceive military options as virtually risk-free rather than as instruments of last resort. Because remote operations seldom endanger their own troops, each successful hit appears consequence-free.

This illusion emboldens decision-makers to persist with attacks. Yet the destruction inflicted by modern long-range weapons is real, compelling the adversary to respond.