Low-Intensity, Persistent Struggle

People on both sides of the India-Pakistan border had their first calm night on Sunday after days of intense hostilities between the arch-rivals. A day earlier, both hurled accusations against each other of violating the ceasefire brokered by the United States. Soon after the understanding came into effect, India accused Pakistan of sending military drones across the border and launching rockets into Jammu and Kashmir and targeted Pakistan’s military installations in response. The uneasy calm holds for now. But will it in the long run?

The India-Pakistan conflict remains one of the most persistent geopolitical tensions in modern history. While both nations have engaged in multiple wars since their partition in 1947, a full-scale war seems unlikely. Instead, tensions continue in a low-intensity form, shaped by strategic calculations, external diplomatic pressures, and the emergence of drone warfare. The rivalry between India and Pakistan is deeply rooted in history, ideology, and territorial disputes. Since gaining independence in 1947, the two nations have fought multiple wars, mostly centered around Kashmir. However, none of these conflicts have resulted in a decisive military victory. Instead, they have reinforced the status quo, leaving both sides locked in a cycle of hostilities and failed peace attempts.

Border skirmishes 

Despite the numerous ceasefire agreements signed over the years, skirmishes along the border persist. The situation remains volatile, and every minor altercation has the potential to escalate into a larger conflict. While both countries possess nuclear weapons, making a full-scale war incredibly dangerous, neither side seems willing to relinquish aggressive posturing. This fragile balance ensures that military engagements remain limited yet frequent.

The United States played a crucial role in mediating the ceasefire, pressuring both nations to prevent further escalation. Washington recognised the catastrophic consequences of war between two nuclear-armed states, facilitating diplomatic backchannel negotiations to avert direct military confrontation. U.S. foreign policy toward South Asia has always been dictated by its broader strategic interests. Stability in the region is essential for Washington, particularly as it shifts focus to counter China’s growing influence. The Biden administration has sought to balance its relationships with both India and Pakistan, ensuring that neither country feels overly antagonised. 

Given India’s strategic importance as a counterweight to China, the U.S. has strengthened defence and economic ties with New Delhi. However, it also maintains a working relationship with Pakistan, particularly in matters of counterterrorism. China, too, has historically supported Pakistan but remains economically invested in regional stability. With large-scale infrastructure projects in South Asia, Beijing seeks to maintain controlled tensions rather than prolonged conflict, ensuring that trade routes and geopolitical interests remain secure. 

Through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), Beijing has invested billions in South Asian infrastructure. A major conflict between India and Pakistan would threaten these investments, disrupt trade routes, and create uncertainty in a region where China seeks economic dominance. As a result, Beijing has a vested interest in ensuring that tensions remain controlled, exerting influence over Islamabad to prevent escalation.

Even with the ceasefire in place, border skirmishes persist, largely due to the increasing reliance on military drones. Pakistan has reportedly deployed drones along the Line of Control (LoC), providing surveillance and precision strikes against Indian positions. India, in turn, has incorporated advanced anti-drone technologies and conducted targeted drone operations to neutralize cross-border threats. Drones have emerged as a game-changer in modern military engagements. Their ability to conduct reconnaissance, carry out targeted strikes, and evade conventional defence systems makes them an essential tool in asymmetric warfare. Pakistan has used drones not only for surveillance but also reportedly supplied arms and explosives to militant groups operating along the border. 

This shift from traditional troop deployments to asymmetric drone warfare reflects a broader transformation in military engagement, where technology enables tactical manoeuvring without confrontation. Drones allow both countries to engage militarily without triggering full-scale war, making them an ideal choice for nations locked in prolonged territorial disputes. However, their increased use also raises concerns about misinterpretation and unintended escalation.

Beyond military technology, misinformation and miscalculation pose serious risks. False reports, exaggerated casualty figures, and distorted narratives often fuel nationalist sentiments and pressure governments into retaliatory actions. The spread of misinformation has become a major problem in modern conflict zones. With the rise of social media and state-controlled propaganda, false narratives can quickly shape public opinion and governmental decisions. In India and Pakistan, the media plays a significant role in shaping nationalistic fervour. Sensationalized reports of cross-border attacks or exaggerated casualty figures often provoke strong reactions from the public, forcing governments to respond in kind. Past conflicts—such as the 2019 Pulwama attack—have demonstrated how misleading narratives can escalate tensions, forcing leaders into aggressive military responses. Misinterpretations of routine drone movements or defensive measures can trigger disproportionate retaliations, pushing both nations toward unnecessary confrontations.

Miscalculation

Similarly, miscalculation remains an ever-present danger. In high-stakes situations, even minor errors in judgment can lead to a big escalation. If India perceives a routine Pakistani drone operation as a prelude to a larger attack, it may respond with disproportionate force, triggering a cycle of retaliation. Likewise, Pakistan’s military planners may misread India’s defensive measures as preparations for an offensive, prompting pre-emptive strikes. The combination of misinformation and miscalculation creates a volatile environment where small incidents can spiral into larger conflicts.

Despite recurring skirmishes, a full-scale India-Pakistan war remains unlikely due to military stalemates, nuclear deterrence, and global diplomatic pressures. The future of India-Pakistan relations will largely be determined by how both nations manage their border tensions. Continued reliance on drone warfare, cyber operations, and targeted strikes suggests that the conflict will remain contained yet persistent. Though peace talks occasionally surface, ideological differences, historical grievances, and political nationalism will hinder long-term resolutions. However, misinformation and miscalculation introduce new risks, potentially intensifying hostilities beyond controlled skirmishes. As regional power dynamics shift, India and Pakistan will navigate a fragile balance, avoiding catastrophic war while sustaining their geopolitical rivalry.

(A PhD in political science from the State University of New York, Buffalo, the author is a faculty member at IACER. govinda@iacer.edu.np)