India-Pakistan Tensions Surge After Deadly Kashmir Attack

India-Pakistan Tensions Escalate After Deadly Pahalgam Terror Attack

A deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, on April 23, 2025, has pushed India and Pakistan into one of their most serious diplomatic crises in years. The attack claimed the lives of 26 individuals—most of them Indian tourists—and left over 20 others injured. The militant group Kashmir Resistance, which has alleged ties to the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, has claimed responsibility for the assault.

India has strongly condemned the attack and directly blamed Pakistan for fostering cross-border terrorism. Pakistan, in turn, has denied any involvement, calling India’s accusations “baseless and politically motivated.” The fallout from the attack has triggered a rapid deterioration in bilateral relations, prompting both sides to take drastic diplomatic, economic, and military steps.

India’s Swift and Strong Reaction

In response to the attack, India’s Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) held an emergency meeting, following which several key decisions were announced:

• Visa Restrictions: India suspended all visas previously issued to Pakistani nationals and revoked the SAARC visa exemption facility. Pakistani diplomats and nationals were ordered to leave the country within 48 hours.

• Border Measures: India closed the Attari-Wagah border crossing and halted the traditional daily ceremonial handshake between border guards.

• Water Treaty Suspension: In a major move, India suspended the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, a foundational agreement that governs water sharing between the two nations. This has raised concerns about the region’s water security.

• Diplomatic Downgrade: Indian diplomats were recalled from Islamabad, and Pakistan’s diplomatic staff in New Delhi were expelled.

• Travel Advisory: The Indian government advised its citizens to avoid travel to Pakistan and called upon those already there to return home at the earliest.

Pakistan’s Countermeasures

In retaliation, Pakistan responded with a parallel set of measures:

• Airspace Closure: Pakistan shut its airspace to Indian aircraft, leading to disruptions in international and domestic flight routes.

• Trade Suspension: All trade with India was suspended, including transactions routed through third countries.

• Diplomatic Expulsions: Pakistan canceled visas issued to Indian nationals, expelled Indian diplomats, and directed Indian military advisers to leave the country by April 30.

• Treaty Suspension: Pakistan announced the suspension of the Simla Agreement, a pivotal 1972 accord that has long shaped India-Pakistan relations. Islamabad also warned that any interference with its water resources would be considered an act of war.

Tensions Along the Line of Control

As diplomatic relations unraveled, tensions escalated on the ground. Reports emerged of cross-border firing between Indian and Pakistani troops along the Line of Control (LoC) in Kashmir. Although no casualties have been reported, the skirmishes reflect the growing volatility in the region.

Global Reactions and Calls for Peace

The international community has expressed deep concern over the rapidly worsening situation. The United Nations called for “maximum restraint” and urged both countries to de-escalate through dialogue. The United States, while reiterating its concern over regional stability, emphasized that it respects India’s position of resolving issues with Pakistan bilaterally, without third-party mediation.

An Uncertain Road Ahead

The fallout from the Pahalgam attack has led to an unprecedented rupture in India-Pakistan relations. Diplomatic ties are downgraded, borders are closed, and major treaties are suspended. With both sides refusing to back down and warning of serious consequences, fears of a broader conflict are growing.

Efforts by the international community to mediate or calm tensions have yet to yield significant progress. Both nations appear focused on asserting their positions rather than engaging in dialogue. As tensions remain high, the risk of further escalation—military or otherwise—cannot be ruled out.