Written By Nabeeha Wafa As tensions once again rise between South Asia’s nuclear-armed neighbors, Pakistan’s nuclear warning to India in May...
Written By Nabeeha Wafa
.jpg)
As tensions once again rise between South Asia’s nuclear-armed neighbors,
Pakistan’s nuclear warning to India in May 2025 has drawn international
attention and concern. But far from being reckless, Pakistan’s position is
based on a long-standing policy aimed at deterrence, not destruction.
For many outside the region especially in the West such warnings can
appear alarming. But within South Asia, where the past still bleeds into the
present and every border carries the weight of history, Pakistan’s doctrine is
not about launching war but about stopping it before it begins.
"In a land where every mother knows the price of war, deterrence is not a threat, it is a vow to protect the living from the ghosts of the past."
The 2025 Escalation: What Actually
Happened
On May 7, 2025, India launched a coordinated set of airstrikes
under Operation Sindoor against what it claimed were militant targets
inside Pakistan, including in Pakistan-administered Kashmir and Punjab
province. Indian Rafale jets, armed with precision-guided SCALP missiles and
Hammer bombs, struck nine sites, including Bahawalpur, Muridke, Gulpur,
Bhimber, Chak Amru, Bagh, Kotli, Sialkot, and Muzaffarabad. These attacks
resulted in at least 31 civilian deaths, including women and children,
and injured dozens more. Notably, a mosque in Muzaffarabad and an educational
complex in Muridke, comprising a school, college, and medical clinic, were
among the damaged structures.
India claimed the strikes targeted terrorist infrastructure linked to the
Pahalgam massacre, where 26 Indian tourists were killed in April. Indian
Defense Minister Rajnath Singh stated that at least 100 terrorists were killed
in the missile strikes.
In response, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) scrambled its aircraft
and engaged Indian jets in a dogfight that reportedly lasted nearly an hour.
Pakistan claimed it shot down five Indian aircraft, including advanced
Rafales, marking this as one of the most serious military confrontations
between the two countries since the 2019 Pulwama–Balakot crisis.
Then, in the early hours of May 10, India escalated by launching missile
attacks on three major Pakistani airbases: Nur Khan (Rawalpindi),
Murid (Chakwal), and Rafiqui (Jhang). Pakistan confirmed these attacks and
reported damage to infrastructure, but its air defense systems managed to
intercept several missiles.
In response, Pakistan launched Operation Bunyan Marsoos rantslated
as "Wall of Steel". In a coordinated air and missile campaign,
Pakistan struck multiple Indian military targets, including:
- The BrahMos missile storage depot
in Beas
- Pathankot and Udhampur airbases
in Indian Punjab and Jammu
- Forward supply depots and logistics hubs supporting Indian Integrated Battle Groups (IBGs)
"We did not choose war, but we refused silence in the face of fire."
The Cold Start Doctrine and the Risk
of Miscalculation
At the heart of India’s military posture lies the Cold Start Doctrine:
a strategy of launching rapid, limited conventional strikes into Pakistani
territory before Islamabad can organize a full defense. The intent is to
deliver punitive blows while staying below Pakistan’s nuclear threshold.
But this doctrine rests on a dangerous assumption: that Pakistan would
tolerate such a strike without retaliating or escalating. It is precisely this
assumption that Pakistan’s nuclear warnings and now its military response are
designed to dismantle.
"Deterrence is not the language of war—it is the language of warning. It says: tread carefully, for what breaks in battle cannot always be mended in peace."
Why Pakistan’s Nuclear Doctrine
Matters
Pakistan does not subscribe to a “No First Use” policy. Instead, it
maintains strategic ambiguity about when and how it might use nuclear
weapons. This policy, called Full Spectrum Deterrence under the Credible
Minimum Deterrence framework, is meant to leave adversaries uncertain and
thereby deter aggression.
In response to India's evolving military strength and Cold Start posture,
Pakistan has developed tactical nuclear weapons such as the Nasr
(Hatf-IX) short-range missile. These weapons are meant to blunt Indian
incursions by targeting military columns or airbases before they gain a
foothold. While battlefield-ready, these systems remain under strict central
command to avoid unauthorized use.
"When a nation builds weapons, it is not always to use them but often to make sure they never have to be used at all."
Command and Control: Avoiding
Accidental Escalation
Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is overseen by the National Command
Authority (NCA), a civilian-military body responsible for decision-making
and operational control. This ensures that no battlefield commander or crisis
escalation can trigger a nuclear launch without authorization from the top
leadership.
The NCA employs layered electronic, procedural, and physical safeguards to prevent misuse, even amid combat operations. During Operation Bunyan Marsoos, these controls were tested but remained fully intact showing Pakistan's ability to mount a robust conventional response without destabilizing the nuclear balance.
Why the 2025 Nuclear Warning Matters
Pakistan's nuclear warning following the attacks was not an act of
brinkmanship but a calculated message rooted in its strategic doctrine. It
underscored that any aggression would be met with a proportionate response, and
that the thresholds for escalation are well-defined yet deliberately ambiguous
to deter adversaries.
India’s recent reorganization into Integrated Battle Groups (IBGs),
coupled with precision-strike capabilities and Cold Start-like planning, is
viewed in Islamabad as a deliberate move to test Pakistan’s thresholds.
Operation Bunyan Marsoos was Islamabad’s answer: swift, calculated, and
proportional but backed by a doctrine that warns escalation won’t end
conventionally.
"We warned not because we were weak but because we remember the cost of war far too well to risk it lightly."
Deterrence Is Meant to Prevent War Not
Fight One
Pakistan’s doctrine doesn’t seek confrontation. It seeks to preserve a
peace that cannot be taken for granted in a region where one misstep could
cost thousands of lives.
By reinforcing tactical capabilities, maintaining strategic ambiguity, and launching credible military responses, Pakistan aims to prevent misjudgments like the one that occurred on May 7. In this light, nuclear deterrence is not about aggression but about creating unacceptable risks for aggressors.
Conclusion: The Logic of Stability in
a Nuclear Region
Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine is not about brinkmanship, it’s about ensuring
peace through credible deterrence. Operation Bunyan Marsoos demonstrated
that Pakistan is not only willing but capable of defending itself decisively
within a framework that aims to avoid nuclear war, not incite it.
For diplomats, strategists, and younger generations across South Asia,
the takeaway from May 2025 is clear: the stakes of miscalculation are too high.
In a nuclearized region, the logic of deterrence backed by restraint,
readiness, and resolve remains the most reliable path to peace.
"Peace is not kept by the quiet, but by the resolute—those who speak clearly when the world begins to whisper war."
Let those who seek to understand Pakistan’s warnings look beyond the
rhetoric and into the logic of deterrence. In a region where seconds decide
fate and firepower knows no borders, the space for miscalculation is
vanishingly small and the cost of error, unthinkably high.
.jpg)