Pakistan’s offensive defence

We are witnessing the rule-based order collapse in real time. It ain’t a pretty sight.

Multiple and simultaneous conflicts across the globe are telling the same story: military might is what matters the most. This harsh reality had been obfuscated under the blanket of international rules, treaties and conventions. Missiles and bombs have blown away this veneer and now the world stands exposed to the exercise of naked power.

Russia-Ukraine war, Israel-Iran conflict, Israeli genocide of Palestinians, and Pakistan’s vanquishing of India in the four-day hostilities, all these mega and mini wars are a reminder that the old ways of living, thriving and surviving in the international system are fast getting outdated. This new normal, so to speak, shall be internalized swiftly by all countries who face threats to their sovereignty.

More so Pakistan.

The conflict with India has showcased Pakistan’s military prowess but this is not a one-off event. The hiking of the defence budget, and a greater focus on acquiring the latest weaponry is now an accepted fact. Israeli belligerence in the Middle East, and open support from the United States and various other western nations, has further lowered the threshold of acceptability for unilateral aggression against a weaker state. In such an age of war, experts say, the best deterrent is having enough firepower, and the readiness to unleash it, so the opponent understands the steep cost of aggression.

In our context, this may go beyond the nuclear factor. India has tried to create space for a conventional attack. It has paid a steep price. We have also understood weaknesses in our defences. Both sides will aim to rectify such weaknesses while preparing for the next round.

There are enough reasons to suggest, in fact, that there will be another round. Indian military analysts have acknowledged the superiority of the Pakistan air force and its use of multi-domain warfare strategy that resulted in six Indian fighter aircraft being shot down.

They have also pointed out that Pakistan will acquire more sophisticated and lethal fighter jets, missiles and air defence systems from China soon. This will give PAF a decisive edge over the Indian air force. Since modern conflicts are now primarily defined by air and missile power, such superiority would mean Pakistan having a clear advantage in a limited but intense conflict with India.

The comparison to Israeli aggression against Iran can only go so far. Israel’s rationale for an unprovoked attack on Iran is as flimsy as it gets. It has launched a full-scale war on the pretext that Tehran is near building a nuclear weapon. Israel has not had to construct a narrative for its aggression because it has superior military might, American and European backing and an opponent that is sanctioned, isolated and militarily weaker.

Pakistan’s case differs. We are not sanctioned, not isolated and not militarily weaker (of course India is stronger in real numbers). Any doubts about Pakistan not being able to deter, degrade and defeat India in a limited conventional conflict have been put to rest after the recent conflict.

But unlike Israel, we need a narrative to bolster our policy. Up till the May hostilities, India commanded the narrative ladder and escalated at will. But by misjudging the situation after the Pahalgam incident and launching an attack on Pakistan without any solid proof, India has blundered into a situation where Pakistan now commands the narrative. For now. The worst thing we can do is to take this narrative edge for granted.

Also, there’s a difference.

So far, our entire approach towards India has been defensive in nature. Military doctrines and narrative talking points all have remained focused on how we will defend ourselves against an Indian onslaught. This defensive approach has outlived its utility. It now needs to transform into an offensive defence strategy.

What do we mean by this?

In simple terms, this means Pakistan has to carefully and persuasively construct a narrative that justifies a pre-emptive strike on India if our sovereignty is under threat. Two factors here require elaboration.

First, the obvious factor that will define such an offensive defence is India disturbing or diverting the flow of water to Pakistan. We have already stated our official position that we will consider this an act of war. Good. But now we have to expand on it so that the world understands that if such an eventuality were to occur, then Pakistan’s kinetic response will be a ‘just war’. Of course, war is not the desired outcome. But whatever offensive defence we opt to exercise must be backed by a rationale that the world understands and appreciates.

Second, such an offensive defence may not be confined to the water issue alone. It is clear that India has already stepped-up terrorist activity inside Pakistan. It may ramp up these efforts in the coming weeks and months. There is a threshold for such activity. Once that is breached, Pakistan should be open to considering a bigger response. But this too requires careful thinking, conceptualizing and then formal articulation.

In the new normal, a new way of approaching our defence through greater willingness for offence may then be the best deterrent in a hostile neighbourhood.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025