On April 22, 2025, a terrorist attack in the Baisaran Valley near Pahalgam, located in the Anantnag district of Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, killed 26 tourists, including 25 Indian citizens and one Nepalese national, while injuring over 20 others. This incident, the deadliest in India since the 2008 Mumbai attacks, was claimed by The Resistance Front (TRF), a militant group designated as a terrorist organization by India and linked to the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, a United Nations-sanctioned entity. The attack has precipitated a severe escalation in India-Pakistan relations, marked by diplomatic expulsions, trade suspensions, and the abeyance of the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, raising concerns about regional stability and the potential for military conflict between two nuclear-armed states. This article examines the geopolitical, economic, and strategic dimensions of the crisis, drawing on verified data from authoritative sources to analyze its implications for South Asia and the international community.
The Pahalgam attack targeted a group of predominantly Hindu male tourists in a scenic meadow known as “mini-Switzerland,” accessible only by foot or horseback, approximately 7 kilometers from Pahalgam town. According to a report by the Observer Research Foundation, TRF emerged in 2019 following India’s revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status, which had granted the region limited autonomy. The group’s stated motive for the attack was to resist perceived demographic changes in Kashmir, particularly the settlement of non-Kashmiris enabled by the 2019 policy shift, which allowed outsiders to purchase land and access jobs in the region. Indian security agencies identified Saifullah Kasuri, a senior Lashkar-e-Taiba commander, as the mastermind, with sketches released of three suspected Pakistani nationals involved: Hashim Musa, Ali Bhai, and Abdul Hussain Thokar, according to a statement from the Jammu and Kashmir Police on April 24, 2025.
India’s response was swift and multifaceted, reflecting both domestic political pressures and strategic objectives. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, addressing a rally in Bihar on April 24, vowed to “identify, track, and punish every terrorist and their backers” to the “ends of the earth,” signaling a robust retaliatory posture. The Cabinet Committee on Security, chaired by Modi, convened on April 23 and announced a five-pronged strategy. First, India suspended its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty, a World Bank-brokered agreement that has governed the sharing of the Indus River system’s waters since 1960, citing Pakistan’s alleged support for cross-border terrorism. Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri stated on April 23 that the treaty would remain in abeyance until Pakistan “credibly and irrevocably abjures” such support. Second, India closed the Attari-Wagah Integrated Check Post, the primary land border crossing with Pakistan, effective immediately. Third, all visas issued to Pakistani nationals, except long-term, diplomatic, and official visas, were revoked, with a deadline of April 27 for affected individuals to leave India. Fourth, India expelled Pakistani military advisors from the Pakistan High Commission in New Delhi and reduced diplomatic staff from 55 to 30. Finally, India issued a travel advisory urging its citizens to avoid Pakistan and return immediately if present there.
Pakistan’s National Security Committee, chaired by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, met on April 24 and responded with reciprocal measures. Pakistan closed its airspace to Indian aircraft, suspended all trade with India, and placed the 1972 Simla Agreement, a post-war peace accord, in abeyance. A statement from Sharif’s office warned that any Indian attempt to “stop or divert” the Indus River system’s flow would be considered an “act of war,” given that Pakistan relies on these waters for approximately 90% of its agricultural irrigation, according to data from the Food and Agriculture Organization. Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry, through spokesperson Abdul Qahar Balkhi, condemned the Pahalgam attack but denied any involvement, with Defense Minister Khawaja Asif labeling India’s accusations as “unilateral, politically motivated, and legally void.” Tensions further escalated with reports of ceasefire violations along the Line of Control on April 24, involving small-arms fire exchanges, though no casualties were reported, per Indian Army statements to Reuters.
The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty represents a critical escalation, given its historical resilience through three India-Pakistan wars. The treaty allocates the waters of the Indus and its tributaries, with India controlling the eastern rivers (Sutlej, Beas, and Ravi) and Pakistan the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab), subject to India’s limited use for domestic purposes. A 2023 World Bank report emphasized the treaty’s role in preventing water-related conflicts, noting that Pakistan’s agriculture, which accounts for 24% of its GDP, depends heavily on consistent water flows. India’s decision to hold the treaty in abeyance raises the specter of water weaponization, though practical constraints—such as India’s limited infrastructure to divert significant water volumes—may limit immediate impacts. The International Monetary Fund’s 2024 Pakistan country report highlights that any disruption to water availability could exacerbate Pakistan’s economic vulnerabilities, given its $350 billion GDP and ongoing fiscal challenges.
Geopolitically, the crisis underscores the enduring Kashmir dispute, which has fueled three wars since India and Pakistan’s independence in 1947. The Line of Control, established after the 1947-48 war, divides the region, with India administering two-thirds and Pakistan one-third, while China controls a portion in the east. The 2019 revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s autonomy intensified local grievances, with the United Nations Human Rights Council noting increased detentions and communication blackouts in the region. The Pahalgam attack, occurring during a period of relative calm, has reignited fears of renewed insurgency. A 2024 report by the Council on Foreign Relations indicates that while violence in Kashmir has declined since 2019, sporadic militant attacks persist, often attributed to Pakistan-based groups. India’s claim of “clear evidence of cross-border complicity,” presented to foreign envoys on April 23, aligns with its long-standing narrative, though Pakistan’s denial and call for a “comprehensive investigation” reflect the absence of mutually accepted evidence.
Economically, the mutual trade suspensions and airspace closures threaten to deepen bilateral isolation. The World Trade Organization’s 2024 trade profiles show that India-Pakistan bilateral trade, already minimal at $2.8 billion in 2023, is dwarfed by India’s $1.2 trillion and Pakistan’s $80 billion total trade volumes. However, Pakistan’s closure of airspace to Indian flights could disrupt India’s aviation sector, which handled 153 million passengers in 2024, per the International Air Transport Association. Conversely, Pakistan’s agricultural exports, valued at $7 billion annually by the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, may face logistical challenges if trade routes are further constrained. The Asian Development Bank’s 2025 outlook warns that escalating tensions could deter foreign investment in both nations, with India’s FDI inflows of $45 billion and Pakistan’s $1.5 billion in 2024 at risk.
Internationally, the crisis has elicited cautious responses. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, on April 24, urged both nations to exercise “maximum restraint,” citing concerns over regional stability. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, in a call with Modi on April 25, expressed horror at the attack and reaffirmed solidarity, according to a Downing Street statement. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak also condemned the attack, with Netanyahu calling it a “barbaric” act, per India’s Ministry of External Affairs. Indonesia’s Ambassador to India, Ina Hagniningtyas Krisnamurthi, labeled the attack “heinous” and unjustifiable. These condemnations reflect global consensus against terrorism but stop short of endorsing India’s retaliatory measures, highlighting the delicate balance of maintaining relations with both nations.
The domestic fallout in India has been marked by widespread grief and anger. Protests erupted in Delhi, Jammu, and other cities, with some targeting Pakistan and raising concerns about anti-Muslim sentiment, as noted by CNN on April 24. The Indian Premier League observed moments of silence, and public figures, including cricketer Gautam Gambhir, called for severing sporting ties with Pakistan. The Congress Party, led by Rahul Gandhi, organized candlelight vigils and emphasized national unity, with Gandhi visiting victims’ families in Kashmir on April 25. Meanwhile, the Jammu and Kashmir Police launched a manhunt, deploying drones and helicopters, and imposed a lockdown in Pahalgam, according to Al Jazeera. The arrest of an individual in Jharkhand for praising the attack on social media underscores heightened domestic sensitivities.
Strategically, the attack poses a dilemma for Modi’s government. The Lowy Institute notes that the timing, coinciding with Vice President JD Vance’s visit to India and Modi’s curtailed trip to Saudi Arabia, suggests an intent to embarrass India on the global stage. A muscular response risks internationalizing the Kashmir issue, which India has sought to frame as a domestic matter, while inaction could embolden opposition narratives of policy failure. The 2019 Balakot airstrikes, following a similar attack, set a precedent for military action, but Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities and conventional deterrence, as outlined in a 2024 RAND Corporation study, constrain escalation. Pakistan’s military readiness, affirmed by an anonymous security official to Al Jazeera, signals preparedness for retaliation, raising the stakes of miscalculation.
The Pahalgam attack and its aftermath illustrate the fragility of India-Pakistan relations, rooted in historical grievances and competing nationalisms. The suspension of foundational agreements like the Indus Waters Treaty and Simla Accord threatens long-term stability, while economic and diplomatic measures deepen mutual isolation. The international community’s restrained response reflects the complexity of mediating between two nuclear powers. As security operations continue and both nations brace for potential escalation, the crisis underscores the urgent need for dialogue to prevent a slide toward conflict, with implications for South Asia’s 2 billion inhabitants and global security.
Geopolitical and Economic Ramifications of the 2025 Pahalgam Terrorist Attack: India-Pakistan Tensions and Regional Stability
On April 22, 2025, a devastating terrorist attack struck the Baisaran Valley near Pahalgam in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir, claiming the lives of 25 Indian tourists and one Nepalese citizen, while injuring over 20 others. The assault, executed in a remote meadow accessible only by foot or horseback, was claimed by The Resistance Front (TRF), a militant group linked to the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, a United Nations-sanctioned terrorist organization. This incident, the deadliest in India since the 2008 Mumbai attacks, has triggered an unprecedented escalation in India-Pakistan relations, marked by the suspension of the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, mutual diplomatic expulsions, trade bans, and ceasefire violations along the Line of Control. Drawing on verified data from authoritative sources, including the United Nations, World Bank, and national statistical agencies, this article analyzes the geopolitical, economic, and strategic dimensions of the crisis, exploring its implications for South Asia’s stability and the global order.
The Pahalgam attack targeted a group of predominantly Hindu male tourists in a scenic valley, known locally as “mini-Switzerland,” located 7 kilometers from Pahalgam town in Anantnag district. According to a 2024 report by the Observer Research Foundation, TRF emerged in 2019 as an offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba, following India’s revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status under Article 370, which had granted the region partial autonomy. The group’s stated objective was to oppose perceived demographic shifts in Kashmir, particularly the settlement of non-Kashmiris enabled by the 2019 policy change, which permitted outsiders to purchase land and access employment opportunities in the region. Indian security agencies identified Saifullah Kasuri, a senior Lashkar-e-Taiba commander, as the mastermind, with the Jammu and Kashmir Police releasing sketches of three suspected Pakistani nationals—Hashim Musa, Ali Bhai, and Abdul Hussain Thokar—on April 24, 2025, as reported by The Hindu.
India’s response was immediate and resolute, reflecting both domestic political imperatives and strategic calculations. On April 24, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, speaking at a public rally in Bihar, vowed to pursue “every terrorist and their backers to the ends of the earth,” signaling a zero-tolerance stance. The Cabinet Committee on Security, chaired by Modi, convened on April 23 and announced a five-pronged strategy to address the crisis. First, India suspended its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty, a World Bank-brokered agreement that has governed the sharing of the Indus River system’s waters since 1960. Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri, in a statement on April 23, declared the treaty would remain in abeyance until Pakistan “credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism.” Second, India closed the Attari-Wagah Integrated Check Post, the primary land border crossing with Pakistan, halting all cross-border movement. Third, the Ministry of External Affairs revoked all visas issued to Pakistani nationals, except long-term, diplomatic, and official visas, mandating their departure by April 27. Fourth, India expelled Pakistani tri-service military advisors from the Pakistan High Commission in New Delhi and reduced diplomatic staff from 55 to 30. Finally, a travel advisory urged Indian citizens to avoid Pakistan and return immediately if present there, as reported by The Times of India on April 24.
Pakistan’s National Security Committee, chaired by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, met on April 24 and responded with reciprocal measures. Pakistan closed its airspace to Indian aircraft, suspended all bilateral trade, and placed the 1972 Simla Agreement—a post-war accord establishing the Line of Control and committing both nations to peaceful dispute resolution—in abeyance. A statement from Sharif’s office, published by Dawn on April 25, warned that any Indian attempt to “stop or divert” the Indus River system’s flow would be considered an “act of war,” given Pakistan’s reliance on these waters for approximately 90% of its agricultural irrigation, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization’s 2024 data. Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Abdul Qahar Balkhi, condemned the Pahalgam attack on April 23, denying any involvement and calling for a “comprehensive investigation” to identify the perpetrators, as reported by Al Jazeera. Defense Minister Khawaja Asif, in a televised address on April 24, dismissed India’s accusations as “unilateral and politically motivated,” asserting Pakistan’s commitment to regional stability.
The suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty represents a pivotal escalation, given its historical durability through three India-Pakistan wars and multiple crises. The treaty allocates the waters of the Indus and its tributaries, with India controlling the eastern rivers (Sutlej, Beas, and Ravi) for unrestricted use and Pakistan receiving the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab), subject to India’s limited rights for domestic purposes, such as irrigation and hydropower. A 2023 World Bank report underscored the treaty’s role in averting water-related conflicts, noting that Pakistan’s agriculture, which constitutes 24% of its $350 billion GDP, depends critically on consistent water flows. India’s decision to hold the treaty in abeyance raises concerns about water weaponization, though practical limitations—such as India’s lack of infrastructure to divert significant water volumes—may mitigate immediate impacts, as analyzed in a 2024 study by the International Institute for Strategic Studies. The International Monetary Fund’s 2024 Pakistan country report warns that any disruption to water availability could exacerbate Pakistan’s fiscal vulnerabilities, with a debt-to-GDP ratio of 70% and foreign exchange reserves of $9 billion as of March 2025.
Geopolitically, the crisis is rooted in the unresolved Kashmir dispute, which has fueled three wars and numerous skirmishes since India and Pakistan’s independence in 1947. The Line of Control, established after the 1947-48 war, divides the region, with India administering 140,000 square kilometers, Pakistan 85,000 square kilometers, and China controlling 38,000 square kilometers in the east, according to the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. The 2019 revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s autonomy intensified local grievances, with the United Nations Human Rights Council documenting increased detentions and communication restrictions in the region through 2024. The Pahalgam attack, occurring during a period of reduced violence, has reignited fears of renewed insurgency. A 2024 report by the Council on Foreign Relations notes that while militant attacks in Kashmir have declined since 2019, sporadic incidents persist, often attributed to Pakistan-based groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba. India’s claim of “cross-border linkages,” presented to foreign envoys from the United States, Russia, China, the European Union, and France on April 23, aligns with its long-standing narrative, though Pakistan’s call for an independent investigation reflects the absence of mutually accepted evidence, as highlighted by Reuters on April 24.
Economically, the mutual trade suspensions and airspace closures threaten to deepen bilateral isolation, with broader implications for regional connectivity. The World Trade Organization’s 2024 trade profiles indicate that India-Pakistan bilateral trade, valued at $2.8 billion in 2023, is negligible compared to India’s $1.2 trillion and Pakistan’s $80 billion total trade volumes. However, Pakistan’s closure of airspace to Indian flights could disrupt India’s aviation sector, which handled 153 million passengers in 2024, according to the International Air Transport Association. Pakistan’s agricultural exports, valued at $7 billion annually by the Pakistan Bureau of Statistics, may face logistical challenges if trade routes are further constrained, particularly through the port of Karachi. The Asian Development Bank’s 2025 outlook cautions that escalating tensions could deter foreign direct investment, with India attracting $45 billion and Pakistan $1.5 billion in 2024. The closure of the Attari-Wagah border, a symbolic and economic link, disrupts the limited cross-border trade in goods like cement and agricultural products, as noted in a 2024 report by the South Asia Network on Economic Modeling.
Internationally, the crisis has prompted measured responses, reflecting the complexity of mediating between two nuclear-armed states. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, in a statement on April 24, urged both nations to exercise “maximum restraint” to safeguard regional stability, as reported by the UN News Service. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, in a call with Modi on April 25, condemned the attack and expressed solidarity, according to a Downing Street press release. Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu labeled the attack “barbaric” in a statement relayed by India’s Ministry of External Affairs, while former UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Indonesia’s Ambassador to India, Ina Hagniningtyas Krisnamurthi, echoed similar sentiments, per The Indian Express. The Taliban’s political office in Doha, through spokesperson Suhail Shaheen, condemned the attack on April 23 and called for an investigation to “bring the real culprits to justice,” a rare alignment with India’s position, as reported by Hindustan Times. These responses underscore global consensus against terrorism but avoid endorsing India’s retaliatory measures, highlighting the diplomatic tightrope of maintaining relations with both nations.
Domestically, the attack has galvanized public sentiment in India, with widespread grief and anger. Protests erupted in Delhi, Jammu, and other cities, some targeting Pakistan and raising concerns about communal tensions, as reported by CNN on April 24. The Indian Premier League observed moments of silence, and public figures, including cricketer Gautam Gambhir, advocated severing sporting ties with Pakistan, per ESPN India. The opposition Congress Party, led by Rahul Gandhi, organized candlelight vigils and emphasized national unity, with Gandhi visiting victims’ families in Kashmir on April 25, according to NDTV. Security operations intensified, with the Jammu and Kashmir Police deploying drones and helicopters and imposing a lockdown in Pahalgam, as reported by Al Jazeera. The arrest of an individual in Jharkhand for praising the attack on social media, noted by The Print on April 24, reflects heightened domestic sensitivities and the government’s focus on curbing inflammatory rhetoric.
Strategically, the attack poses a complex challenge for Modi’s government. The Lowy Institute’s 2025 South Asia analysis suggests the attack’s timing—coinciding with Vice President JD Vance’s visit to India and Modi’s curtailed trip to Saudi Arabia—was intended to undermine India’s global standing. A robust response risks internationalizing the Kashmir issue, which India frames as a domestic matter, while inaction could embolden opposition critiques of policy failures in Kashmir. The 2019 Balakot airstrikes, conducted after a similar attack, set a precedent for military action, but Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal and conventional deterrence, detailed in a 2024 RAND Corporation study, constrain escalation. Pakistan’s military readiness, affirmed by an anonymous security official to Al Jazeera on April 24, signals preparedness for retaliation, heightening the risk of miscalculation along the Line of Control, where ceasefire violations were reported on April 24, per The Guardian.
The abeyance of the Simla Agreement further complicates the crisis, as it underpinned bilateral commitments to resolve disputes peacefully and respect the Line of Control. A 2023 report by the United States Institute of Peace notes that the agreement, signed after the 1971 war, has been a cornerstone of India-Pakistan diplomacy, despite frequent violations. Its suspension, alongside the Indus Waters Treaty, signals a broader unraveling of bilateral frameworks, increasing reliance on external mediation, such as through the United Nations or the World Bank, which has historically facilitated water-sharing negotiations. The European Union’s 2024 South Asia strategy emphasizes the need for dialogue to prevent escalation, but India’s insistence on bilateralism, rooted in the Simla Agreement, limits multilateral engagement, as noted by the International Crisis Group.
The Pahalgam attack and its fallout highlight the fragility of India-Pakistan relations, shaped by historical animosities, competing nationalisms, and the unresolved Kashmir dispute. The suspension of foundational agreements threatens long-term stability, while economic and diplomatic measures deepen mutual isolation. The international community’s cautious response reflects the challenge of mediating between two nuclear powers with a combined population of 1.6 billion. As security operations continue and both nations brace for potential escalation, the crisis underscores the urgent need for de-escalation and dialogue to prevent a slide toward conflict. The stakes extend beyond South Asia, with implications for global trade, energy markets, and nuclear non-proliferation, as outlined in a 2024 report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. The path forward requires balancing domestic pressures with strategic restraint, a challenge that will test the resilience of both nations’ leadership in the months ahead.
[…] Escalating Tensions in South Asia: Geopolitical and Economic Implications of the… […]