On April 22nd, tensions between India and Pakistan escalated sharply after 26 people, the majority of them Indian tourists, were shot dead near Pahalgam, in the Indian-administered area of Jammu and Kashmir. The Indian government, led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, swiftly blamed Pakistan for backing the attack. Pakistan, under the leadership of President Asif Ali Zardari, denied any involvement and pointed to the militant group Kashmir Resistance, also known as The Resistance Front (TRF), as the responsible party.
The TRF, which emerged in 2019, is widely recognised as a proxy for the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, which is designated by the UN and many Western governments as a terrorist organisation. Following the attack, the TRF openly claimed responsibility, further complicating the situation. Nevertheless, the Pakistani government has continued to disavow any links between its state apparatus and the perpetrators.
Jammu and Kashmir are long-disputed regions, with both India and Pakistan claiming them in full but controlling different parts. The line of control dividing the region has historically been a flashpoint for cross-border violence, and fears are growing that this latest incident could lead to major regional conflict.
In response to the initial attack, the Indian government closed the main border crossing to Pakistan and threatened to suspend water flows from Indian-controlled rivers into Pakistan, leveraging provisions under the Indus Waters Treaty. Such a move would drastically impact Pakistan’s water security and could be seen as a disproportionate form of retaliation, collectively punishing civilians and escalating tensions into a full-blown humanitarian crisis.
Since then, India retaliated with air strikes on Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, killing 31 people and injuring at least 57. In return, Aqeel Malik, Pakistan’s justice minister, claimed India violated Pakistani sovereignty and that Islamabad would respond accordingly.
On the escalations, the UK’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the UK was hoping for “dialogue, de-escalation and the protection of civilians” and that “We are engaging urgently with both countries as well as other international partners, encouraging dialogue, de-escalation and the protection of civilians.”
Pickthall House commends Starmer’s stance and recommends that the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) use its influence to mediate and encourage de-escalation between India and Pakistan. The FCDO has longstanding bilateral relationships with both countries and remains a respected intermediary. It should urge both governments to prioritise dialogue over retaliation, highlight the severe humanitarian consequences of cutting off water supplies, and encourage confidence-building measures, including independent investigations into the Pahalgam attack.
Collective punishment, particularly measures affecting entire populations, is neither a proportional nor a sustainable response under international law. Civilian damage risks entrenching grievances and fuelling further extremism. Instead, a diplomatic solution that isolates and targets militant actors, rather than national populations, would be the more just and strategic path forward.
The FCDO must make clear that while the UK unequivocally condemns terrorism, it equally urges respect for human rights, civilian protection, and adherence to international agreements. A measured, diplomatic intervention now could prevent further escalation into a full conflict and preserve fragile regional stability.
