War Drums Between India and Pakistan: What Military Options Lie on the Table?

By Mubarak Ansari

Pune, 1st May 2025: As diplomatic tensions simmer following the recent terrorist attack in Pahalgam in Jammu and Kashmir, strategic circles in South Asia are quietly asking: what if India and Pakistan went to war?

Military planners on either side are believed to be reviewing operational readiness. Drawing from doctrines, past conflicts, and current capabilities, here’s a deep dive into what India and Pakistan could consider if a full-scale war erupted — and how far each would be willing to go.

India’s Gameplan: Swift, Limited, Decisive

Commanding approximately 14 Lakh active personnel, the Indian Army benefits from a larger force, modernized equipment, and a robust defence budget, giving it conventional superiority over Pakistan. India’s goals in a war would likely include defending its territory, neutralizing Pakistan’s military capabilities, and securing strategic objectives, especially in Jammu and Kashmir.

Indian military doctrine has gradually evolved from post-Kargil restraint to the Cold Start Doctrine — a strategy designed for swift, limited warfare under a nuclear overhang.

“If provoked, our response will be quick, focused, and calibrated. The time is ripe to integrate PoK in India and liberate Balochistan. This will be decisive to break back of Pakistan to refrain from interfering in our territory,” a retired Indian Army general told Punekar News, referencing integrated battle groups trained for rapid mobilization.

Key Indian options include:

1. Defensive Operations Along the Line of Control (LoC)

• Objective: Protect Jammu and Kashmir from Pakistani incursions.
• Actions:
  • Station troops in fortified positions along the LoC, using advanced artillery, infantry, and surveillance tools like drones and satellites.
  • Conduct operations to stop infiltrations by Pakistan-supported militants.
  • Respond to cross-border attacks with precision strikes on Pakistani forward posts.
• Strengths: India’s larger troop numbers and border infrastructure (fencing, sensors) make it strong defensively. Experience in Kashmir counterinsurgency adds tactical depth.
• Risks: Frequent skirmishes could escalate or divert resources from other areas.

2. Limited Offensive Operations (Cold Start Doctrine)

• Objective: Launch rapid strikes into Pakistan to destroy terrorist bases or military targets without triggering full-scale war.
• Actions:
  • Execute quick, brigade-sized incursions (10-20 km deep) into Pakistani Punjab or Sindh using mechanized infantry, tanks, and air support.
  • Target areas like the Shakargarh Bulge or Rajasthan deserts for maneuverability.
• Strengths: India’s modernized forces and air superiority enable fast, decisive action. The Cold Start approach aims to win before global intervention.
• Risks: Pakistan’s tactical nuclear weapons (e.g., Nasr missile) could counter this, risking escalation. Terrain obstacles like canals might slow progress.

3. Full-Scale Conventional War

• Objective: Defeat Pakistan’s military decisively, possibly capturing key cities like Lahore or strategic assets.
• Actions:
  • Deploy India’s three strike corps for deep offensives, backed by air and naval forces.
  • Target Pakistan’s military bases, airfields, and supply lines across multiple fronts (e.g., Rajasthan, Gujarat).
• Strengths: India’s larger army, air force, and navy, plus economic staying power, could dominate a prolonged fight.
• Risks: Pakistan might use nuclear weapons if its survival is threatened, and international pressure would push for a quick end.

4. Naval Blockade and Maritime Operations

• Objective: Disrupt Pakistan’s economy and military supplies by blocking its ports, especially Karachi.
• Actions:
  • Use India’s aircraft carrier and submarines to enforce a blockade in the Arabian Sea.
  • Attack Pakistani naval and merchant ships with missiles and conduct coastal raids.
• Strengths: India’s stronger navy can control sea lanes and choke Pakistan’s trade and fuel supplies.
• Risks: Pakistan’s submarines and anti-ship missiles could hit back, and escalation might involve other nations.

5. Cyber and Electronic Warfare

• Objective: Weaken Pakistan’s military coordination and infrastructure without direct combat.
• Actions:
  • Launch cyberattacks on Pakistan’s military networks, power grids, and communications.
  • Jam Pakistani radar and missile systems with electronic warfare.
• Strengths: India’s growing cyber capabilities could disrupt Pakistan early on.
• Risks: Pakistan might retaliate with its own cyber attacks, and the impact in a full war is hard to predict.

Cyber warfare and space-based surveillance would play a crucial role in disrupting Pakistani command chains and monitoring military movements.

Pakistan’s Options: Defense, Escalation, and Diplomacy

Leading a force of about 7 Lakh active personnel, the Pakistan Army is smaller but skilled and focused on defence and deterrence. Pakistan’s goals would be to protect its territory, counter India’s conventional edge with nuclear threats, and use irregular tactics. Pakistan’s military, while numerically smaller, operates with a doctrine centered on early escalation and strategic ambiguity — a stance designed to deter deeper Indian incursions.

“Our response will be resolute. Any misadventure will invite consequences beyond control,” a senior Pakistani military source is quoted as saying in local media.

Pakistan’s military playbook may include:

• Defensive Engagement: Heavily fortified positions in Punjab and Sindh would be activated to stall or repulse Indian advances.
• Air and Missile Attacks: Pakistani Air Force could conduct targeted strikes on Indian ammunition depots or forward bases, while deploying Babur cruise missiles or the short-range Nasr missile to warn of tactical nuclear escalation.
• Asymmetric Warfare: Intelligence-led irregular warfare — including activation of proxy fighters in Jammu and Kashmir — could stretch Indian forces and globalize the conflict narrative.
• Nuclear Signaling: Pakistan might publicly reposition its tactical nuclear arsenal to deter Indian armor thrusts, a strategy built around its “first use” doctrine in response to existential threats.
• Internationalization Strategy: Islamabad would swiftly move to galvanize support from the UN, OIC, and allies like China and Turkey, portraying India as the aggressor.

1. Defensive Fortifications and Attrition Warfare

• Objective: Repel Indian attacks and wear them down, especially in Punjab and Sindh.
• Actions:
  • Use canals, bunkers, and anti-tank defenses to trap Indian forces in prepared kill zones.
  • Deploy artillery, anti-tank missiles, and infantry to inflict heavy losses.
  • Leverage terrain like the Thar Desert or Kashmir mountains to slow India.
• Strengths: Pakistan’s fortified defences and experience in past wars make this effective.
• Risks: India’s firepower and air support could eventually break through, and resources might run thin.

2. Asymmetric Warfare and Proxy Support

• Objective: Destabilize India using militants and insurgents to offset its conventional strength.
• Actions:
  • Back groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba to attack in Kashmir or deeper in India.
  • Stir unrest in India’s Northeast or Punjab to stretch its forces.
• Strengths: This low-cost approach exploits India’s internal vulnerabilities and avoids direct battles.
• Risks: India’s improved counterinsurgency skills could limit success, and global backlash might isolate Pakistan.

3. Tactical Nuclear Deterrence

• Objective: Stop Indian advances by threatening battlefield nuclear strikes.
• Actions:
  • Use short-range systems like the Nasr missile against Indian troops if they enter Pakistan.
  • Warn of nuclear use if key territories or assets are lost.
• Strengths: This could force India to scale back, fearing escalation.
• Risks: Even a limited nuclear strike might provoke a devastating Indian response, plus severe global consequences.

4. Air and Missile Strikes

• Objective: Hit Indian military targets to disrupt their operations.
• Actions:
  • Send the Pakistan Air Force to strike Indian bases in Kashmir or Punjab.
  • Fire cruise missiles (Babur) and ballistic missiles (Shaheen) at key Indian infrastructure.
  • Use drones for attacks and scouting.
• Strengths: Pakistan’s air force and missiles can cause significant damage in focused areas.
• Risks: India’s superior air defences and larger air force could overpower these efforts.

5. Naval Guerrilla Warfare

• Objective: Counter an Indian naval blockade with asymmetric tactics.
• Actions:
  • Use submarines and fast boats for hit-and-run attacks on Indian ships.
  • Fire anti-ship missiles from shore and lay mines to disrupt Indian naval movements.
• Strengths: Pakistan’s submarines and coastal defences could challenge India’s navy temporarily.
• Risks: India’s stronger naval capabilities might neutralize this over time.

High-Stakes Deterrence and a Fragile Line

Analysts agree that while both countries have a range of military options, the risk of escalation to nuclear warfare is never far off.

“Neither side truly wants war — the costs are too high. But once conflict begins, controlling it is incredibly difficult,” said a former Indian military strategist.

Any escalation would also bring severe economic fallout, disrupt global supply chains, and invite international mediation efforts within hours. Cyberattacks, satellite jamming, and attacks on energy infrastructure could open a new front in South Asian warfare.

Past Lessons, Present Dangers

India and Pakistan last came close to a full-scale war during the 2019 Balakot-Pulwama episode, when retaliatory airstrikes and aerial dogfights marked a dangerous flashpoint. In 2025, with both countries modernizing their arsenals and hardened positions on Kashmir, the stakes are higher than ever.

The silent consensus on both sides of the border: prepare for the worst, hope for de-escalation.

(The author is a senior journalist based in Pune)