What’s in Today’s Article?
- A Doctrinal Shift in India’s Security Strategy Latest News
- Background - Genesis of the ‘Thousand Cuts’ Doctrine
- Implementation of the Doctrine
- Recent Flashpoint - Pahalgam Massacre (2025)
- India’s Strategic Posture Before 2016
- Doctrinal Shift - Post-Uri and Beyond
- Operation Sindoon (2025), Pakistan’s Response and Escalation Risks
- Strategic Implications and the ‘New Normal’
- Key Challenges and Outlook
- Conclusion
- A Doctrinal Shift in India’s Security Strategy FAQs
A Doctrinal Shift in India’s Security Strategy Latest News
- India and Pakistan have shared a history of conflict since partition, with Pakistan adopting a strategy of proxy warfare to challenge India’s territorial integrity, particularly in Jammu and Kashmir.
- The evolution of Pakistan’s 'Thousand Cuts' doctrine and India’s calibrated responses have shaped a volatile and high-stakes security environment in South Asia.
- However, a doctrinal shift in India's security strategy (after 2016) has established a new normal, one where it directly targets terrorist infrastructure within Pakistan in response to attacks.
Background - Genesis of the ‘Thousand Cuts’ Doctrine
- Bhutto’s 1965 UN speech and legacy:
- Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s declaration at the UN Security Council in 1965: "Will wage war for 1,000 years".
- This sentiment laid the ideological foundation for Pakistan’s long-term hostile posture toward India.
- Zia-ul-Haq and the strategic shift:
- General Zia-ul-Haq institutionalized Bhutto’s rhetoric into the ‘Bleed India Through a Thousand Cuts’ doctrine.
- Focus shifted to sub-conventional and proxy warfare, especially through militancy and infiltration.
Implementation of the Doctrine
- Lessons from Afghanistan:
- Post-Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan (1989) inspired Pakistan.
- US and Saudi-backed mujahideen became a template for low-cost insurgency warfare.
- Escalation in Kashmir and beyond:
- 1989: Surge in Kashmir militancy.
- Expansion to other Indian cities: 2001 Parliament attack, 2008 Mumbai attacks.
- Institutional support: Rise of terror groups like Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), with alleged support from Pakistan’s security establishment.
Recent Flashpoint - Pahalgam Massacre (2025)
- April 22, 2025: 26 civilians brutally gunned down by terrorists in Pahalgam (J&K).
- This was the latest sign that the ‘Thousand Cuts’ doctrine remains alive in Rawalpindi’s strategic thinking.
- The attack came days after Pakistan’s military chief Gen. Asim Munir said “Kashmir is our jugular vein”.
- The Resistance Front (a front of LeT), initially claimed responsibility for the attack, but later denied any role.
India’s Strategic Posture Before 2016
- Traditional Indian response:
- Diplomatic isolation of Pakistan.
- Economic pressure (e.g., Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey-listing).
- Reluctance for military retaliation due to:
- Nuclear deterrence
- International pressure
- Limited impact: Pakistan continued proxy war with low cost and high strategic gain.
Doctrinal Shift - Post-Uri and Beyond
- Surgical strikes (2016):
- Following the JeM attack at the Indian Army Brigade headquarters in Uri (J&K), which killed 19 soldiers, India conducted a cross-border operation targeting terror launchpads and safe houses in PoK.
- This was India’s first direct cross-border operation in PoK targeting terror infrastructure across the Line of Control in response to attacks.
- Balakot airstrike (2019):
- Retaliation for the deadly suicide bombing in Pulwama.
- Strikes extended into Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan (not limited to PoK).
- Impact:
- This strategic shift did not immediately establish a strong deterrent.
- For example, the Uri response did not prevent the deadly suicide bombing in Pulwama.
- Similarly, the Balakot airstrike that followed Pulwama did not deter the attack on civilians in Pahalgam.
Operation Sindoon (2025), Pakistan’s Response and Escalation Risks
- Operation Sindoor (2025): In a response to the Pahalgam massacre, India struck 9 locations, including Pakistan’s heartland Bahawalpur and Muridke in Punjab, marking its largest aerial operation on Pakistani soil since 1971.
- Escalation post-Balakot:
- Pakistan responded with aerial dogfight.
- An Indian pilot was captured and later returned.
- Operation Sindoor fallout:
- Pakistan chose to escalate by targeting military stations at Jammu, Pathankot and Udhampur with drones and missiles, which were “swiftly neutralised”.
- India launched its counterattacks in the same domain and same intensity as Pakistan.
- In essence, the killing of 26 Indians in Pahalgam by terrorists has brought India and Pakistan dangerously close to the brink of an all-out war.
Strategic Implications and the ‘New Normal’
- India’s new posture:
- Emphasis on military retaliation alongside diplomatic and economic tools.
- Sends a clear signal that sub-conventional war under nuclear cover is no longer tolerable.
- Changing rules of engagement:
- India’s doctrine now includes cross-border operations.
- Raised costs for Pakistan’s continued proxy war.
Key Challenges and Outlook
- Risks of escalation:
- Every terror attack may now demand a military response from India, raising stakes.
- Future governments may face domestic pressure to retaliate forcefully.
- Pakistan’s strategic dilemma:
- Domestic instability:
- Islamist militancy,
- Baloch insurgency,
- Political crisis,
- Economic dependence on the IMF.
- Raises doubts about Pakistan's capacity to sustain long-term hostility.
Conclusion
- India’s post-2016 doctrinal shift signals its resolve to respond militarily to terrorism emanating from Pakistani soil, redefining the terms of engagement between the two nuclear-armed neighbors.
- While this strategic assertiveness aims to deter proxy war, it also increases the risks of escalation, demanding careful long-term calibration and diplomatic balancing.
A Doctrinal Shift in India’s Security Strategy FAQs
Q1. What is the 'Thousand Cuts' doctrine and how has it influenced Pakistan's strategic approach toward India?
Ans. The ‘Thousand Cuts’ doctrine is Pakistan’s strategy of using low-intensity, proxy warfare—including cross-border terrorism—to weaken India without engaging in full-scale war.
Q2. How did the 2016 Uri attack mark a doctrinal shift in India's counter-terrorism strategy?
Ans. Post-Uri, India shifted from a defensive diplomatic stance to a proactive strategy involving direct military retaliation through cross-border surgical strikes.
Q3. Explain the significance of the 2019 Balakot airstrike in the context of India-Pakistan relations.
Ans. The Balakot strike marked India’s expansion of military response beyond PoK into mainland Pakistan, signaling a new normal in India’s counter-terror doctrine.
Q4. What are the risks associated with India’s evolving military response to Pakistan-based terrorism?
Ans. The new strategy increases the risk of rapid escalation into conventional war, especially given the nuclear capabilities of both nations.
Q5. Why is Pakistan’s capacity to continue its long-term proxy war against India being questioned in recent years?
Ans. Pakistan faces internal instability, economic crisis, and multiple insurgencies, making it increasingly difficult to sustain its 'Thousand Cuts' campaign.
Source: TH
