WHY does India repeatedly resort to aggression against Pakistan? As Pakistan celebrates what many describe as a remarkable success in the “Battle of Truth,” this question deserves serious reflection. Another related question also arises: why does India repeatedly stage false-flag operations and then place the blame on Pakistan? The answer is not particularly difficult to understand. A clue lies in a statement made by prominent Indian journalist Pravin Sawhney while discussing tensions between China and India. Speaking about the failure of India’s so-called “Operation Sindoor,” he remarked: “China is a successful country that we, as Indians, have been unable to accept.”
In my view, India’s dilemma regarding Pakistan is exactly the same. It is both fascinating and deeply revealing. I no longer remember the name of another Indian intellectual, but one question raised by him still burns in my memory like a lamp. He asked: if Muslims and Hindus fought shoulder to shoulder during the War of Independence in 1857, what happened afterward that Muslims chose to separate their political destiny from the Hindus? That is the central question that unlocks the mystery of partition and explains why Pakistanis today stand united like a wall of steel in operations such as Maarka-e-Haq. Sir Syed Ahmad Khan was the first great Muslim thinker of the subcontinent to openly describe the discriminatory attitude of the Hindu majority toward Muslims. He argued clearly that the two nations could not move forward together because the Hindu majority lacked the capacity to rise above narrow-mindedness regarding Muslim rights and identity. After Sir Syed, the Khairi brothers promoted similar ideas through their newspaper ‘’ Akhwat’’ published from Istanbul. Although these ideas remained part of intellectual discourse for years, they did not yet become a political movement. It was Allama Muhammad Iqbal who, through his Allahabad Address of 1930, transformed this concept into a practical political vision that later evolved into the Pakistan Resolution.
This historical narrative may be dismissed as merely the Muslim version of events, but the matter becomes far more significant when similar observations come from an Indian statesman like Jaswant Singh. In his book “Jinnah”, he wrote that Muhammad Ali Jinnah had accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan because it offered constitutional safeguards to Muslim-majority provinces within a loose federation. Had Muslim rights been guaranteed, perhaps the subcontinent might never have been partitioned. However, Jawaharlal Nehru refused to provide binding constitutional guarantees for Muslim protections. It was this rigidity and intolerance within the Congress leadership that paved the road to partition.
Even after Pakistan came into existence, many within the Indian political establishment believed it would not survive for long and would eventually merge back into India. This mindset shaped early disputes over the division of assets and financial obligations. While earlier Congress leaders combined rivalry with a certain level of civility, the rise of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the current Bharatiya Janata Party leadership stripped away even that restraint. Today, Narendra Modi openly projects a politics of intimidation and hostility. This attitude reveals that sections of India’s ruling elite, especially those aligned with the RSS worldview, view Muslims—and Pakistan in particular—through the same lens with which extremist Zionist circles view the Palestinians. Nearly eighty years after Pakistan’s creation, India still struggles to accept Pakistan’s existence and success. Pakistan today enjoys international relevance; even powerful countries like the United States seek its diplomatic support in resolving regional crises. Yet India’s ideological establishment remains unwilling to acknowledge Pakistan as a successful and permanent reality.
This explains India’s repeated attempts to weaken Pakistan. Whether it was the attack on Lahore in 1965, the tragedy of East Pakistan in 1971 or repeated false-flag accusations in recent decades, the same mindset has remained active. Even today, many in India seem to believe that Pakistan’s existence is temporary and that conditions must somehow be created for its eventual collapse or absorption. Narendra Modi’s policies reflect precisely this thinking. Pakistan, however, has consistently resisted such efforts. India miscalculated badly when it assumed Pakistan would remain weak and divided after the Balakot episode in 2019. Today, Pakistan is led by a more assertive political and military leadership. Under Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and the command of Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir, Pakistan demonstrated both political resolve and military capability during recent confrontations.
This was a historic victory for Pakistan. Yet the question remains: has India truly accepted this new reality? Developments in states such as Bengal suggest otherwise. Religious polarization and anti-Muslim politics continue to dominate India’s electoral landscape. Even if Narendra Modi eventually leaves office, another hardline figure from the same ideological tradition may take his place. In such circumstances, Pakistan’s task is clear. It must preserve the spirit of unity, resilience and national solidarity demonstrated during recent crises. Political stability and economic strength are essential so that enemies cannot exploit internal divisions. A confident and united nation will continue to stand like “Bunyan-um-Marsoos” — a solid wall — ensuring that every future “Operation Sindoor” ends in failure for India.
—This writer is former advisor to the President of Pakistan, author & mass media theorist.
(farooq.adilbhuta@gmail,com)
