Context:

The recent four-day conflict between India and Pakistan, both nuclear-armed nations, highlighted the volatility of their relations, fueled by new military technologies and entrenched religious nationalism. Despite stepping back from the brink, the use of drones and missiles deep into each other's territories raised military alerts and necessitated urgent international diplomatic intervention. Historical external interventions have previously de-escalated such conflicts, but the current extreme positions and determination, especially from India, challenge this norm. Political dynamics remain unchanged, with religious nationalism driving both countries, and diplomatic relations remain frosty, with India refusing to comply with a critical river treaty. The conflict was sparked by a terrorist attack in Kashmir, prompting India to respond forcefully, but operational and strategic improvements remain questionable despite India's assertive stance.

Dive Deeper:

• The conflict involved a significant escalation in military technology, with both countries using drones and missiles deep into each other's territories, causing heightened military alerts and dire threats.

• International diplomacy played a crucial last-minute role in de-escalating the situation, highlighting the thin safety net in a global landscape with distracted leaders and retreating peace responsibilities.

• The entrenched religious nationalism in both India and Pakistan remains a potent force for potential future confrontations, as political realities have not changed post-conflict.

• India's refusal to adhere to a river treaty exacerbates tensions with Pakistan, which views any interference with water flows as an act of war.

• The recent conflict was triggered by a terrorist attack in Kashmir, ending a six-year lull, and India's response was driven by political pressure and a desire to assert military might despite past operational challenges.

• India's modernization efforts have been hampered by supply issues due to global conflicts, but the country aimed to project a more muscular global stance in this conflict.

• Although India appeared assertive, the conflict did not indicate significant operational or strategic advancements, leaving questions about the politico-strategic gains achieved.