A look back: India faces strategic setback in stand-off as Pakistan largely unscathed Opinion by Geo News

The Pakistan-based Geo News website has published an article, written by Sabur Ali Sayyid, researcher with a special interest in India, Pakistan and regional affairs, analysing the aftermath of the recent India-Pakistan military stand-off, highlighting India's strategic and symbolic setbacks, including the underperformance of key Western-supplied military equipment and its implications for global allies like France, Israel, Russia, and the US. Caliber.Az shares the article. 

The guns have fallen silent, but the echoes of failure are still ringing in New Delhi. After weeks of sabre-rattling and brinkmanship, India has agreed to a ceasefire with little to show for it. The outcome marks a strategic and symbolic setback – not just for its government and military, but also for international allies who hoped the stand-off would reinforce India’s regional dominance.

Among the most disillusioned is France. Its Rafale fighter jet, long marketed as an invincible war machine that had never been shot down in combat, was not only grounded but exposed as vulnerable. Indian pilots, far from showcasing elite capabilities, underperformed, tarnishing the jet’s reputation. Israel, too, has cause for concern. Its Harop drones – hailed as the pinnacle of unmanned aerial warfare – were downed repeatedly, appearing more like practice targets than technological marvels.

Russia, another major defence supplier to India, cannot be celebrating either. Its hyped S-400 missile defence system failed to deliver, undermining years of promotion and arms deals. And the US, which has invested heavily in India as a counterweight to China, must now reckon with the sobering reality that India is not yet ready to play the strategic role Washington envisioned. Worse still, American narratives about the supposed superiority of Western and Israeli military technology took a blow, especially in the face of Chinese-made J-10 fighter jets and precision missile systems deployed by Pakistan, which stunned analysts with their effectiveness.

Pakistan, by contrast, has emerged from this crisis largely unscathed and emboldened. But this moment of advantage must not lead to complacency. Instead, it demands strategic foresight. One urgent area where Pakistan must pivot from rhetoric to resolve is the equitable management of water under the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty. Though this crisis offered a moment to highlight longstanding grievances over water rights, the opportunity to pressure India into compliance has passed – for now.

Still, Pakistan must act – diplomatically, legally and strategically – to safeguard its fair share of Indus waters. Rather than relying on bilateral mechanisms that have proven inadequate, it should spearhead a global coalition of lower riparian states to champion the rights of downstream nations. This includes countries along the Nile and the Ganges, which face similar challenges of upstream control.

International law is clear on this matter. The Madrid Declaration of 1911 states that riparian states may not alter a shared river system to the detriment of a co-riparian without mutual consent. The Montevideo Declaration of 1933 reaffirms this, warning against industrial or agricultural exploitation of international waterways that harms others. The Helsinki Rules of 1966 go further, insisting that each basin state is entitled to a “reasonable and equitable” share of international water bodies.

More recently, the 1997 UN Convention on the Law of the Non-Navigational Uses of International Watercourses established a comprehensive legal framework governing cross-border freshwater resources. Although not universally ratified, the convention enshrines two cardinal principles: first, the people living along a river basin have first claim to its waters; second, no state may obstruct or divert a river’s flow to another state’s detriment without consent.

India’s status as the upper riparian does not give it carte blanche to manipulate the Indus system to Pakistan’s disadvantage. Yet, in recent years, it has sought to do exactly that – building dams and obstructing flows in violation of both the treaty and broader international norms.

Further complicating the situation is the rapid glacial melt in Kashmir, which feeds the Indus basin. India has largely ignored the issue and, in some cases, accelerated it through unregulated activity. Though it has received little attention, the consequences are serious: declining glacial mass could significantly reduce river flow, worsen water scarcity and heighten the risk of future conflict. Pakistan must advocate for a joint regional strategy focused on environmental protection and transparent data sharing on glacial melt.

Beyond water rights, Pakistan must confront the strategic narratives surrounding its security posture. It should renew its call for a composite dialogue with India, frozen since 2015, not merely as a diplomatic gesture, but as a platform to challenge the enduring campaign to label Pakistan as a sponsor of terrorism.

At the same time, Pakistan must assert – unequivocally – that it retains the right to respond to aggression with proportionate force. If India claims the right to strike targets it deems threats within Pakistan, then Islamabad has equal right to defend itself against those aiding or harbouring extremists on Indian soil. Operation Bunyanun Marsoos delivered a critical message: only nations willing to carry the fight into the adversary’s domain earn security and respect.

Pakistan has paid a heavy price over the decades – in lives, in reputation and in economic opportunity. This must end. It is time to shift from reactive crisis management to proactive policy grounded in legal legitimacy, regional partnerships, and strategic clarity.

In the aftermath of this latest flare-up, Pakistan has a rare opening to redefine its future. But doing so will require more than triumphalism. It will require resolve and responsibility.