Terror, Trade, and Timing: The Real Politics Behind the India-Pakistan Escalation.

Srishti Pandey Editor- TGP

In a world where global influence is increasingly defined by economic strength and democratic resilience, the India-Pakistan crisis of 2025 arrives not in a vacuum, but in a highly strategic, almost suspiciously timed geopolitical moment.

On April 22, 2025, 26 Indian civilians—mainly Hindu pilgrims were gunned down in Pahalgam, Kashmir. The massacre bore all the hallmarks of cross-border terrorism, with India quickly pointing to Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and its proxy, The Resistance Front (TRF). The latter initially claimed responsibility and then curiously retracted, citing a supposed hacking of their digital channels a narrative widely considered implausible given their known affiliations and prior operations.

India responded swiftly. On May 7, it launched “Operation Sindoor,” a precise, coordinated offensive on terror launch pads across Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and deep within Pakistan’s heartland. Reports confirm the elimination of senior Jaish-e-Mohammed commander Abdul Rauf Azhar brother of Masood Azhar and long implicated in global terror cases, including the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl. Pakistan retaliated with drone attacks, some hitting Indian civilian zones. Over 100 fighter jets engaged across contested airspace marking one of the largest air skirmishes in modern military history.

This isn’t just a border dispute or ideological rivalry. This is a clash between trajectories.

India, despite regional provocations, is steering itself into the global economic elite. It recently finalized a major free trade deal with the UK, adding to a growing list of bilateral agreements. Multinational giants—Apple, Samsung, Foxconn have shifted critical manufacturing from China to India, not only due to India’s growing capabilities, but also due to rising tariffs and political unpredictability under the US–China trade war. India today is not merely “rising” it is replacing.

Meanwhile, China, facing a strategic squeeze from the West and internal manufacturing slowdowns, has every reason to feel insecure. The exposure of global luxury brands like Louis Vuitton and Gucci for outsourcing low-cost Chinese goods while pricing them at millions has dented China’s image as a premium manufacturer. India offers an alternative: democratic, transparent, and scalable. In this context, a destabilized India serves not just Pakistan’s agenda but also strategically benefits China.

So the timing of this attack is not coincidental it’s calculated. As India consolidates economic credibility and gains global diplomatic weight, a terrorist attack on its soil resets global headlines. Instead of the West celebrating India’s trade coups, the focus shifts to Kashmir. Instead of global capital flowing toward stability, there’s apprehension. It is in this smokescreen that both Pakistan’s military establishment and China’s shadow diplomacy thrive.

Pakistan has denied any involvement in the Pahalgam massacre predictably. Yet international skepticism is growing. At the UN Security Council, Pakistan was grilled over the attack, its history with LeT, and its silence on the targeting of Indian civilians based on religion.

This is not a moment for neutrality. The world cannot afford to treat terrorism as a regional irritant. India’s rise is not a provocation; it is a recalibration of global order. And those who fear it whether through rogue proxy war or strategic silence must be named, questioned, and held to account