The simmering summer of 2025 brought not only scorching heat but also a conflict that burned even hotter in South Asia. The recent crisis between Pakistan and India has dramatically altered the region’s geopolitical landscape in just a week. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has long projected India as the self-appointed custodian of regional order — the de facto “policeman” of South Asia — has seen that image collapse. Unlike in past crises, the United States (US) and its Western allies chose not to back India.
The escalation began with a devastating terrorist attack in Pahalgam that killed 26 Indian tourists. India swiftly blamed Pakistan for the incident, without presenting credible evidence. Islamabad offered a neutral investigation, but New Delhi rejected the proposal and chose to respond militarily. India launched “Operation Sindoor” — a show of force driven more by retaliation than strategy. In doing so, India violated the international border, targeting nine sites within Pakistan. This aggressive move left little room for Western powers to either pressure Pakistan or support India’s actions under international law. In contrast, Pakistan took a strategic pause, opting for diplomacy over escalation. Islamabad presented substantive evidence to international media, implicating India in sponsoring terrorist activities within Pakistan. These revelations cast doubt on India’s narrative and exposed its intent to frame Pakistan.
On 10 May 2025, India intensified the conflict by launching missile strikes on three Pakistani airbases. In response, Pakistan initiated Operation Bunyan ul-Marsoos, leading to the most intense military exchange between the nuclear-armed rivals in a decade. Notably, the US remained neutral, calling for restraint and diplomacy. This marked a significant departure from Washington’s historical alignment with New Delhi — leaving India diplomatically isolated and challenging its assumption of guaranteed Western support.
This shift is partly the result of Modi’s increasingly aggressive and self-centred foreign policy. Rather than collaborating on an international investigation, India chose unilateral military action. Modi’s miscalculation backfired. He anticipated global sympathy and backing, much like after the 2019 Pulwama attack. This time, however, only Israel expressed open support. Traditional allies like the US and European nations issued no statements in India’s favour. Why the silence? Because the international community recognised a familiar pattern — politically motivated escalation without concrete evidence, echoing tactics that have grown increasingly unconvincing.
India must now transition from arrogance and confrontational posturing to pragmatic diplomacy rooted in respect for the sovereignty of its neighbours.
India’s overconfidence in its military prowess was further undermined by the Pakistan Air Force. Despite advanced assets — including French-made Rafale fighter jets, BrahMos missiles, and Russian S-400 defence systems — Pakistan’s air force demonstrated unexpected effectiveness. Pakistan shot down six Indian fighter jets — four of which were confirmed by international sources. These included three Rafales, a MiG-29, and a Su-30. Pakistan’s armed forces, equipped with Chinese J-10C fighters and indigenous missile systems, showed tactical resilience.
Diplomatically, India’s attempt to portray itself as a victim of terrorism failed to find traction due to its aggressive military actions. Traditional allies like France, the United Kingdom and Australia chose neutrality instead of rallying behind New Delhi. Conversely, Pakistan’s restrained and diplomatic approach earned it support from China, Türkiye, Azerbaijan, and several Middle Eastern countries, strengthening its image as the more responsible regional actor.
India’s foreign policy under Modi has increasingly been defined by assertiveness rigidity and ideological posturing. Over the past decade, India has sought to position itself as a global power alongside the US, China, and Russia. But this ambition has often been coupled with an air of diplomatic arrogance. Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar has gained notoriety for his sharp rebukes of Western nations.
One of his most quoted remarks came during the Ukraine crisis: “Europe has to grow out of the mindset that its problems are the world’s problems, but the world’s problems are not Europe’s.” He signalled India’s determination to maintain strategic autonomy. Similarly, in response to Western criticism over democratic backsliding and religious intolerance, Jaishankar bluntly told the West, “We do not need approval from others on our democracy. We are a 1.4 billion-strong democracy. We know how to manage ourselves.” Such remarks, while popular domestically, have strained India’s relationships with key partners. The perception has grown that India is an unreliable partner — one that demands support but resists alignment with Western strategic interests.
India’s refusal to criticise Russia over its Ukraine invasion, continued purchase of discounted Russian oil and its ambiguous role in the global conflict have further deepened Western skepticism. At the same time, India’s internal policies have added to Western discomfort. The Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), suppression of dissent during farmer’s protests and ongoing human rights concerns in Kashmir have tarnished India’s image as a liberal democracy.
Modi’s foreign policy has relied heavily on personal charisma and muscular nationalism. But this approach has faltered under pressure. During the latest conflict, India failed to mobilise its traditional allies — a failure rooted not in betrayal, but in the consequences of arrogant diplomacy. The West’s reluctance to back India sends a message: symbolic strength and rhetorical defiance are no substitute for genuine diplomacy and reliable partnership.
India must now transition from arrogance and confrontational posturing to pragmatic diplomacy rooted in respect for the sovereignty of its neighbours. The era of chest-thumping nationalism must give way to a foreign policy grounded in realism, accountability, and mutual respect. Only then can India reclaim the diplomatic stature it aspires to on the global stage.
