SOURCE: AFI
Over the years, India’s military strategy towards Pakistan has often revolved around the concept of swift, punitive responses to provocations — exemplified by surgical strikes and air raids such as the Balakot operation in 2019. While short, sharp conflicts may satisfy immediate political and military objectives, they do little to permanently shift the strategic calculus in India’s favor. In fact, a short war, no matter how successful, risks international intervention, escalatory miscalculations, and only temporary deterrence.
Instead, India must pivot towards preparing for a long war — a sustained, multidimensional campaign that would exploit Pakistan’s deep economic vulnerabilities, stretch its military logistics, and force a reckoning within its national security establishment. Such a conflict, while demanding for India, could be disastrous for Pakistan, leading to long-term strategic degradation and possibly a collapse of its coercive leverage.
Pakistan’s military strategy is built around the assumption of a quick escalation followed by early international mediation. Islamabad banks on global powers stepping in to de-escalate any conflict with India before the consequences become unmanageable. A short war allows Pakistan to sustain the myth of “parity” with India, rally internal support, and avoid lasting military damage.
By contrast, a long war nullifies this advantage. The longer the conflict drags on, the more it exposes the fragility of Pakistan’s defense industry, depletes its foreign reserves, and undermines morale. It also breaks the illusion of equivalence with a far superior Indian military machine.
Pakistan’s economy is in perpetual crisis. With dwindling foreign reserves, reliance on IMF bailouts, soaring inflation, and structural fiscal mismanagement, its economic foundations are brittle. In a prolonged war scenario, its ability to sustain military operations would erode rapidly.
India, with its $3.7 trillion economy and growing global clout, is far better positioned to weather the storm. A long war would impose costs on both sides, but Pakistan would face existential strain. The economic blockade of supply chains, disruption of trade routes, and sustained air or cyber strikes on infrastructure could cripple Pakistan’s already fragile system.
The Pakistan Armed Forces may appear battle-hardened, but they are overextended — balancing internal counterinsurgency operations, a volatile western frontier, and an obsession with India. A long war would overstretch the Pakistan military’s manpower and logistics, forcing it to deplete reserves, rotate exhausted troops, and eventually face internal dissent.
Moreover, a protracted conflict could create rifts between the civilian government, military command, and radical non-state actors, making internal cohesion difficult to maintain.
In a short war, global powers are quick to press for de-escalation — often without placing accountability on Pakistan for provoking conflict. In a longer conflict, however, the narrative evolves. As the humanitarian and economic toll mounts, international pressure could turn against Pakistan, especially if it is seen as the aggressor or harboring terrorist groups.
India must use diplomatic channels to shape global perception, leveraging its partnerships with the US, France, and other powers to delay ceasefire calls until Pakistan faces significant strategic degradation.
A long war could have psychological effects on Pakistan’s population, eroding public support for its military’s adventurism. Economic hardship, battlefield losses, and the prolonged threat of escalation can undermine the “guardian” image of the Pakistan Army, opening space for civil resistance, internal rebellion, or regime instability.
India must factor in these psychological dynamics while calibrating its long-term strategy.
India’s ultimate goal must not be to punish Pakistan, but to neutralize its capacity and will to sustain a decades-long hostile posture. A short war may bring headlines, but a long war — waged with military, economic, cyber, and diplomatic tools — would fundamentally alter Pakistan’s strategic landscape and degrade its ability to pose a threat.
Such a plan demands endurance, strategic foresight, and national unity. India must begin now — not with immediate confrontation, but with preparations for a war that, if ever fought, would be decisive, sustained, and devastating for those who have made hostility their national doctrine.
NOTE: AFI is a proud outsourced content creator partner of IDRW.ORG. All content created by AFI is the sole property of AFI and is protected by copyright. AFI takes copyright infringement seriously and will pursue all legal options available to protect its content.