The Marka-e-Haq or the period between April 22 and May 10, 2025, is a landmark in South Asian security relations. Rather than being considered merely through patriotic or rhetorical perspectives, it is better to consider it as a multifaceted case of limited war between two nuclear states, involving a mix of military, political, and technological operations. It exemplifies the role of perception, narrative and restraint in shaping contemporary conflicts, and how battles are increasingly fought not just on the ground but also in the minds and hearts of people.
The escalation was sparked by the April 22, 2025, attack in Pahalgam that reportedly killed 26 civilians. As has been the case in past conflicts, the war of words and political reactions played a role in escalating tensions. The conflict further escalated in early May with both sides accusing each other of attacks on civilians along the Line of Control. This is in line with the history of relations between the two countries since 1947, characterised by three full-fledged wars and limited conflict, with Kashmir at the centre of the dispute.
Pakistan launched a military operation, codenamed Operation Bunyan-al-Marsoos, on May 10, 2025, claiming that it was a proportional response. Official statements indicated a strike on some 20-26 Indian military targets, including major airbases at Pathankot, Srinagar and Adampur. But there was no confirmation from Indian sources, which points to the problem of verification in modern warfare. In such conflict, information itself can be a weapon, and perceptions can be as much a part of the battle as actual events.
Another feature of this incident was the prominence of multi-domain warfare. Airpower, in particular, was a crucial element, with Pakistan claiming the shootdown of several high-tech Indian aircraft, including Rafale jets (albeit claims disputed at an international level). In addition to traditional military operations, drone warfare played an important role, with accounts of air intrusions and countermeasures signalling a trend towards more technologically sophisticated tactics. Information warfare and cyber activities were another significant aspect of the conflict, with both sides engaging in digital campaigns to sway domestic and international opinion. This melding of military and non-military activities reflects the evolution of 21st-century conflicts.
Another significant aspect of this crisis was its economic and geopolitical implications, backed by evidence from previous crises. Regional markets tend to respond to Indo-Pak escalations in the short term. For example, during other confrontations, such as the 2019 incident, Pakistan’s stock market index dropped more than 3-5% in a few days, with currency depreciation resulting from capital flight and uncertainty. Moreover, defence spending indicates the nature of the strategic rivalry, as recent estimates indicate India’s defence budget is over $75 billion and Pakistan’s is $10-11 billion, reflecting the power imbalance in the region. Notwithstanding this, Pakistan’s emphasis on deterrence, precision and cost-effective weaponry (notably drones and stand-off systems) reflects the ability of smaller economies to counter larger adversaries. Moreover, international diplomatic attention also tends to increase during such episodes; past escalations have seen several states, including the United States, China and Gulf countries engage to bring down the tension. This underlines that the significance of Indo-Pak conflicts is not confined to the region alone, and can have implications for global security and stability.
Despite the severity of the conflict, war did not break out. This can be explained, in large part, by the deterrent effects of the region’s nuclear arsenals. Pakistan and India both had a sense of the escalation ladder and chose to respond in measured ways rather than escalating their responses. Pakistan seemed to place a strong emphasis on deterrence through limited but symbolic action, while India’s restraint following the initial escalations also played a role in de-escalating the conflict. This is part of a wider trend in South Asia in which crises are common but are usually limited in scope.
The domestic dimension of the conflict was also important. In Pakistan, the incident stirred public emotions and fostered a sense of unity, especially among the young population, who were active in information and digital domains. The role of media on both sides was vital in framing narratives, often in ways that supported national stances, and in creating an information bubble. The dissemination of both authentic and false information underlines the importance of media and information literacy and of objective reporting during crises.
From a strategic perspective, Marka-e-Haq exemplifies a number of points. It demonstrates the growing acceptance of short, intense conflict between Pakistan and India, the growing prominence of new technologies such as drones and cyber weapons, and the importance of information warfare in contemporary conflict. It also highlights the tenuousness of peace in the region, where nuclear deterrent forces preclude large-scale conflict, but do not preclude the possibility of accidents.
In the end, Marka-e-Haq is not a decisive battle, but a “signalling” exercise. Both sides were determined to establish credibility, enhance deterrence and control escalation while avoiding an all-out war. In so doing, this episode offers an insightful case study of the nature of contemporary limited wars under the nuclear shadow, where restraint, ambiguity and communication control are as critical as hard military power.
About the author: Hasnain Iqbal is an MPhil scholar in Defence and Strategic Studies at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad. He has previously worked at the China Center, Institute of Regional Studies (IRS), the Army Institute of Military History, and the Parliament House of Pakistan