What are the key lessons from the India - Pakistan conflict

Investing.com -- India’s latest conflict with Pakistan has underlined a range of strategic and structural challenges for New Delhi, with implications reaching far beyond the immediate ceasefire.

While India enjoys a massive economic advantage—its GDP is close to $4 trillion versus Pakistan’s $350 billion—the outcome did not follow a simple path dictated by size or financial strength.

As strategists at Bernstein put it, “facts, even when true, can often blind us to reality.”

A key element in the ceasefire was the nuclear backdrop, which continues to be a powerful deterrent regardless of economic disparity. But deeper differences lie in how the two militaries function.

India’s armed forces are entirely state-controlled and reliant on government funding.

Pakistan’s military, by contrast, operates with substantial autonomy and oversees around 50 businesses, including major firms like Fauji Cement and Fauji Fertilizers.

“In situations such as this, sometimes economic realities become less relevant,” said Venugopal Garre, Managing Director and India Head of Research at Bernstein.

The digital front was also a crucial arena. Social media, now central to shaping global perceptions during conflicts, was an area where India lagged.

“India has struggled to create a compelling online narrative,” Garre notes, weakening its ability to counter misinformation and highlight its side of the story. Despite its vast user base, the absence of a strong homegrown social media platform with international influence is seen as a significant misstep.

“Recognizing and harnessing the power of social media is essential for India to assert its narrative and engage meaningfully with the world,” the analyst stressed.

Diplomatically, India responded by deploying high-profile parliamentary delegations to the U.S., U.K., and other nations. Led by opposition leader Shashi Tharoor, these visits aimed to present a unified national stance.

On this, Garre highlights the rarity of such bipartisan cohesion and questions the delay in this outreach. “Why was this proactive approach not taken sooner, especially given the numerous incidents of cross-border terrorism that have occurred in the past?” he asked.

The United States played a pivotal role. While the precise triggers of the ceasefire remain unclear, the report states unequivocally, “only after the U.S. interference did India and Pakistan start talking.” This intervention underscores India’s limited leverage in bilateral resolutions, despite its growing global stature.

Defense preparedness emerged as another area of concern. The battlefield featured predominantly foreign equipment—French Rafale jets, Russian missile systems, Israeli drones—while indigenous platforms were few.

Although efforts are underway, the pace remains slow. Public sector dominance continues to be a bottleneck: “It is time to discard the PSU ecosystem and focus on including private sector more aggressively,” Bernstein argues.

Geopolitically, India is increasingly isolated. “India has no military allies,” the note warns. Quad remains underdeveloped, and BRICS is deemed “a weak alliance at best.” Even traditional partners like Russia and Israel appear distracted or aligned elsewhere.

The broader financial cost of war is also sobering. A brief four-day conflict involving high-tech military assets likely cost billions. At a time of rising social spending, such expenditures strain public finances and deliver limited economic returns.