Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos: Strategic Signalling and Pakistan’s Calculated Response After Pahalgam
Samra Khaksar
The aftermath of the Pahalgam incident highlighted the delicate nature of peace in South Asia, in which individual incidents can set off a spiral of escalation along the Line of Control (LoC). In this context, state behaviour is seldom impulsive, but rather informed by an evaluation of risks, capabilities and objectives. Pakistan’s launch of Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos must then be seen not just as a response, but as a carefully crafted step aimed at de-escalating the situation while bolstering deterrence.
The Pahalgam incident forms part of a broader pattern of recurring tensions between Pakistan and India, particularly in Indian illegally occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). Such incidents are frequently complemented with increased rhetoric, military deployments and border skirmishes, which add to a sense of uncertainty. In a world where both sides have significant military power and nuclear weapon capabilities, there is little room for misstep. It is in this environment that Pakistan’s actions become crucial.
Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos, a name stemming from a metaphor for unity and strength, is more than a typical military response. It is an effort to convey strength without overstepping into a situation that risks runaway escalation. This combination of goals – strength and restraint – is a characteristic of Pakistan’s current security policy.
In a broader sense, the operation is consistent with Pakistan’s strategy of credible minimum deterrence. Dually linked with nuclear strategy, the principle of deterrence applies to conventional and sub-conventional warfare, too. In responding in a controlled manner, Pakistan aims to convey that its responses to provocations will be proportionate, thereby acting as a deterrent. Similarly, the measured response suggests an understanding of the costs of war.
Firstly, this approach involves signalling. In contemporary conflict scenarios, moves are often not just made for their inherent tactical implications but for the signalling effect they have. Accordingly, Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos can be seen as a signal to domestic, regional and international audiences: at home, it serves as an assurance to the public that the state is capable of taking action; regionally, it demonstrates willpower to the adversary; and internationally it sends a message that it is a responsible state seeking stability and not escalation.
Finally, Pakistan’s response also demonstrates restraint. While showing its preparedness, Islamabad has repeatedly stressed the importance of de-escalation and negotiation. This is because it recognises that while military measures may be necessary at times, they cannot resolve deeply entrenched political issues. The stress on restraint is thus not weakness but a deliberate strategy to avoid escalation that would have dire consequences for the region.
The operational aspect of the operation also needs to be considered. In today’s world, where perceptions can be as important as actions, narrative control is an essential part of the strategy. Pakistan’s narrative of its response in terms of security and stability aims to counter other narratives, and to present itself as a peace-loving nation. This is especially so in IIOJK, where narratives and perceptions play an important part in international relations. But such operations need to be consistent and credible. Signalling needs to be credible and restraint needs to be sustained. A lack of congruence between words and actions can backfire.
The repercussions of Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos are similarly important. The South Asian region continues to be one of the most dynamic and potentially unstable in the world, with a range of political, territorial and ideological tensions. A conflict between Pakistan and India could result in international attention due to the risks of nuclear conflict. In this regard, Pakistan’s measured response helps to stabilise the situation and forestalls a further escalation while maintaining open lines of communication.
Beyond the current situation, Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos highlights the changing dynamics in conflict management in South Asia. Conventional notions of war are being supplemented by an approach that prioritises control, signalling and messaging. Pakistan’s actions are in response to this shift, where the goal is not to react but to manage the conflict.
But it’s also essential to understand their limitations. Although operations can be used to manage security threats, they do not deal with the root causes of conflict. The Kashmir issue, which plagues Pakistan-India relations, continues to give rise to sporadic crises that need more than operational solutions. In the absence of political dialogue, the conflict will likely continue to follow a pattern of incident, escalation and de-escalation.
In this context, Pakistan’s focus on the need for negotiations and engagement continues to be important. By engaging in graduated responses alongside appeals for dialogue, Pakistan aims to keep a holistic approach that meets short- and long-term objectives. This approach is based on the recognition that lasting peace cannot be attained through military action alone.
Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos was a strategic response to the Pahalgam incident, showcasing Pakistan’s focus on deterrence, restraint and calibrated messaging. It demonstrated a conflict resolution strategy that aims to combine security objectives with stability. In the end, the effectiveness of Pakistan’s strategy will be determined not just by its tactical success, but by its role in creating a more peaceful and predictable regional order.
Samra Khaksar is a student of Strategic Studies at National Defence University and currently serves as an intern at Kashmir Institute of International relations. She is also a member of HEAL Pakistan, a non- governmental organization, advocating for regional and global issues.
