NEO POLITY WITH BRIG (RETD) BRIJESH PANDEY
By Ravish Handoo
In the ever-shifting sands of South Asian geopolitics, where alliances form and fracture like mirages in the desert, recent events in Pakistan have cast a long shadow over the region. As the host of Neo Polity program on The Earth News, I had the privilege of sitting down with Brigadier (Retd) Brijesh Pandey, a seasoned defence expert whose insights cut through the noise like a well-honed blade. Our conversation, aired just on 22 September 2025, delved into the heart of these developments, from Pakistan’s brazen airstrikes on its own civilians to the enigmatic Saudi-Pakistan defence pact, and the lingering echoes of India’s Operation Sindoor.
What emerged was not just a dissection of isolated incidents, but a broader narrative of a nation teetering on the brink, with profound implications for India’s security and the fragile balance of power in our neighbourhood. As someone rooted in Jammu, where the tremors of cross-border tensions are felt in every household, these discussions hit close to home, reminding us that geopolitics is not an abstract game played in distant capitals, but a force that shapes lives on the ground.
The recent airstrikes by Pakistan on its civilian populations mark a disturbing escalation in what appears to be a deepening internal crisis, one that exposes the fragility of a state grappling with insurgencies it can no longer contain through conventional means.
The reports emerging from the Tirah Valley in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa indicate that Chinese-procured JF-17 jets unleashed precision-guided munitions on areas suspected of harbouring militants, resulting in the deaths of at least 30 people, including women and children, in what locals describe as a night time bombardment that flattened homes and sowed terror. This isn’t merely a tactical misstep; it’s a symptom of a military stretched to its limits, forced to deploy overwhelming airpower against its citizens because ground operations have failed to quell uprisings in regions like Balochistan and the northwest.
As Brigadier (Retd) Brijesh Pandey starkly put it, “The second question is about human rights and such situations where you use the air force against your own people, against civilians, where the whole world talks about the use of minimum force. So this in itself means that when any country does this, it means that it is completely surrounded from all sides and the situation has become so bad that it has to use its assets like this.”
Such actions violate fundamental principles of proportionality and human rights, turning the skies into instruments of domestic repression and signalling a government cornered by its own failures.
In broader context, this desperation reflects a nation where economic collapse and resource mismanagement have fuelled widespread discontent, pushing ordinary people toward rebellion and leaving the army with no choice but to bomb from afar, a grim admission that it has lost control on the ground.
This internal turmoil is compounded by Pakistan’s flirtations with external alliances, none more intriguing than the newly formalized strategic mutual defence pact with Saudi Arabia, which carries subtle yet profound implications for regional nuclear dynamics. At its core, the agreement isn’t just about military cooperation; it’s a veiled acknowledgment of Saudi Arabia’s historical role in funding Pakistan’s nuclear program, a partnership that has long lingered in the shadows but now steps into the light amid growing instability in the Middle East.
The pact, framed as a “strategic” endeavour, effectively ties Saudi security interests to Pakistan’s atomic arsenal, allowing Riyadh to hedge against uncertainties like the erosion of the American security umbrella over Gulf states. Recent events, such as Israel’s airstrike on Qatar despite the presence of major US bases, have shaken confidence in Washington’s commitments, prompting Saudi Arabia to seek alternative assurances.
Brigadier Pandey explained this linkage clearly, stating, “This pact is basically placed under the name of Strategic Mutual Defense Pact Agreement. So the meaning of strategic is actually that it is related to nuclear.” For Pakistan, mired in economic ruin with a collapsing currency and skyrocketing inflation, the deal is a financial lifeline, exchanging access to troops and weaponry for much-needed funds.
Yet, this arrangement holds limited direct threats to India, as Saudi Arabia’s military strengths lie in intelligence and aerial refuelling rather than deployable ground forces suited to South Asian terrain. The deep-rooted economic ties between New Delhi and Riyadh, encompassing trade volumes in the billions and cultural exchanges that bind millions of Indian expatriates to the kingdom, further ensure that Saudi Arabia is unlikely to intervene against India in any conflict, prioritizing pragmatic relations over ideological alignments.
Operation Sindoor which was executed on 7 May 2025 stands as a pivotal moment in this volatile landscape, a demonstration of India’s evolving defence posture that has redefined the rules of engagement with Pakistan. In the dead of night, Indian forces launched a series of precise strikes deep into Pakistani territory, targeting key assets in a 22-minute blitz that showcased asymmetric warfare at its finest.
From my home in Jammu’s Himalayan foothills, where the international border’s lights flicker like distant stars, I witnessed the operation’s immediate aftermath: air defence systems illuminating the sky as they intercepted incoming threats, including missiles aimed at strategic armoury dumps near Nagrota. The retaliation was swift and surgical, with BrahMos missiles striking Sargodha, a hub of nuclear-related infrastructure, sending shockwaves through Pakistan’s command structure and forcing desperate pleas for de-escalation. This wasn’t random aggression; it was a calculated response to provocations, integrating advanced systems like Akash Teer for seamless air defence and achieving depths of penetration that caught adversaries off guard.
Brigadier (Retd) Pandey also highlighted its unprecedented nature, noting, “This has never happened in history. India has given a sample of such soft short intense and accurate warfare only in Operation Sindoor.” By paralyzing decision-making in Islamabad and exposing vulnerabilities in Pakistan’s nuclear posturing, Operation Sindoor elevated the cost of conflict, shifting the initiative to India and underscoring a national resolve that extends beyond military might to encompass economic and cultural strengths. The operation’s “paused” status, as reiterated by leadership, serves as an ongoing deterrent, a reminder that India will act decisively to protect its interests while navigating the complexities of global alliances.
Pakistan’s trajectory toward potential disintegration is rooted in foundational flaws that have festered since its inception, transforming a patchwork of regions into a powder keg of ethnic and economic grievances. Conceived in 1933 by cartographer Chaudhry Rahmat Ali as an acronym stitching together disparate territories from Punjab to Kashmir the nation was built on the shaky edifice of the two-nation theory, a construct that ignored cultural diversities and sowed seeds of division. Today, Balochistan endures the world’s longest-running insurgency, ignited on the night of August 14, 1947, and fueled by systematic exploitation where resources flow disproportionately to Punjab, leaving peripheries in poverty.
Water crises, exacerbated by India’s revocation of the Indus Waters Treaty, have turned fertile lands barren, with monsoons bringing floods and off-seasons yielding droughts that displace millions along the Indus’s path to the sea. Inter-provincial tensions, like the violent disputes over canal projects between Sindh and Punjab under figures like Asim Munir, highlight a fractured federation where favouritism breeds separatism. America’s Cold War-era investments, aimed at countering the USSR and encircling India, propped up this unstable structure, but at the cost of Pakistan’s strategic autonomy, turning it into a proxy for terrorism without genuine development. As insurgencies engulf over 60-70% of districts, the military faces a multi-front quagmire—Indian borders, Afghan frontiers, and internal revolts—leaving it unable to sustain control without resorting to draconian measures like airstrikes on civilians. Brigadier Pandey captured this precarious state succinctly, warning, “When you build a country on lies, then you keep justifying it on lies only.”
The notion of victory in Pakistan often resides in perception rather than reality, a psychological crutch that perpetuates overconfidence and risks catastrophic miscalculations. Historical texts, such as the 1970s treatise on Quranic concepts of warfare, emphasize a “notion of victory” where defeats are reframed as triumphs, allowing leaders to maintain morale amid repeated setbacks. This mindset, coupled with external props like residual US support and the Saudi pact, fosters a dangerous illusion of invincibility, potentially emboldening actions that could ignite wider conflicts.
Yet, beneath this facade lies a society ravaged by corruption, poverty, and resource scarcity, where power outages and inflation erode daily life, pushing populations toward radicalization or outright rebellion. The revocation of water-sharing agreements has not only heightened environmental stresses but also amplified separatist sentiments, with millions of hectares of farmland turning to dust and communities clashing over dwindling supplies. In this context, Pakistan’s military, once a unifying force, now appears as an oppressor, its airstrikes alienating the very people it claims to protect and inviting international scrutiny from human rights bodies demanding probes into civilian casualties.
Jammu & Kashmir’s security landscape offers a stark contrast, where de-radicalization efforts must transcend military solutions to address deep-seated ideological divides. Radical elements have infiltrated institutions, from educational systems to local governance, perpetuating cycles of violence that exploit economic disparities and historical grievances. True stability requires a multifaceted approach: fostering inclusive education that counters extremist narratives, creating economic opportunities to integrate marginalized communities, and building shared cultural memories that bridge communal rifts.
As someone who has lived through the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits and the ensuing turmoil, I see the scars of division, but also glimmers of resilience in nationalist voices that push back against separatist agendas. Patience is essential; old hatreds don’t dissolve overnight, but sustained dialogue and development can erode them, turning fault lines into foundations for peace. The recent uptick in operations in Jammu underscores the need for vigilance, yet it also highlights progress in countering infiltration, where community involvement plays a pivotal role in thwarting external manipulations.
Global shifts add urgency to these regional dynamics, with America’s waning influence creating vacuums that opportunistic alliances seek to fill. Historical exploitation, from drone campaigns in the 2000s that alienated populations to the post-9/11 War on Terror that eroded Pakistan’s sovereignty, has left lasting resentments. Now, pressures like H-1B visa restrictions signal attempts to draw India into realigned blocs, testing New Delhi’s commitment to strategic autonomy. Emerging threats, such as cognitive warfare through digital platforms, demand robust defences in information domains to counter disinformation that could inflame tensions.
India’s comprehensive power bolstered by economic growth and cultural depth positions it to navigate these waters, balancing relations with the US while fortifying against Pakistan’s instabilities. As airstrikes scar civilian landscapes and pacts reshape alliances, the region stands at a crossroads, where proactive diplomacy and internal reforms could avert collapse, ensuring that South Asia’s future is defined by cooperation rather than conflict.
