Preparedness Is Patriotism: Why Pakistan Must Invest in Defense
In spite of occasional ceasefires and fleeting diplomatic gestures, the truth is that Pakistan and India are stuck in a perpetual and perilous conflict. This is not an old-fashioned war with everyday...
In spite of occasional ceasefires and fleeting diplomatic gestures, the truth is that Pakistan and India are stuck in a perpetual and perilous conflict. This is not an old-fashioned war with everyday battles, but a shadow war conducted using missiles, military mobilizations, cross-border clashes, and aggressive rhetoric. What happened during 2024 and 2025 has proved beyond all doubt that the concept of peace between the two countries is an easy myth. What we are witnessing is not the absence of war but its transformation into a more complex and layered conflict. The recent escalations, triggered by a militant attack in Indian-occupied Kashmir on April 22, 2025, led India to carry out aggressive air and missile strikes into Pakistan-administered territory. India claimed it was targeting terrorist infrastructure, but Pakistan suffered the loss of at least 31 civilians, including women and children. In retaliation, Pakistan launched drones and artillery strikes, resulting in four days of intense military exchanges. This was reportedly the worst cross-border clash in decades. Despite the announcement of a ceasefire by May 10 through international mediation, both countries continued to exchange fire across the Line of Control, a clear signal that hostilities are far from over.
India’s choice of weapons and military posture reveals a deeper agenda. In this conflict, India launched stand-off weapons like BrahMos and SCALP-EG cruise missiles. Such an incident clearly shows an escalation in offensive power from India. The strikes were not symbolic; they were a deliberate show of strength. While Pakistan responded with its Fatah ballistic missiles and surveillance drones, it is a reminder that the country has both capacity and will to respond robustly. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif’s remarks after the attacks left no doubt that Pakistan will fight for its sovereignty no matter what. His words were also echoed by Defence Minister Khawaja Asif, who said that the country would respond at a time and place of its choice. This firm political resolve is not talk; it is an expression of a consensus within the Pakistani state that India’s behavior is not individual incidents, but part of a general pattern of regional aggressiveness.
India’s militaristic ambitions are not limited to its Pakistan border. In the course of the last year, it has organized a series of large-scale military exercises, including Exercise Akraman, which included live-firing maneuvers and simulated war fighting along several frontlines. These were not only defensive exercises; they were offensive in design, implying readiness for quick deployment and offensive military operations. On the other hand, India maintains participation in various international military alliances and naval war games, like Exercise Malabar with the United States, Japan, and Australia. All of this culminates in fortifying India’s strategic depth and heralds an expansionist doctrine for itself. Pakistan’s military posture, in contrast, is depicted in joint exercises with China and a declared stance for regional stability. But alliances and military presence are becoming less balanced.
The rhetoric itself creates new fault lines. Indian officials are still claiming Pakistan sponsors terrorism while itself undertaking ruthless repression in Kashmir and lives lost to Indian operations. Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri issued a not-so-subtle warning that India would retaliate against any violation, making the idea of unilateral aggression sound near normal. Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry, in contrast, has consistently called for dialogue and peaceful resolution. Prime Minister Sharif has insisted on Pakistan’s commitment to upholding the ceasefire while categorically denying any violations from the Pakistani side. The Indian narrative of “terrorist strikes” is merely a cover for its escalating aggression, and Pakistan cannot afford to ignore this reality any longer.
The most urgent feature of this strategic disequilibrium has been the shocking gap in defense expenditure. SIPRI finds that India spent a mind-boggling USD 86.1 billion in FY2024 on the defense sector, making it the world’s fifth-largest military spender. Pakistan’s defense sector budget was a puny USD 10.2 billion, which is only one-eighth of what India has allocated for the same purpose. India’s budget permits it to modernize at speed, buy high-end weapon systems, and expand its air force and navy. Pakistan, on the other hand, is bound by fiscal constraints and has had to reduce its defense expenditure for three consecutive years, even as threats increase.
India’s defense acquisitions present an alarming tale. It has procured five regiments of Russia’s S-400 Triumf air-defense systems, tested MIRV-capable Agni-V intercontinental ballistic missiles, and acquired new Rafale fighter jets in billion-dollar deals. It has also been offered access to advanced US technology including F-35s. These acquisitions are not in the name of defense but of dominating regional military. India is rapidly modernizing with Western, Russian, and Israeli technology, which is building a potential war machine both for regional coercion and strategic escalation. Our armed forces are highly capable and very professional, but they are operating with fewer resources and a much narrower margin for error.
Realizing the gravity of the situation, Pakistan’s government has already proposed an 18 percent increase in its defense budget in 2025–26, pushing it past Rs 2.5 trillion. This is in the right direction but that is not sufficient. If India continues going ahead with its defense expansion, then Pakistan must respond not just with words, but with concrete investment in defense assets. The need is acute and imperative. Pakistan’s deterrence depends on closing the capability gap, modernizing its armed forces, and enhancing its missile, air defense, and naval power. This is not about fueling an arms race, it is about survival, dignity, and regional equilibrium.
Pakistan’s military has historically safeguarded the nation’s territorial integrity against overwhelming odds. From the heights of Kargil to the battles along the LOC, the Pakistan Army has proved its mettle in terms of repute, professionalism, and sacrifice. But in this era of stand-off weapons, cyber warfare, and hybrid threats, it is incumbent upon us to arm our forces with tools and resources devised for meeting present-day challenges. Action taken by India is not merely defensive but provocative and expansionary. The idea that peace exists because missiles are not flying every day is a dangerous illusion. Real peace requires strength, and strength requires investment.
In conclusion, the events of 2024 and 2025 have made it abundantly clear that Pakistan and India are not at peace. They are in a sustained state of confrontation that demands serious attention and policy shifts. Pakistan must act now to secure its future. A significant and sustained increase in defense spending is not just an option, it is a necessity. The security of the nation, the balance of power in South Asia, and the preservation of regional stability depend on it.
Author
