Why QUAD is not supporting India, Modi failed India again!

Indian Diplomacy failed again ?

The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD)—comprising the United States, India, Japan, and Australia—has emerged as a significant force in the Indo-Pacific region. Initially conceived as a maritime cooperation forum, its role has expanded to include diplomatic, economic, and security dimensions aimed at countering threats in the Indo-Pacific, particularly those posed by an assertive China.

However, as regional tensions flare up once again between India and Pakistan, particularly along the Line of Control (LoC) and in Jammu & Kashmir, observers have noted a conspicuous silence from the QUAD. While India signals readiness for a potential military strike in response to recent incidents, the QUAD has notably refrained from naming Pakistan in any official statements—raising questions about the alliance's unity, geopolitical strategy, and India’s calculations.

This article explores the diplomatic subtleties, the strategic balancing acts within the QUAD, India's motivations and preparations for a potential strike, and the implications of this evolving geopolitical equation.

---

The Incident That Sparked Tensions

Tensions between India and Pakistan are not new, but recent developments have raised the stakes. According to Indian military officials and local intelligence sources, an attack in mid-June 2025 on an Indian Army convoy in Poonch, Jammu & Kashmir, killed seven soldiers and wounded nine. Indian officials assert that the attackers had links to Pakistan-based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM).

In response, Indian political leaders, including senior members of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), have openly hinted at a retaliatory strike. Prime Minister Narendra Modi, while stopping short of confirming military action, stated in a recent address, “The perpetrators of terror, and those who shelter them, must be held accountable.”

The rhetoric, matched by military mobilization along the border, has sparked speculation that India is preparing a “surgical strike 2.0” or a limited cross-border operation, similar to the 2016 and 2019 strikes conducted after the Uri and Pulwama attacks, respectively.

---

QUAD’s Silence — Strategic or Diplomatic?

1. Why QUAD Didn’t Name Pakistan

Despite India’s growing rhetoric and the seriousness of the threat, the QUAD's latest joint statement—released after its July 1, 2025 virtual summit—did not name Pakistan even once. The statement broadly condemned "acts of terrorism that destabilize regional peace and security" and expressed “solidarity with affected nations” but stopped short of attributing blame.

Several reasons may explain this careful wording:

a. Maintaining Cohesion Within QUAD

The QUAD is a diverse grouping with divergent security interests. While India views Pakistan as a persistent threat, Australia and Japan focus more on containing Chinese influence. For the U.S., Pakistan remains a strategic player in the Afghan peace process and a useful intermediary in Middle Eastern affairs. Naming Pakistan directly could risk internal fractures.

b. Avoiding Escalation in South Asia

Openly blaming Pakistan could fuel further escalation. The QUAD, by remaining ambiguous, appears to be urging restraint while still supporting its democratic partner, India, in principle. This measured stance provides diplomatic room for de-escalation if necessary.

c. China Factor

There’s growing suspicion in New Delhi that China may be indirectly encouraging instability through Pakistan as part of a “two-front threat” against India. However, QUAD’s strategic compass remains China-centric, and dragging Pakistan directly into the discourse could dilute the clarity of its Indo-Pacific focus.

---

India’s Strategic Calculations

1. Preparing for a Strike?

Military analysts suggest India is positioning for a quick and limited operation aimed at militant infrastructure in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Satellite images and troop movement patterns indicate that strike teams, including Special Forces and air assault units, have been placed on high alert.

The Indian Air Force is reportedly conducting night drills in border areas, and the Navy has been asked to remain combat-ready. Though India has not officially confirmed an impending strike, defense sources speak of a “short-window retaliatory campaign” under review by the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS).

2. Lessons from the Past

India has used limited military strikes to send a message without engaging in prolonged conflict:

• Uri 2016 Surgical Strikes: Targeted launch pads across the LoC, in response to an attack that killed 19 soldiers.
• Balakot 2019 Airstrikes: Targeted a JeM training camp in Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province following the Pulwama attack.

Both operations were carefully calibrated, with a strong domestic political payoff. The question is whether such a strategy can be repeated in 2025 without drawing wider regional backlash.

---

Pakistan’s Response and International Dynamics

1. Pakistan’s Reaction

Pakistan’s military has warned of "full-spectrum retaliation" if India conducts any form of aggression. Pakistani Prime Minister Asif Ali Zardari, in a press conference, accused India of warmongering and urged the international community to “take notice of Indian belligerence.”

At the same time, Islamabad is lobbying its traditional allies—China, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia—to intervene diplomatically and put pressure on New Delhi to avoid escalation.

2. China’s Calculated Watch

China, though not part of QUAD, watches closely. It has increased its own military presence in the Ladakh sector and has reportedly been conducting joint exercises with Pakistani forces in Gilgit-Baltistan. The China-Pakistan axis, underpinned by the Belt and Road Initiative (CPEC), gives Beijing a stake in the outcome.

A limited India-Pakistan conflict may suit China’s interests in the short term by diverting Indian military focus away from the disputed eastern border.

---

What Does This Mean for QUAD?

The QUAD’s refusal to name Pakistan signals the limits of its cohesion when its members’ national interests diverge. While India wants diplomatic support from its allies, others in the grouping may be cautious about being drawn into bilateral disputes that could jeopardize their own regional calculations.

Still, India’s role within QUAD remains central—economically, geographically, and militarily. The grouping's future relevance may depend on how effectively it can support each member in times of crisis, even when the crisis doesn’t directly involve China.

If India goes ahead with a strike, QUAD’s next move—whether explicit support, silent backing, or diplomatic distancing—will be critical in defining its credibility.

---

Domestic Politics and Timing

1. Electoral Context in India

India is heading into key state elections later this year. Analysts argue that a successful strike could boost the BJP’s domestic standing, similar to the nationalist surge seen post-Balakot in 2019. However, miscalculation could backfire dramatically—both militarily and diplomatically.

2. Media and Public Opinion

Indian media is largely supportive of a tough stance. Public opinion, fueled by viral videos of grieving families and prime-time debates, is overwhelmingly in favor of retaliation. The government faces strong pressure to act decisively, but responsibly.

---

Risk of Escalation

While both countries have experience managing crises, any misstep—like the capture of a pilot in 2019 or civilian casualties—can escalate tensions beyond manageable limits. With both sides nuclear-armed, the stakes are exceptionally high.

Military experts caution that limited strikes can spiral into broader conflict if not diplomatically contained within 48–72 hours.

---

As India inches closer to a potential military response and the QUAD tiptoes around direct condemnation of Pakistan, a delicate geopolitical balance is on display.

India must navigate the fine line between strategic assertion and escalation. Meanwhile, the QUAD must reconcile its internal contradictions if it wants to remain a credible security coalition.

Ultimately, the region—and the world—waits to see whether diplomacy, deterrence, or confrontation will define the next chapter in South Asian geopolitics.