Modern war is no longer limited to battlefields alone; More and more crosses the daily life of civilians. The deliberate orientation of non -combatants marks one of the most serious infractions of international law, undermining both humanitarian principles and the global order based on the rules.
In May 2025, the Sindoor operation of India inflicted precisely such violation. When hitting houses, mosques, markets and essential services, the operation resulted in the death of at least 40 civilians in Pakistan and Azad Jammu & Kashmir.
These deaths were not incidental or guaranteed, but the foreseeable result of strikes in spaces where there was no present military objective.
The consequences of such actions extend far beyond the immediate loss of lives. They were the credibility of the global order based on rules, normalize impunity and establish a dangerous precedent in which humanitarian protections are considered optional instead of mandatory.
At a time when conflicts extend through domains of earth, air, cybernetics and information, the erosion of humanitarian principles threatens to draw again the limits of war behavior acceptably acceptably destructive.
From a legal perspective, the case against the Sndoor operation is clear. Article 2 (4) of the UN Charter prohibits the use of force against the sovereignty of another State, while article 51 allows self -defense only in the case of an armed attack. In invoking article 51 to justify its attacks, India misused international law. Terrorism, no matter how serious, does not constitute an armed attack that justifies interstate military aggression unless state participation can be established in a credible way.
In the case of the Pahalgam incident, there was no credible evidence to link Pakistan with the events. On the other hand, a tragedy was used in the Indian soil as a pretext for cross -border attacks, violating the letter and spirit of international law.
Geneva conventions offer even clearer prohibitions. Articles 15, 27 and 32–34, as well as the common article 3, explicitly protect civilians from being attacked, collectively tortured or punished. The attacks of the Sindoor operation on civil neighborhoods and religious sites fell directly within the scope of prohibited behavior.
The international community cannot afford to treat violations such as conflict routine characteristics. To do so would make the protections enshrined in the meaningless humanitarian law, reducing them to aspiring ideals instead of required obligations.
Moral bets are equally marked. When civilians, women who obtain water, children at stake and families in prayer, become deliberate objectives, war stops fighting between armies and instead becomes a campaign against humanity itself.
The normalization of this practice has serious implications for global security. It establishes in motion a cycle of retaliation, radicalization and perpetual instability, while giving the credibility of the states that claim to maintain human rights.
The broader geopolitical context also requires scrutiny. The Sindoor operation is not alone; It is part of a broader pattern of policies that marginalize and dehumanize Muslim populations in southern Asia.
The parallels with other theaters of the conflict, particularly Israel’s operations in Palestine, are difficult to ignore. In both cases, civilians are dehumanized for being labeled as “terrorists” or “collateral damage”, a rhetorical hand game that masks systematic violations of humanitarian law.
The erosion of the norms in a conflict invariably spills in others, weakening the global architecture of responsibility.
Pakistan’s lessons are urgent. First, there is a need for systematic legal preparation. Attribution and documentation are the basic components of responsibility.
Without evidence, photographs, testimonies and forensic records, civil risk statements are dismissed as political rhetoric. Legal audits, structured files and independent investigations must form the backbone of Pakistan’s case in international forums.
Institutions such as the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court cannot guarantee rapid justice, but provide platforms to establish a legal registry that can influence global opinion and policy.
This urgency echoed in a recent seminar organized by the Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI) on “Civil Protection in Multi -Dominium Conflicts: Legal and Humanitarian Perspectives on the Sindoor operation.”
Ambassador Sohail Mahmood, the director of ISSI, stressed the need for Pakistan to build stronger diplomatic coalitions to highlight these violations in multilateral forums.
In his final comments, Mr. Ahmer Bilal Soofi, former Minister of Law and Justice, emphasized the importance of structured legal documentation and the preparation for Pakistan to effectively seek responsibility under international humanitarian law.
Secondly, Pakistan must emphasize his diplomatic strategy. Bilateralism dependence with India has not repeatedly failed to offer responsibility. Multilateral platforms: the UN, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation and even regional groups, offer more viable pathways to amplify Pakistan’s concerns.
The diplomatic dissemination must connect the Sindoor operation with the broader continuum of the Human Rights Historia of India in Kashmir, its treatment of minorities and its use of water as a coercive tool. The construction of states coalitions around these issues can generate an impulse where unilateral protests cannot.
Third, narrative construction is central. International law operates not only in court but also in the public opinion court. The stories of victims, displaced families, orphaned children and destroyed communities have moral weight that statistics themselves cannot transmit.
The social media platforms, international media and civil society organizations are critical of transforming legal arguments into convincing narratives that resonate worldwide. Without this, the human dimension of such tragedies runs the risk of being drowned by the noise of geopolitics.
Finally, Pakistan must strengthen his own internal resilience. Civil protection is a matter of national cohesion, not only of law and diplomacy. Divided societies are less capable of advocating their citizens abroad. The strongest social unit, economic resilience and institutional capacity are essential to ensure that external promotion coincides with internal stability.
A perceived country as fractured and unstable will have difficulty gaining sympathy for its victims, regardless of how fair is its cause.
The Sindoor operation raises questions that go beyond the immediate tragedy of May 2025. Asks if the international community is prepared to defend the humanitarian principles that often invokes. Ask if the powerful states will remain in the same standards as the weakest, or if the selective application will continue to empty the legitimacy of international law.
Above all, ask if civilians in conflict areas can expect the protections promised by treaties and conventions.
For Pakistan, the way ahead is clear. The legal resource, diplomatic dissemination and narrative construction must work together. None of these tools can only ensure responsibility, but together they can challenge impunity and preserve the principle that civilians should never be the objective of war. The Sindoor operation was an attack on the idea that war has limits.
Allowing such an act without response would invite repetition, not only in southern Asia, but where powerful states choose to fold the rules.
Civil Protection, therefore, must remain in the heart of the Pakistan Foreign and National Security Strategy.
It is not only a legal but also moral imperative. Defending civilians is defending the very principle of humanity in war. The Sindoor operation has tested that principle. The answer must reaffirm it, clearly and conviction, before the erosion of humanitarian norms becomes irreversible.
Discharge of responsibility: The views expressed in this piece are that of writer and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of PakGazette.TV.
The writer is an expert in public policies and leads the World Economic Forum of the World Institute in Pakistan. PUBLIC @AMIRJAHANGIR and can be contacted in: [email protected]
Originally published in the news
