As the world takes the news of the Indian military operation last night after the deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam on 22 April 2025, resulting in 26 tourists who died, the question arises: What can we expect from the world? How would you play international response to the emotionally designated ‘Operation Sindoor’?
The first international reactions have been largely estimated. The United States President Donald Trump “embarrassed” the situation and hoped that it would be “very early”. State Secretary Marco Rubio said that he is closely monitoring the situation and will continue to join both Indian and Pakistani leadership for peaceful resolution. The US has also reported that it is in touch with the two countries in recent times, urging D-signs, and these efforts will increase.
Sense in china
China expressed “regret” over anxiety about India’s military action and existing developments, calling both India and Pakistan to prioritize peace and stability, remain calm, calm down, practice restraint, and avoid actions that make the situation more complex. China emphasized that India and Pakistan are neighbors who cannot be separated and they are also neighbors of China. It was a more balanced statement that could expect many people, given Beijing’s “All-Vather” friendship with Pakistan, which is practically a vassal position of China.
Russia expressed deep concern about deepening the military conflict between India and Pakistan. Moscow called both countries to show restraint and condemned all forms of terrorism – a welcome reminder to incite India’s action at first.
France ‘understands’
France, similarly, called both India and Pakistan to avoid calling and practice restraint to protect citizens, but said that it “understands India’s desire to protect itself from terrorism”. Paris emphasized the need to prevent a permanent confrontation, saying that no one is interested in such results. The French Foreign Minister indicated that he would talk with his counterparts in India and Pakistan.
The United Kingdom was slow to react, but earlier remarks by an Foreign Office of Foreign Office suggest that London would call for de-size and dialogue, combining with other major powers. Given its own adequate sub-monopoly population, the UK is also likely to be attached to the curtain to encourage restraint.
Concern for South Asia
In the Arab world, Egypt urged both sides to use the highest level of restraint, which emphasized the importance of advancing dialogue through diplomatic channels to reduce the crisis and avoid moving forward. The UAE also asked both India and Pakistan to use restraint and de-suscule stress, which emphasizes the importance of diplomatic dialogue and mutual understanding to prevent military growth and strengthen stability in South Asia.
A country that has spoken strongly in support of India, uncertainly, is Israel, who has militored the terrorist attack on October 7, 2023. Israel has made it clear that it sees India’s actions as a legitimate response to terrorism and its right to self-defense. Israel’s Ambassador to India, Reven Azar, publicly said on X (East Twitter): “Israel supports India’s rights for self -defense. Terrorists should know that there is no place to hide from their heinous crimes against the innocents.”
What is cooking in the United Nations?
United Nations Secretary -General Antonio Gutres also expressed deep concern about Indian military operations across the Line of Control and International Border. His spokesperson, Stephen Duseric, says the general secretary “is very concerned about the Indian military operations on the control and international border” and says: “He asks the two countries for maximum military restraint. The world cannot afford military confrontation between India and Pakistan.”
The United Nations Security Council had requested restraint and dialogue in its closed doors consultations. Although Pakistan is a non-installed member of the 15-state body, and India does not exist in such consultations, informal reports indicate that things were not very good for our neighbors in those discussions. Some countries like France strongly accepted India’s concerns about terrorism.
In short, the major topic emerging from the reactions of the international community is a large extent call for restraint and de-size. It suits India, as Operation Sindoor was clearly conceived as a one-band vengeance rather than inaugurated in a long war. Given that New Delhi has no desire to go to the escalatery ladder, a global call for maximum military restraint from the two countries – emphasizing that the world could not afford the military confrontation between India and Pakistan – mainly Islamabad can be addressed. Some sympathy for India as a victim of terrorism is clear.
Abstinence is common theme
There is a clear concern within the international community about the ability to grow the situation, especially given that both nations are atomic-cosmetics. As a result, many nations and United Nations are emphasizing the importance of dialogue and peaceful solutions for issues. Globally over -wide messages need to maintain peace and stability in the South Asian region. Diplomatic efforts are expected to intensify to encourage de-escation and prevent a major conflict.
In the context of any military growth of the India-Pakistan situation, we can expect the Security Council to call for restraint, urge dialogue, and conduct a potentially closed consultation to assess the situation and consider further action. Participation of five permanent members will be important in shaping the council’s response. Ideally, the Security Council wants to work with its members’ consensus with its members to ensure the validity and effectiveness of its decisions, but it is currently impossible as a member of Pakistan.
If the United Nations Security Council decides to hold a formal meeting on the issue – not behind the closed doors but to publicly indicate its concern about the conflict between two nuclear powers – the result is largely already projected. From its long experience of the United Nations, I would expect that the council hoped to call parties to resolve its differences through peaceful means such as interactions or mediation such as interactions or mediation in chapter VI of the United Nations. If Pakistan’s averade vengeance shows signs of going far away, the council may demand an immediate stop for enmity. However, it is unlikely that its language will be in favor of one side or another, with its customer overtate protection of China and wide goodwill and respect for India among members of the council.
Will Islamabad learn?
In other conflicts, calls for the ceasefire occur after the remittance of special messengers to establish arbitration efforts to facilitate dialogue between parties. But here it seems that looking at India’s famous allergies to integrate India’s Kashmir controversy – and its awareness is that it was one of the objectives of the terrorist attack.
As usual, in such a rapidly developed situation, the watchword for all relatives seems to have a better understanding in Islamabad, or more decisive intervention may be necessary to prevent uncontrolled growth.
(Shashi Tharoor has been a member of Parliament from Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala in Kerala since 2009. He is a published writer and a former diplomat.)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author
