As the world takes in the news of last night’s Indian military operation against Pakistan, following the deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam on April 22, 2025, which resulted in the death of 26 tourists, the question arises: What can we expect from the world? How will the international reaction to the emotively-named ‘Operation Sindoor’ play out?

The first international responses have been largely predictable. United States President Donald Trump termed the situation a “shame” and hoped it would end “very quickly”. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated he is closely monitoring the situation and will continue to engage with both Indian and Pakistani leadership for a peaceful resolution. The US has also conveyed that it has been in touch with both nations in recent days, urging de-escalation, and that these efforts will increase.

The Sentiment In China

China expressed “regret” over India’s military action and concern about the current developments, calling on both India and Pakistan to prioritise peace and stability, remain calm, exercise restraint, and avoid actions that further complicate the situation. China emphasised that India and Pakistan are neighbours who cannot be separated and are also China’s neighbours. This was a more balanced statement than many might have expected, given Beijing’s “all-weather” friendship with Pakistan, which is practically a vassal state of China.

Russia expressed deep concern about the deepening military confrontation between India and Pakistan. Moscow called on both countries to show restraint and condemned all forms of terrorism – a welcome reminder of what provoked India’s action in the first place. 

France ‘Understands’

France, similarly, called on both India and Pakistan to exercise restraint to avoid escalation and to protect civilians, but added that it “understands India’s desire to protect itself against terrorism”. Paris emphasised the need to prevent a lasting confrontation, stating that no one has an interest in such an outcome. The French Foreign Minister indicated he would be speaking with his counterparts in India and Pakistan.

The United Kingdom was slower to react, but remarks made earlier by a Foreign Office minister suggest that London would call for de-escalation and dialogue, aligning with the stance of other major powers. Given its own substantial sub-continental population, the UK is also likely to engage behind the scenes to encourage restraint.

Concerns For South Asia

In the Arab world, Egypt urged both sides to exercise the highest levels of restraint, emphasising the importance of pursuing dialogue through diplomatic channels to defuse the crisis and avoid further escalation. The UAE also called on both India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and de-escalate tensions, stressing the importance of diplomatic dialogue and mutual understanding to prevent military escalation and strengthen stability in South Asia.   

The one country that has robustly spoken in support of India, unsurprisingly, is Israel, which also reacted militarily to a terrorist attack on October 7, 2023. Israel has made it clear that it views India’s actions as a legitimate response to terrorism and an exercise of its right to self-defence. Israel’s Ambassador to India, Reuven Azar, stated publicly on X (formerly Twitter): “Israel supports India’s right for self-defence. Terrorists should know there’s no place to hide from their heinous crimes against the innocent.”

What’s Brewing At UN?

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres also expressed deep concern about the Indian military operations across the Line of Control and the international border. His spokesperson, Stéphane Dujarric, says the Secretary-General is “very concerned about the Indian military operations across the Line of Control and international border” and adds: “He calls for maximum military restraint from both countries. The world cannot afford a military confrontation between India and Pakistan.” 

The UN Security Council, in its closed-door consultations, had also urged restraint and dialogue. Though Pakistan is a non-permanent member of the 15-state body, and India is not present at such consultations, informal reports indicate that things did not go very well for our neighbours in those discussions. Some countries, like France, strongly acknowledged India’s concerns regarding terrorism.

In short, the key theme emerging from the reactions of the international community is largely the call for restraint and de-escalation. This suits India, since Operation Sindoor was clearly conceived as a one-off retaliation rather than the opening salvo in a protracted war. Given that New Delhi has no desire to go up the escalatory ladder, the global calls for maximum military restraint from both countries – emphasising that the world cannot afford a military confrontation between India and Pakistan – can be said to be addressed mainly to Islamabad. Some sympathy for India as a victim of terrorism is evident.

Restraint Is The Common Theme

There is a clear concern within the international community about the potential for the situation to escalate, especially given that both nations are nuclear-armed. As a result, several nations and the UN are emphasising the importance of dialogue and peaceful resolution to the issues. The overarching message one hears globally is the need to maintain peace and stability in the South Asian region. Diplomatic efforts are expected to intensify to encourage de-escalation and prevent a larger conflict.

In the context of any military escalation of the India-Pakistan situation, we can expect the Security Council to call for restraint, urge dialogue, and potentially hold closed consultations to assess the situation and consider further action. The involvement of the five permanent members will be crucial in shaping the Council’s response. Ideally, the Security Council seeks to act with the consensus of its members to ensure the legitimacy and effectiveness of its decisions, but Pakistan’s being a member currently makes that impossible.

If the UN Security Council decides to hold a formal meeting on the issue – not behind closed doors but to signal publicly its concern about conflict between two nuclear powers – the outcome is largely predictable in advance. From my long experience of the United Nations, I would expect the Council to call on the parties to the conflict to resolve their differences through peaceful means such as negotiation or mediation, as outlined in Chapter VI of the UN Charter. If Pakistan’s avowed retaliation shows signs of going too far, the Council might demand an immediate halt to the hostilities. It is unlikely, though, that its language will unduly favour one side or the other, given China’s overt patronage of its client state and the widespread goodwill towards and respect for India among Council members. 

Will Islamabad Learn?

In other conflicts, calls for a cease-fire are sometimes followed by the dispatch of special envoys to establish mediation efforts to facilitate dialogue between the parties. But this seems unlikely here, given India’s well-known allergy to internationalising the Kashmir dispute – and its awareness that that was precisely one of the objectives of the terrorist attack.

As always in such a swiftly evolving situation, the watchword for all concerned appears to be to wait and see whether better sense will prevail in Islamabad, or more decisive intervention may be necessary to prevent uncontrolled escalation.

(Shashi Tharoor has been a Member of Parliament from Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, since 2009. He is a published author and a former diplomat.)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author