*Originally published in 2025 and preserved as part of our archive project.Get E-International Relations delivered to your inbox, free of charge. As you sign up, consider becoming a paid subscriber to support our work.

The terror attack on tourists in Jammu and Kashmir’s Pahalgam in April 2025 sparked not only official condemnations from world leaders but also stirred a powerful emotional current across India. The national mood was awash with grief, anger, and a thirst for justice. In response, New Delhi enacted a series of swift diplomatic measures: suspending the Indus Water Treaty, shutting down the border at Attari, reducing the strength of diplomatic missions, and signalling a hardened stance against cross-border hostility. However, it was the launch of Operation Sindoor—India’s military campaign targeting terror launchpads and infrastructure—that most viscerally embodied the national sentiment. Framed not merely as a strategic necessity but as a moral imperative, the operation marked a significant escalation, one fuelled by collective anguish and the deeply felt need to restore national dignity. These actions, while calculated, were also profoundly emotional—charged with a sense of collective hurt and the urgent need to reaffirm India's resolve and honour on the global stage. Moments like these reveal an important, often overlooked dimension of foreign policy: the role of emotions.

Traditional theories in International Relations (IR) often reduce state behaviour to strategic calculations of power and interest. Yet, emotions—particularly those tied to national identity and honour, shape how states perceive threats and project their power. India is no exception. This article poses a central question: How do emotions, especially national honour, shape India’s foreign policy? Through an examination of pivotal moments such as Operation Sindoor and the Balakot airstrikes, and the discourse surrounding India’s global aspirations, this piece argues that national honour functions not just as a rhetorical device, but as a powerful force in shaping strategic decisions, diplomatic posture, and public legitimacy.

In recent years, emotions have become central to IR theory and practice, offering deeper insight into the complex motivations behind state behaviour. Scholars like Emma Hutchison argue that emotions are not only inevitable in human affairs but are also “intrinsically linked to, and imbued within, the discourses and social structures that underpin societies and their politics.” While the so-called ‘emotional turn’ in IR emerged over a decade ago, the foreign policy decisions of India’s strategic elites have yet to be thoroughly examined through this........

© E-International