In the wake of the recent terrorist attack in Pahalgam, the familiar drumbeat of war rhetoric has returned with unnerving speed. Television channels in both India and Pakistan have turned into battlegrounds of their own — anchors shouting over each other, guests hurling accusations, and talk show panels reduced to nationalist echo chambers. Words like "retaliation", "punishment" and "decisive response" dominate the airwaves, drowning out nuance, restraint, and any aspiration for a different path.

This cycle has become all too predictable. A violent incident triggers outrage, and instead of sober inquiry or diplomacy, both states fall back into postures of hostility. Politicians make aggressive statements to appease domestic audiences, the media inflates emotions for ratings, and the public is fed a narrative of enmity that leaves little room for critical reflection. But the question we must ask - loudly and persistently — is whether this path leads anywhere meaningful. Can war guarantee peace? Can two nuclear-armed neighbours truly afford a misstep?

The historical record offers no comfort. India and Pakistan have fought three wars and countless skirmishes. Each has inflicted pain, deepened distrust, and widened the emotional chasm between societies that were once part of the same cultural fabric. We have been told repeatedly that the next strike will be decisive, that the next war will settle scores, that this time we will teach the other side a final lesson. But what has........

© The Express Tribune