Modi’s Warning, a Secret Call, and a Storm Unleashed: What Triggered India’s Most Devastating Response Yet?

New Delhi: In the wake of Pakistan’s attempted strike on Indian military assets, Prime Minister Narendra Modi conveyed a stern warning to US Vice President JD Vance during a phone call on May 9: India’s response to any Pakistani provocation would be “more forceful, stronger, and more devastating” than anything Islamabad could imagine.

According to senior officials familiar with the exchange told HT, the rare direct conversation was initiated by the US following heightened concerns of military escalation between the two nuclear-armed neighbours. The US had reportedly assessed a “high probability” of escalation after India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7, targeting terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) in retaliation for the Pahalgam terror attack that killed multiple civilians and tourists on April 22.

“The Prime Minister was categorical — if Pakistan acts, India will respond, and respond harder. There’s no ambiguity,” an official told this correspondent. “Mr Modi told Mr Vance very clearly that India would not back down in the face of terror. The message was unmistakable.”

The same message was echoed by External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, who reached out to global counterparts including US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, reinforcing India’s position that it will strike terrorists on Pakistani soil if provoked. “They fire, we fire. They stop, we stop,” an Indian official said, underlining the new doctrine of symmetry — but with greater intensity.

On May 10, when the Pakistani military attempted coordinated strikes on 26 Indian defence establishments, India retaliated with precision attacks on eight Pakistani airbases using long-range weaponry. The strikes reportedly forced Islamabad to seek a de-escalation route through Washington. Rubio then reached out to Jaishankar, suggesting a possible “off-ramp” — a diplomatic term for exit strategy — that could be acceptable to Pakistan.

However, India demanded direct communication from Pakistan rather than messages passed through back channels. “We made it clear that New Delhi will only talk if Islamabad reaches out officially. No intermediaries,” said the source.

India’s clarity of purpose was evident even before Operation Sindoor began. Diplomatic communications post-April 22 made it clear that any terrorist attack on Indian soil would invite swift retribution. This stance also shaped India’s push at the UN Security Council, where New Delhi successfully ensured a strongly worded condemnation of the Pahalgam attack despite Pakistan’s presence as a non-permanent member.

Military officials confirmed that the speed and precision of the Indian response prevented international interlocutors from urging restraint — a dynamic that traditionally emerged during India-Pakistan crises. “We struck before anyone could tell us not to. Our forces were prepared, and each strike was more impactful than what Pakistan expected,” said a senior defence official.

India also rejected attempts at “shuttle diplomacy,” discouraging foreign nations from mediating. Though West Asian leaders including Saudi Arabia’s Adel al-Jubeir and Iran’s Seyed Abbas Araghchi made visits to both countries, Indian officials noted that these nations expressed understanding of New Delhi’s stance.

“We don’t believe there is an Islamic bloc backing Pakistan. The discussions within the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) showed internal disagreements, and the resolution that emerged did condemn terrorism,” an Indian official added.

Meanwhile, India was not surprised by China’s subtle support to Pakistan, particularly the use of Chinese military platforms during Pakistani strikes. Beijing’s role was expected, said officials, given the longstanding “iron brother” narrative between the two countries.