Kirana’s Fallout: The Hidden Catalyst Behind The India-Pakistan Truce – OpEd

The recent escalation between India and Pakistan marks one of the gravest military confrontations in the subcontinent in recent years. The immediate catalyst was the Pahalgam Hindu Massacre, a horrifying act of terror in which innocent tourists were brutally killed after being identified by their religion. This deliberate targeting of civilians, particularly based on religious identity, shocked the nation and drew widespread condemnation. It was one of the deadliest attacks on tourists in Kashmir’s recent history and marked a dangerous escalation in cross-border terrorism.

In response, the Government of India vowed to deliver a strong and decisive response to the perpetrators of this heinous crime and their backers across the border. Acting swiftly, on the night of May 6 and 7, India launched precision strikes targeting key terrorist infrastructure deep within Pakistani territory. The Indian Air Force carried out coordinated strikes nine terror sites, including on the Lashkar-e-Taiba headquarters in Muridke, the Jaish-e-Mohammad stronghold in Bahawalpur and Hizbul Mujahideen’s Mahmoona Zoya base in Sialkot, inflicting significant damage. Reports confirmed the elimination of dozens of terrorists and military-linked personnel, including members of Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Maulana Masood Azhar’s family.

Over the next 2–3 days, the conflict intensified. India struck 12 high-value terrorist-linked targets across Pakistan, demonstrating both military might and strategic clarity. Pakistan, in turn, attempted to retaliate by targeting Indian military installations but failed to breach India’s robust air defense system, particularly the S-400 missile defense shield acquired from Russia.

Notably, during the initial days of this high-intensity confrontation, major global powers, including the United States, chose to remain silent, subtly signaling that India’s right to self-defense and retaliation against terrorism was justified in the wake of the massacre of its civilians. This silence from the global stage may mark a turning point in international attitudes towards India’s counter-terrorism doctrine and its strategic autonomy in responding to cross-border terrorism.

The Truce and its Background:

On May 10th at 3:35 PM, Pakistan’s Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) contacted his Indian counterpart and requested a ceasefire. India agreed to the proposal, and the ceasefire officially came into effect at 5:00 PM on the same day. Shortly after, U.S. President Donald Trump claimed credit for facilitating the truce, stating on X (formerly Twitter) that his team had worked through the night to make the ceasefire possible. It was also announced that the DGMOs of both nations would hold a formal meeting on May 12 to discuss the terms and future of the ceasefire.

Leading up to this development, India had inflicted significant damage on Pakistan’s military infrastructure. On the first day of Indian strikes, Pakistan deployed its Chinese-supplied HQ-9P air defense system, but it failed to intercept even a single Indian missile. Over the next two days, India continued to dominate the airspace, launching successful missile and drone attacks. In total, 11 Pakistani air bases were targeted, leaving much of Pakistan’s air defense network compromised.

At a moment when Pakistan appeared militarily vulnerable and Indian public sentiment was surging with demands to reclaim Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK), the decision to accept a ceasefire raised widespread questions. Many speculated that India agreed to the ceasefire under pressure from the United States, although this claim was firmly denied by the Indian government.

Nevertheless, the debate continues: Why did India agree to a ceasefire when it held a clear strategic advantage? The Indian opposition has strongly criticized the government’s decision, and a large section of the public feels that the campaign against terrorism and its sponsors should have continued with full force.

Truth behind the truce

The Real Story Behind the Ceasefire In the days following India’s decisive airstrikes under Operation Sindoor, which targeted key terrorist and military infrastructure across Pakistan, disturbing reports began emerging from the Kirana Hills region—a suspected site of nuclear activity in Pakistan’s Punjab province. Unconfirmed sources and regional intelligence chatter suggested that a radioactive leak may have occurred following precision missile and drone strikes in the vicinity. These allegations sparked widespread concern, particularly after reports indicated that boron shipments—notably the neutron-absorbing Isotope Boron-10—were being rushed into Pakistan from Egypt, possibly to contain a radiation emergency.

Boron, a well-established component in nuclear safety protocols, is critical in such situations due to its neutron-absorbing properties, which allow it to absorb free neutrons to slow or halt chain nuclear reactions, Contain the spread of radioactive emissions, and Stabilize compromised nuclear fuel or containment structures.

According to reports, an Egyptian Air Force transport aircraft landed in Pakistan shortly after the alleged leak, delivering a consignment of boron sourced from the Nile Delta, one of the region’s natural reserves. The gesture, interpreted by some observers as an act of Islamic solidarity—“Muslim bhai-bhai”—underscored Egypt’s support for Pakistan in a moment of crisis. Meanwhile, teams from the U.S.  Department of Energy and other international entities were reportedly monitoring the situation closely, though their role remains opaque.

Despite the escalating speculation, neither the Pakistani government nor international agencies have issued formal confirmation regarding the alleged radiation leak or the presence of nuclear targets at Kirana Hills. The Indian government has categorically denied targeting any nuclear facilities during its air campaign. In a pointed yet humorous remark, a senior Indian official quipped, “Thank you for informing us that Kirana Hills houses nuclear installations. We had no idea.”

Amid these tensions, India and Pakistan conducted their routine exchange of nuclear facility lists on January 1, 2025, under the bilateral Agreement on the Prohibition of Attack Against Nuclear Installations and Facilities, signed in 1988 and in force since 1991. This was the 34th consecutive exchange of such lists. However, reports suggest that Pakistan may have failed to disclose Kirana Hills as a sensitive site under this agreement, further complicating the matter.

Fueling the controversy, India’s strikes on airbases such as Sargodha and Nur Khan—both strategically important and geographically close to nuclear infrastructure—added weight to concerns. Nur Khan Airbase, located in Rawalpindi, lies adjacent to Pakistan’s Strategic Plans Division, the nerve center of its nuclear command. Sargodha, located approximately 20 km from Kirana Hills, hosts the Mushaf Airbase, a key hub for Pakistan’s F-16 and JF-17 fleets.

Alarm bells rang louder when flight tracking platforms such as Flightradar24 reportedly detected a U.S. Beechcraft B350 Aerial Measuring System (AMS) aircraft—tail number N111SZ—operating over Pakistani airspace. This aircraft, part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s emergency radiation detection fleet, is equipped with gamma-ray sensors and real-time mapping systems. It has previously been deployed during nuclear incidents like the Fukushima disaster, raising suspicions that it was in Pakistan to assess a potential nuclear mishap.

Speculation intensified when former CIA officer and RAND analyst Derek Grossman claimed that India’s strike on Nur Khan “threatened Pakistan’s nuclear command” and possibly caused a radioactive leakage. His remarks, however, were not officially acknowledged by Washington or New Delhi.

A New York Times report quoted a former U.S. official as saying, “Pakistan’s deepest fear is of its nuclear command authority being decapitated. The missile strike on Nur Khan could have been interpreted… as a warning that India could do just that.” Meanwhile, CNN reported that U.S. Vice President JD Vance had contacted Prime Minister Narendra Modi after receiving “alarming intelligence” related to the incident.

Adding to the intrigue, observers noted the sudden appearance of an Egyptian military aircraft at Murree, reportedly landing and departing in quick succession. Though unverified, social media claims suggested the aircraft delivered emergency boron supplies to counter a potential radioactive release.

The Earthquake story

A growing concern among the public regarding radiation risks has been amplified by a series of recent earthquakes in Pakistan. On Monday, the country was struck by a 4.6-magnitude quake, following two tremors on May 10 — a 4.7-magnitude quake in the morning and a subsequent 4.0-magnitude event later that day.

Geologists and meteorological experts have attributed these seismic activities to natural tectonic movements in the geologically active Himalayan region, where such events are relatively common. However, the timing of these repeated earthquakes, coinciding with recent military developments, has sparked a wave of speculation on social media.

Unverified theories circulating online suggest that a targeted strike may have hit the entrance of a tunnel, triggering an underground blast that registered as a 4.0-magnitude earthquake. Further fueling suspicion are widely shared videos that purportedly show Pakistani authorities evacuating the affected area.

Life Expectancy of the Ceasefire

Following the Pahalgam terrorist attack, India agreed to the ceasefire, but strictly on its own terms. One of the most significant moves underscoring India’s hardened stance was the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (1960), a landmark water-sharing agreement with Pakistan. This suspension, declared immediately after the attack, remains in effect despite the truce. Indian authorities have clearly communicated that, under the current circumstances, it is neither practical nor appropriate to continue honoring the treaty. Although Pakistan has appealed to India to reconsider, New Delhi has shown no inclination to reverse its decision.

In addition, India has unequivocally stated that any future acts of terrorism emanating from Pakistani soil will be interpreted not merely as isolated incidents, but as direct acts of war. This shift in doctrinal posture signals a deeper strategic recalibration in India’s security policy toward Pakistan.

Operation Sindhoor, India’s recent military campaign, has not been officially terminated — it has merely been suspended for the time being. According to Indian officials, the operation had clear psychological, strategic, and political objectives. The government has claimed these objectives were met, particularly emphasizing that it successfully targeted terror infrastructure deep within Pakistani territory and sent a strong deterrent message.

A key factor influencing the current ceasefire appears to be the suspected nuclear leakage near Pakistan’s Kirana Hills — a consequence, it is believed, of Indian air strikes on the nearby Sargodha airbase. Notably, Pakistan had not declared this nuclear facility to India under any prior agreement or transparency mechanism. Prior to this incident, the United States had taken a relatively neutral stance. However, reports suggest that following the potential radiation threat, Washington significantly escalated diplomatic efforts to end hostilities, likely driven by concern over a broader environmental and humanitarian catastrophe.

India’s willingness to accept the ceasefire at this juncture, therefore, seems to have been motivated not only by international pressure but also by a desire to prevent nuclear fallout that could endanger not just the populations of both Punjabs — Indian and Pakistani — but the entire region.

About the authors:

• Prof. Jagmeet Bawa, Central University of Himachal Pradesh, Dharmshala (HP), India
• Mr. Jagesh Kumar, Research Scholar, Central University of Himachal Pradesh, Dharmshala (HP), India