The notion that Pakistan perceives India as an existential threat has been a recurring theme in U.S. intelligence assessments and public statements by American officials, reflecting the deep-seated tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. The query references a U.S. Threat Assessment Report, likely pointing to the 2025 Annual Threat Assessment by the U.S. Intelligence Community or related declassified documents. Below, I address the query by synthesizing relevant information from recent sources, including U.S. intelligence reports, historical context, and current dynamics, while critically examining the narrative and its implications.
U.S. Threat Assessment Reports on Pakistan-India Dynamics
The U.S. Intelligence Community’s 2024 Annual Threat Assessment, published on March 12, 2024, describes India-Pakistan relations as maintaining a “fragile calm” but notes ongoing tensions, particularly over the Kashmir dispute. The report highlights Pakistan’s historical support for anti-India militant groups and India’s increasing willingness under Prime Minister Narendra Modi to respond with military force to provocations. This aligns with earlier assessments, such as a 2012 statement by then-CIA Director David Petraeus, who noted that Pakistan considers India an existential threat, leading to divergent U.S.-Pakistan interests.
A 2025 report by News18 explicitly states, “‘Pakistan Regards India As An Existential Threat’: US Report,” underscoring Pakistan’s perception as a driver of its security policies. This perception stems from historical conflicts, including the 1947 partition, the Kashmir dispute, and multiple wars (1947, 1965, 1971, and 1999 Kargil War). Pakistan’s view is amplified by India’s conventional military superiority, prompting Islamabad to rely on nuclear deterrence and, allegedly, support for terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) to counter India.
Declassified U.S. intelligence from the 1980s and 1990s, published by the National Security Archive in April 2025, reveals early concerns about Pakistan’s nuclear program as a response to India’s 1974 nuclear test. A 1981 Special National Intelligence Estimate (SNIE 31/31-81), “India’s Reaction to Nuclear Developments in Pakistan,” assessed the risk of India launching preventive strikes on Pakistan’s nuclear facilities, driven by fears of a nuclear-armed Pakistan. The SNIE noted India’s “wait and see” approach, contingent on whether Pakistan produced or stockpiled nuclear weapons, which could trigger either a nuclear arms race or preemptive action.
Why Pakistan Sees India as an Existential Threat
Pakistan’s perception of India as an existential threat is rooted in several factors:
- Historical Rivalry: The 1947 partition created enduring hostility, with Kashmir as a flashpoint. Pakistan’s loss in the 1971 war, leading to Bangladesh’s creation, deepened fears of Indian dominance.
- Military Disparity: India’s larger population, economy, and military (with a defense budget of $81 billion in 2024 compared to Pakistan’s $7 billion) fuel Pakistan’s insecurity. India’s “Cold Start” doctrine, enabling rapid conventional strikes, heightens fears of a swift defeat, pushing Pakistan to rely on nuclear weapons.
- Nuclear Competition: India’s 1974 nuclear test spurred Pakistan’s program, achieving nuclear capability by 1998. Both nations now possess around 170 nuclear warheads each, with Pakistan’s doctrine emphasizing first use to deter India’s conventional advantage.
- Kashmir and Terrorism: Pakistan’s alleged support for groups like LeT and JeM, blamed for attacks like the 2008 Mumbai siege and 2019 Pulwama bombing, is seen as a strategy to destabilize India. U.S. reports, including a 2020 State Department assessment, note Pakistan’s role as a safe haven for such groups.
- Domestic Politics: Pakistan’s military wields significant power, justified by the Indian threat, often sidelining civilian governance. Former CIA Acting Director Michael Morell argued in 2019 that this obsession leads Pakistan to prioritize nuclear weapons over education, exacerbating internal instability.
Recent Developments and U.S. Perspective
In 2025, tensions escalated after a April 22, 2025, terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, killing 26 tourists, blamed on Pakistan-based groups. India’s Operation Sindoor, involving airstrikes on Pakistani airbases, and Pakistan’s Operation Bunyan Marsoos in retaliation marked the most severe clash since 1971. A U.S.-mediated ceasefire on May 10, 2025, paused the conflict, but violations and nationalist rhetoric suggest fragility. Satellite imagery showed limited damage despite claims of widespread strikes, indicating both sides exaggerated their military impact.
The U.S. has shifted its South Asia policy, increasingly aligning with India while maintaining Pakistan as a Major Non-NATO Ally (MNNA). The Atlantic Council suggests making Pakistan’s MNNA status conditional on counterterrorism and economic reforms, reflecting frustration with Islamabad’s support for militant groups. Trump’s administration has endorsed India’s counterterrorism operations, such as after the 2019 Pulwama attack, while pressuring Pakistan on terror financing via the Financial Action Task Force grey list. However, limited U.S. leverage over Pakistan, coupled with China’s growing support for Islamabad, complicates diplomacy.
Critical Examination: The “Existential Threat” Narrative
While U.S. reports consistently frame Pakistan’s view of India as an existential threat, this narrative warrants scrutiny:
- Pakistan’s Perspective: Pakistan’s fears are not baseless. India’s military superiority, its revocation of Jammu and Kashmir’s special status in 2019, and statements like External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar’s claim to “reclaim” Pakistani-administered Kashmir fuel Islamabad’s insecurity.
- India’s Focus: Former CIA official Michael Morell noted in 2019 that India has largely shifted focus to its economic rise, not Pakistan, suggesting the threat perception may be overstated in Islamabad. Yet, India’s aggressive posturing, like Operation Sindoor, reinforces Pakistan’s narrative.
- U.S. Bias: The U.S. framing often emphasizes Pakistan’s role in terrorism while downplaying India’s actions, such as its Kashmir crackdowns (e.g., arresting 1,500 Kashmiris in 2025). This aligns with U.S.-India strategic cooperation but risks oversimplifying a complex rivalry.
- Global Risks: A 2019 study and 2025 Scientific American article warn that even a limited India-Pakistan nuclear war could release smoke into the stratosphere, causing global famine by disrupting agriculture for years, potentially killing 1-2 billion people. This underscores the stakes of U.S. diplomacy failing to address the root causes of the conflict.
Potential Boomerang Effect
The query’s mention of a “boomerang effect” (from the previous context) could apply here. U.S. policies supporting India’s autonomy while pressuring Pakistan may backfire by:
- Strengthening Pakistan-China Ties: Pakistan’s reliance on China, evident in satellite support and economic aid, grows as U.S. leverage wanes.
- Unifying Pakistan Domestically: India’s 2025 strikes rallied Pakistani public support for the military, bolstering its grip on power despite prior domestic unrest.
- Escalating Nuclear Risks: Pushing Pakistan into a corner could heighten its reliance on nuclear deterrence, increasing the risk of miscalculation.
- Undermining U.S. Credibility: Equating India and Pakistan in ceasefire talks, as criticized by New Delhi, may alienate India, a key U.S. partner, while failing to curb Pakistan’s actions.
Conclusion
U.S. intelligence, including the 2024 Threat Assessment and 2025 reports, confirms Pakistan’s view of India as an existential threat, driven by historical conflicts, military disparities, and the Kashmir dispute. Pakistan’s nuclear doctrine and alleged support for terrorism stem from this perception, while India’s assertive responses, like 2025 airstrikes, perpetuate the cycle. The U.S. faces a delicate balancing act, with its pro-India tilt risking a boomerang effect by strengthening Pakistan’s resolve, deepening its China alliance, and raising global nuclear risks. Diplomacy, such as updating the Indus Basin Water Treaty, could address underlying issues like resource disputes, but requires more consistent U.S. engagement.
If you’d like a chart visualizing India-Pakistan military budgets, nuclear warhead estimates, or conflict incidents since 1947, let me know! For further reading, see the National Security Archive (https://nsarchive.gwu.edu) or Council on Foreign Relations (https://www.cfr.org).