Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
Simmering tensions between India and Pakistan are fueling concerns about the potential for a nuclear conflict between the two South Asian nations. Here is a look at how their militaries compare. Newsweek reached out to the India and Pakistan foreign ministries for comment via email.
Why It Matters India-Pakistan relations hit a boiling point after an April 22 attack in Pahalgam, a town in Indian-controlled Kashmir, a disputed region divided by a de facto border called the Line of Control. The countries have fought three wars over the territory. The victims were mostly Indian tourists visiting a well-known beauty spot.
India called it a "terror attack" and accused Pakistan of being involved, which it has denied. The Resistance Front—an offshoot of Pakistan's Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist organization—claimed responsibility for the attack, accusing the tourists of attempting to "settle illegally." India soldiers work a search operation in Pahalgam on April 23, 2025.
India soldiers work a search operation in Pahalgam on April 23, 2025. TAUSEEF MUSTAFA/AFP via Getty Images On Wednesday, Pakistan's Information Minister Attaullah Tarar wrote on X (formerly Twitter) that Pakistan has "credible intelligence" India will launch a military strike within the next 24 to 36 hours. What to Know The growing tensions between India and Pakistan are fueling concerns about the potential for nuclear war, as each country has nearly 200 nuclear warheads.
India has about 172, while Pakistan has roughly 170, according to data from the Arms Control Association. In 1998, India adopted a "no first use" policy for nuclear weapons, meaning it would only use them in retaliation, but has reconsidered it in recent years. Pakistan has no such policy.
A 2019 study co-authored by Rutgers University says that 100 million people could die immediately if the two countries engaged in nuclear war—and even more could die from mass starvation if the conflict were to trigger a nuclear winter. India also has an advantage in the number of active military personnel. It has 1,237,000 people serving in the army, 75,500 in the navy, 149,000 in its air force and 13,350 in its coast guard, reported Reuters.
Pakistan, meanwhile, has 560,000 in its army, 70,000 in its air force and 30,000 in its navy. India has 9,743 pieces of artillery and 3,740 battle tanks, while Pakistan has 4,619 artillery pieces and 2,537 battle tanks, Reuters reported. India has 730 aircraft and 16 submarines while Pakistan has 452 aircraft and eight submarines, according to the report.
Additionally, India has a reserve of 1,155,000 troops, while Pakistan's stands at 550,000, according to the organization Global Firepower. Manjari Chatterjee Miller, senior fellow for India, Pakistan and South Asia at the Council on Foreign Relations, told Newsweek that while India's military budget and capabilities "outstrip" Pakistan, that isn't the key issue. "The more important question is whether both countries' militaries can inflict significant damage and cause massive casualties in the event of war, and the answer to that is unequivocally yes," Miller said.
Kanishkan Sathasivam, professor of international relations at Salem State University, told Newsweek that their military strength is "not as divergent" as the imbalance regarding population and GDP, as Pakistan has ensured its capabilities would stay "at least in the same order of magnitude of India" after its defeat in the 1971 war. "Pakistan's army is about 60 percent the size of India's in terms of manpower and key equipment numbers," he said. "However, because almost all of Pakistan's army is deployed against India, whereas India's army is also deployed in the east facing China, Pakistan can actually generate matching strength versus India on their common border."
Miller said India has "little choice but to retaliate soon" amid pressure from the Indian media and public, which wants a "robust response." De-escalation is more difficult, as the flashpoint, rhetoric from leaders in both nations and the deteriorated ties between the U.S. and Pakistan, make the situation "combustible," she said. "Nuclear concerns are always legitimate when it comes to a military conflict between two nuclear-armed states," she said.
"However, some would suggest, that in the past, nuclear concerns are precisely what have held both India and Pakistan back, and forced both to engage in only limited conflict." Sathasivam said he is "very concerned" about the situation, pointing to India's "strangely belligerent posture in confronting Pakistan." "And in the context of any major war scenario between India and Pakistan, nuclear concerns are indeed legitimate," he said.
"If an Indian attack on Pakistan results in a rapid collapse of Pakistan's defensive lines, and India is able to drive deep inside Pakistani territory, the Pakistanis will be very highly incentivized to resort to tactical nukes to stop the Indian advance." What People Are Saying Tammy Bruce, a spokesperson for the State Department: "We are reaching out to both parties and telling them, of course, to not escalate the situation. We, of course, are encouraging all parties to work together for a responsible solution.
The world is watching this." Attaullah Tarar, Pakistan's broadcasting and information minister, on Wednesday: "Pakistan reiterates that any such military adventurism by India would be responded to assuredly and decisively. The international community must remain alive to the reality that the onus of escalatory spiral and its ensuing consequences shall squarely lie with India."
What Happens Next The global community has voiced concerns about escalating tensions in South Asia and has encouraged them to engage in diplomatic measures to avoid a wider conflict. But the path to de-escalation remains unclear. Update 4/30/25, 5:12 p.m.
ET: This story was updated with additional information.
