Thank you dear subscribers, we are overwhelmed with your response.
Your Turn is a unique section from ThePrint featuring points of view from its subscribers. If you are a subscriber, have a point of view, please send it to us. If not, do subscribe here: https://theprint.in/subscribe/
Every conflict is defined and characterised by its end state. In Op SINDOOR, for lndia it was the destruction of the Pak terror establishment, going beyond set boundaries (both literally and metaphorically). We achieved that in 30 minutes on the night of 6/7 May 2025, when we demolished nine of their terror facilities without crossing the lB or LC, through precision guided strikes. We breached the rubicon and went as deep as Bahawalpur in Pak Punjab. Mission and end state accomplished.
It was the subsequent response and belligerence of Pak that led to the three day skirmish, causing irreversible and untold damage to Pak military assets. Enough has been spoken and written about it to go into more details. Suffice it to say that Pak’s war fighting ability, particularly in the aerial domain was severely degraded. As per some reports, much of their Air Force was rendered blind, in addition to the severe punishment that their ground assets at major air bases took.
The unforeseen cease fire (though it is only a pause as per our govt) took all in India by surprise. There has been much criticism from some quarters here about the cessation of hostilities when we had the upper hand and had them running for cover, not to mention to third countries for help. Our Foreign Secretary, a dedicated and steadfast bureaucrat of impeccable credentials, has had to bear the fury of uncalled for trolling and abuse on social media, which is unfortunate.
Very briefly, l would like to posit a few factors which probably led to lndia accepting, if only temporarily, the Pak offer.
- India had achieved what it had set out for. In fact, it achieved more in retaliatory strikes than it had thought it would.
- In terms of messaging to Pak and the world, we had succeeded beyond expectation. This included a stellar demonstration of our weaponry and technological prowess in war fighting. It took many, including some sceptics at home, by surprise.
- Despite the false narrative building and propaganda by Pak, the latter had been humiliated beyond measure and it’s unholy nexus with the terrorists exposed. In fact, it came out, thanks to India’s actions, that the terrorists are really not proxies or non state actors, but very much part of the state apparatus.
- Pak, with its tattered economy and ‘beggar nation’ status had nothing to lose, whereas we, as a large, stable economy, had to assess the effects of a prolonged war on our progress, stability, economy and as an investor friendly destination. This has to be factored in.
- Further punishment to Pak, which indeed we were in a position to inflict, would have branded us as excessively belligerent and perhaps shifted the aggressor tag on to us. Restraint, after achieving what l feel was aim plus, would fortify our credentials as a responsible, mature nation which prefers peace to war.
- Further and prolonged escalation could (though the possibility is low) have drawn in other belligerents like China and Turkey (which reportedly sent an aircraft, naval vessel and allegedly, even some para military to Pak) into the conflict, which would have complicated matters.
- It could also inevitably have led to physical involvement of ground troops across the IB and LC for capture of territory, leading, subsequently to negotiations, treaties etc, which Pak in the past has had no regard for and has followed only in the breach.
- Purely from a military standpoint, it would not be unfair to infer that the swarm of almost 400 drones launched from Pak on the second night was probably to ‘probe’ India’s air defence and gauge their response. Also to locate these and assess their efficacy, so as to take suitable countermeasures. We saw through their ploy and hit their airbases hard the next day. Our air superiority prevailed and more action (with our aim having been achieved) could have proved militarily counter productive.
Apropos, our decision to accept the grovelling offer of Pak to suspend hostilities and later, in the subsequent meeting between DGMOs, lay down our terms for sticking to it, gave us not only the military, but the moral upper hand too. To wit, our PM declared that hereinafter, any act of terror on our soil will be deemed an act of war and dealt with accordingly. The icing on the cake was our bursque dismissal of the nuclear threat which Pak has brazenly employed, including this time. Our actions have been shorn of rhetoric and bluster and shown us as statesmanly and mature. In every sense of the word, there was only one victor in this battle, which, even as opinion may vary on this, fortunately did not lead to a full fledged war.
These pieces are being published as they have been received – they have not been edited/fact-checked by ThePrint.