History does not always announce its arrival. There are moments when it turns with a silence that follows precision. Operation Sindoor has drawn to a pause with a clear announcement that it is far from closure. In the span of 72 hours, between the 7th and the 10th of May 2025, India not only responded to a brutal cycle of hostilities triggered by the Pahalgam terror attack, it may have also initiated something far more consequential; the systematic dismantling of Pakistan’s decades-old terror infrastructure. As dust settles over the International Border, and the Line of Control, it becomes evident this was not just a reaction. It was a redefinition. The end of the beginning of this particular standoff is here. And with it, perhaps, the beginning of the end of an era where the Pakistani state could strike India with impunity hiding behind the non-state actors.
For me six things stood out in Operation Sindoor as compared with the Surgical Strikes in PoK in 2016, and Operations Bandar (Airforce strikes) in Balakot in 2019.
Operation Sindoor and India’s New Information Warfare Doctrine
From evidence-seekers to strategic briefings: How the Indian government rewrote the playbook on public messaging during the India-Pakistan conflict 2025.
The first – information dissemination by the government. The briefings conducted by the able foreign secretary, Vikram Misri flanked by Col. Sofia Qureshi and Wg. Cdr. Vyomika Singh, and later by the Directors General of Military, Air and Naval Operations left no room for anyone to seek ‘evidence’. These briefings were without triumphalist theatrics. They were professional, clinical, layered, and quiet. The absence of spectacle was, in fact, the message. Turns out, when you speak softly and carry actual facts, the usual chorus of ‘Where’s the proof?’ finds itself muted.
Nine Terror Camps, Eleven Airbases, and a Message Delivered: India’s Precision Strike Doctrine Evolves
Operation Sindoor’s military scale dwarfs Surgical Strikes and Balakot redefining deterrence and exposing the vulnerabilities of Pakistan’s air force.
Second, the scope of operations was much wider in Operation Sindoor than in the Surgical Strikes and Operations Bandar. In the very first wave of retaliation against terror, India destroyed terror infrastructure in nine sites across Pakistani Punjab and PoK. This was followed Pakistani response and Indian counter strikes. The resoluteness and fierceness of the Indian response can be assessed from the fact that during May 9/10, we struck 11 airbases of Pakistan in a single operation. It is widely reported in Indian media that this strike destroyed 20 per cent of Pakistan’s air force assets. The particular strikes at Nur Khan in Chaklala (Close to GHQ Rawalpindi), Jacobabad (home to some of PAF’s most advanced equipment), and Sargodha (close to Kirana Hills) broke the back of their resolve and forced their DGMO to reach out to ours on the 10th of May seeking a ceasefire. Apparently, nothing accelerates a call for ceasefire quite like watching your airbases turn into very expensive potholes overnight.
Trump, Ceasefires, and the Optics of Mediation: The Fog of Peace After the Fire of War
How the US tried to frame a narrative of mediation in the Indo-Pak conflict after Operation Sindoor – and how India reclaimed control of its diplomatic story.
Third, it is interesting to note how Donald Trump milked this opportunity to stake his claim on the Nobel peace prize. The visit by Saudi Dy. FM Adel al-Jubeir to Delhi & Islamabad on the 8th of May showed that peace talks were in the works. However, the pounding which the Pakistanis received on the 8/9 May hitting their major radar and air defence installations (Chinese supplied mostly) encouraged them to reach out to the Americans to help sue for peace with India. Only a day before, Trump and JD Vance had ruled out any American role in this conflict. And yet, on the 10th of May Trump announced an American mediated ceasefire between India and Pakistan hours before Pakistan and India themselves announced it. The fact remains that the Americans only carried messages, there was no mediation, as the government of India clarified on multiple occasions thereafter. Clearly, I fail to see Trump’s statesmanship here. He appears more like a wedding crasher grabbing the mic to claim he fixed the marriage.
Targeting a Doctrine: Busting the Nuclear Bluff
India’s strike calculus in Operation Sindoor pierced not just Pakistani airspace but the psychological shield of nuclear deterrence that Islamabad had long weaponized.
Fourth, the targets were not just terror camps or Pakistani military assets, but a doctrine: the long-held assumption that India would calibrate response based on escalation risks. For decades, India’s response matrix to Pakistan-sponsored terror was shaped by the shadow of escalation anchored in the belief that crossing certain thresholds could invite nuclear retaliation. Operation Sindoor flipped that script.
I must make a mention of the alleged targeting of Kirana Hills, a site long associated with Pakistan’s covert nuclear development. While Islamabad has been tight-lipped about the extent of damage, or whether the site was hit at all, what matters more is strategic signalling. Under the 1988 Agreement on the Prohibition of Attack Against Nuclear Installations and Facilities, both countries exchange lists of protected nuclear assets every year on January 1st. Was Kirana Hills on Pakistan’s list in 2025? I don’t know. But if it was not, then that omission made it fair game. You can read more about the agreement here.
Tech Sovereignty on Display: Indigenous Capabilities Rise
In Operation Sindoor, India didn’t just neutralise threats; it showcased a maturing defence-tech ecosystem, where indigenous innovation met battlefield validation.
Fifth, Operation Sindoor was not just a demonstration of India’s military resolve – it was a coming-of-age moment for the nation’s indigenous defence ecosystem. In bypassing Pakistan’s Chinese-origin radar and air defence systems, India deployed a potent mix of home-grown Electronic Warfare suites, loitering munitions, and integrated command systems that underscored the credibility of the Make in India push in defence technology. Central to this success was the deployment of Akashteer, India’s cutting-edge air defence control and reporting system developed by BEL, which enabled seamless integration across radar, weapons, and communication networks. Even legacy platforms like the L70 anti-aircraft guns (originally from the 1950s) and the ZU-23-2 guns (a 1960s Soviet-era design) were retrofitted with electro-optical fire control systems and fused with AI-enabled tracking, proving how vintage hardware can be reborn through smart upgrades.
Adding a strategic layer of autonomy was the use of NavIC (Navigation with Indian Constellation), India’s indigenous satellite navigation system, which replaced dependence on GPS and GLONASS for precision targeting and coordination. Clearly, we have learned the lesson from 1999 Kargil war in which the Americans refused to lend GPS support to us. Supporting this was the Indian Integrated Air Defence System (IIAS), a multi-tiered network that allowed real-time threat tracking and decision-making across Army, Navy, and Air Force assets. In many ways, Operation Sindoor was a field test, and validation of India’s aspiration for tech sovereignty in defence. No imports. No dependencies. Just capability. And clarity.
There is growing belief that the Indian Air Force may have deployed advanced drones engineered to mimic the radar and infrared (IR) signatures of frontline fighter jets like the Rafale or Su-30MKI. These decoys, designed to appear indistinguishable from actual aircraft on enemy radar, could have baited Pakistan into prematurely activating its China-supplied HQ-9 air defence systems, which rely on active radar guidance. By doing so, Pakistan may have inadvertently exposed the positions of its critical Command & Control centres, radar installations, surface-to-air missile (SAM) batteries and other defences. Once these systems lit up and revealed themselves, they became vulnerable targets – potentially taken out by Israeli-origin Harop loitering munitions, also known as suicide drones, known for their precision strikes on radar-emitting targets. Could this electronic sleight of hand be the kind of silent war India is winning – one where cunning and capability outmatch brute force? Only time will tell, and I am not asking my air force to come clean on this. I am happy that I am safe.
The Escalation Doctrine: A New Indian Military Posture
From special forces to full-spectrum joint operations, India’s response trajectory under the Modi government signals a deliberate recalibration of deterrence.
Sixth, there have been three major incidents since the coming-to-power of the BJP government with Mr. Modi as the leader of the nation, to which India responded with precise, well-planned, and deliberate military strikes. The first being at Uri in September 2016 (19 Indian Army soldiers killed), the second at Pulwama in February 2019 (40 CRPF personnel killed), and this being the third in Pahalgam in 2025 (25 Indian and 1 Nepali tourist killed). Every time, the response moved decisively up the escalatory ladder – Special Forces across the LoC in 2016, deep-penetration airstrikes in Balakot in 2019, and now, in 2025, a tri-service operation involving coordinated strikes by the Army, Air Force, and Navy.
This progression is not accidental. It reflects a strategic doctrine in evolution – one that refuses to let precedent constrain action, and instead uses each provocation as an inflection point to redefine deterrence. By engaging across domains, land, air, and sea, India has communicated that its threshold for tolerance has narrowed, and its spectrum of response has widened. The message is clear: terror will be answered, not with rhetoric, but with resolve – and escalation will be India’s to decide, not Pakistan’s to manipulate.
When Will Pakistan Strike Again?
That is the billion-dollar question now, isn’t it? The fact is that Pakistan will strike again. We have not yet completely resolved our vulnerability against their terror attacks. We have a shield now though – not that of technology and capability alone. But that of policy, of shrinking our threshold of our patience. The government of India has made it clear to the world – terror and talks, and terror and trade, are oxymorons in our dictionary. Terror attack in India now equals war on India. Uri happened in 2016, Pulwama 3 years later in 2019, and Pahalgam 6 years later in 2025. Will the next attack come 12 years later in 2037? I pray that it comes never.
With inputs from Priyanka Sharma Kaintura.
This was first published as a two-part article in The Print on the 23rd of May 2025.