How india ensured its success in op sindoor - the statesman

Operation Sindoor is now paused as India continues to monitor Pakistan’s actions and activities. The operation lasted four days at the end of which Pakistan, a nuclear weapons state, backed

by China, Turkey and Azerbaijan, sought termination of hostilities. This is in sharp contrast to current ongoing global conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza. India had no intention of occupying

territory. It had sought to convey the message that terrorist actions are unacceptable and will invite a backlash. The end game was determined by the political leadership; it was to convey a

stern warning in case of future terrorist strikes, while ensuring no collateral damage. The exit strategy based on a possible Pakistani reaction was evolved by the armed forces and approved

by the political authority. The modus operandi, date, timings, as also choice of weapons was left to the forces, a perfect politicomilitary coordination. The operations, once they

commenced, were closely monitored by the Cabinet Committee on Security. Unlike Pakistan, India had decided not to target civilians. Indian armed forces initially destroyed select terrorist

camps, employing a combination of ground and air launched weapons, each accurately, choosing the time when there would be minimum civilians in vicinity. Advertisement The strikes were so

accurate that neighbouring structures were undamaged. After the first strike, India left a message for Pakistan on the hot line that only terrorist camps, not military facilities, had been

destroyed. Pakistan refused to take the hint as terrorists have greater value than soldiers. The second retaliation was a display of India’s military prowess, accurately destroying airfields

and radar sites. It opened Pakistan to any future strikes as its air defence capabilities and its operational airfields were unusable. Pakistan was down on its knees. Advertisement The

impact of India’s successful military campaign added power to the government’s decision of holding the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) in abeyance. India can now negotiate from a position of

strength at a time of its choosing. Pakistan is on the backfoot despite all its threats. The Indian military successfully completed its assigned objectives. No armed force in the world

possesses needed capabilities for immediate operations. There are shortcomings, some critical. Success flows when you hide your shortcomings and exploit your strength. That is what the

Indian armed forces excelled in. Added was close coordination with multiple intelligence agencies to obtain updates on designated terrorist camps and other targets, some of which were

shifted at the last moment to avoid casualties. This was possible as the NSA, who controls them, was part of the planning process. Next was the close collaboration between the three forces.

All air defence assets of the army were placed under the air force, which employed them effectively in a coordinated manner. It brings to fore late General Bipin Rawat’s intent to create an

air defence command, which was then debunked by the air force, but proved possible in this short conflict. It can now be revived. UAVs were shared between the forces. Integration in

firepower was complete. Such synergy was never witnessed in earlier conflicts. Post Uri, there was a view that India will need to retaliate to Pakistan’s future terrorist misadventures.

Hence, capabilities began being enhanced. Post Pulwama, when Balakote was struck, India lost credibility, even internally, as it lacked visual evidence. The air force then had to launch

missiles after crossing the LoC. These lessons were imbibed, alongside those from ongoing global conflicts. After Balakote, the Indian armed forces began preparing for the next round. It was

not the question of if, but when, as Pakistan continued to support terrorism. At some stage it was bound to cross the Indian threshold of tolerance. India enhanced its ability to strike and

obtain PSDA (Post Strike Damage Assessment), while Pakistan developed air defence measures to prevent Indian aircraft from entering its air space. In the final analysis, Indian strikes were

successful, each target engaged with precision from well within Indian territory, employing different weapon systems and also assessed for PSDA, while Pakistan’s ability to damage India’s

assets failed. This was because India had prepared better and its armed forces are professional rather than being involved in governance. India had largely relied on its indigenous air

defence products, which it amalgamated with multiple equipment, including the S 400. India’s domestic defence industry shone, while those of China and Turkey, which supported Pakistan,

proved to be failures. India sent a firm message that no part of Pakistan is safe from Indian retaliation. PM Modi could lay down his new red lines only because the military gave him the

desired end state. The immediate impact was inputs of Pakistan shifting its military HQs from Rawalpindi to Islamabad, with the intent of locating it in a major city which houses embassies,

a clear sign of fear. India won global recognition as unlike other on-going conflicts, there were no civilian casualties. It was precision targeting, the likes of which has not been

witnessed in recent times. Those eliminated were either terrorists or uniformed. The fact that India achieved its aims within a short span under a nuclear threat, was indicative of its

military prowess. India’s maturity stemmed from it not contradicting Pakistan’s attempt at face-saving within its own borders. It announced that Pakistan requested for a ceasefire, but

maintained silence when it was denied by Islamabad. It neither humiliated Pakistan by unwarranted threats nor by highlighting strategic losses. India displayed strategic independence, when

it refused to accept global interjection in its intent. Rejecting President Trump’s claims of brokering talks by the PM himself in his national address was a masterstroke. It left the US red

faced while conveying that despite announcements by Pakistan, all issues between India and Pakistan will remain bilateral, overriding Islamabad’s debunking of the Shimla agreement. It

forced the US to state that it hopes India and Pak can commence dialogue. Maturity was also witnessed when no Indian politician rushed before global media projecting the Indian stand, as

compared to Pakistan, whose political leaders made buffoons of themselves when their lies were caught on global media networks. India was clear on who was behind Pahalgam and needed to

convince no one. This is the new and powerful India. It will act when it is threatened. India achieved its military aims, giving a boost to the political authority, which laid down India’s

new red lines, which will dominate Indo-Pak ties of the future. (The writer is a retired Major-General of the Indian Army.) Advertisement