Operation Sindoor Background: Pahalgam Attack Shocks Jammu & Kashmir
The Indian Armed Forces executed Operation Sindoor, but before we dive into the details, let’s roll back a bit.
On April 22, 2025, a group of armed militants carried out a brutal attack on tourists in the Baisaran meadow near Pahalgam, a popular resort town in Indian-administered Kashmir. The assailants – later suspected to belong to The Resistance Front (TRF), a Lashkar-e-Taiba proxy – singled out non-Muslim tourists, asking men their religion before opening fire. The attackers killed 26 people within minutes, including 25 Indian tourists and one Nepali citizen. They injured dozens more, making it the deadliest terror incident in the region in recent years. Witnesses recounted that the attackers spared women but murdered the men “to send a message,” an act people now call the “Pahalgam massacre.” This mass casualty attack – the worst targeting civilians in India since the 2008 Mumbai attacks – sent shockwaves across the nation and the world.
Indian authorities were quick to label the assault an act of cross-border terrorism, pointing to Pakistan-based militant networks. An offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba initially claimed responsibility, saying they committed the massacre to retaliate against India’s policies in Kashmir, although they mysteriously retracted the claim days later. The attack immediately inflamed tensions between India and Pakistan, two nuclear-armed neighbors with a long history of conflict over Kashmir. New Delhi accused Islamabad of harboring and sponsoring the terrorists, a charge Pakistan vehemently denied. The carnage in Pahalgam left the local community traumatized – this picturesque valley, known for its peace and tourism, had never witnessed such horror in recent times. Memorials for the victims, including several newlywed couples, underscored the brutality: the attackers executed many male tourists in front of their families.
Intelligence Buildup
In the aftermath, Indian security agencies launched a massive intelligence operation to track down the perpetrators and their handlers. The Intelligence Bureau (IB), Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW), and Jammu & Kashmir Police worked in tandem, combing through communications intercepts and human intelligence. Initial findings pointed toward the TRF/Lashkar-e-Taiba network operating from Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). It became apparent that the attackers had received significant local logistical support – investigators believe up to 15 local collaborators in Kashmir helped facilitate the plot. This indicated a well-planned operation with cross-border links. Surprisingly, intelligence agencies had no prior warning of the impending attack. The failure to detect such a large militant infiltration led to urgent calls to bolster ground intel and review security lapses. Officials noted that in a union territory heavily garrisoned with security forces, militants still managed a deadly strike, calling it an “unacceptable” intelligence gap.
Hunt for Perpetrators
Over the next two weeks, agencies pieced together the trail of the militants. Investigators suggested the attackers infiltrated from across the Line of Control (LoC) and an existing insurgent network sheltered them. Electronic intercepts and drones surveilling launch pads in PoK identified several terrorist training camps and safe houses potentially connected to the Pahalgam plot. According to defense sources, pinpoint coordinates of at least nine sites linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad – the groups believed to be behind the massacre – were provided to the government. One key location on the radar was Bahawalpur in Pakistan’s Punjab province, a known stronghold of Jaish-e-Mohammad. Intelligence indicated that the Pahalgam attackers’ handlers may have ties to Jaish operatives in Bahawalpur, as well as Lashkar cells in Muzaffarabad (PoK). This intelligence buildup laid the groundwork for a calibrated response. By the end of April, the Indian security establishment had gathered enough evidence to link the Pahalgam atrocity to Pakistan-based terror infrastructure – setting the stage for a retaliatory strike.
Political Backdrop
The Pahalgam massacre created an outcry across India. There was nationwide grief and anger, with candlelight vigils for the victims and loud calls for justice. Prime Minister Narendra Modi condemned the “barbaric” attack and vowed that **“India will identify, trace and punish every terrorist and their backers… we will pursue them to the ends of the earth”. This stern warning from the Prime Minister signaled that a strong response was on the table. Within days, the Indian government began ramping up diplomatic and economic pressure on Pakistan. In an unprecedented move, New Delhi suspended the Indus Waters Treaty – a 1960 water-sharing agreement – until Pakistan “credibly and irrevocably” curbs terrorism. Indian authorities also expelled several Pakistani diplomats and virtually sealed land borders, underscoring the seriousness of the situation. The Indian government halted trade with Pakistan, which was already minimal, and barred Pakistani aircraft from Indian airspace.
Calls for Action
Islamabad, for its part, denied any involvement in the Pahalgam killings and warned India against “playing with fire.” Pakistani officials called India’s allegations baseless, even as a war of words escalated. By late April, cross-border tensions were sky-high. The fragile ceasefire along the LoC – which had largely held since a 2021 agreement – collapsed under the strain. Pakistani troops began nightly ceasefire violations with mortar and artillery fire into Indian border villages, and the Indian Army retaliated in kind. Security forces reported exchanges of fire for 12 consecutive nights across multiple sectors of the LoC, from Kupwara and Baramulla in north Kashmir to Poonch and Rajouri in Jammu region. Villagers on both sides huddled in bunkers as shells rained down, reviving memories of past border skirmishes.
Political Pressure on Modi
Amidst this backdrop, domestic pressure mounted on the Modi government to act decisively. Media outlets and opposition leaders – often critics of the ruling administration – largely united in demanding a strong punitive action against the terror groups responsible. Analysts compared it to past incidents: after militants attacked the Uri army base in 2016, India conducted cross-LoC “surgical strikes,” and after the Pulwama bombing in 2019, the Air Force struck a Jaish camp in Balakot, Pakistan. Many argued the goWith general elections on the horizon in 2026, the political stakes were high for the government to demonstrate resolve against terrorism.
In a high-level security meeting on April 29, 2025, Prime Minister Modi reportedly gave the armed forces “full operational freedom” to retaliate for Pahalgam at a time and manner of their choosing. Flanked by the National Security Advisor and the chiefs of Army, Navy and Air Force, Mr. Modi emphasized the need to deal a “crushing blow to terrorism”. This green light effectively cleared all bureaucratic hurdles for the military to proceed with a carefully planned operation. Behind closed doors, there was also intense diplomatic consultation with key allies. India quietly briefed partners like the United States, France, and Russia about the evidence linking Pakistan-based groups to the attack, seeking understanding for imminent action. By early May, the pieces were in place: intelligence pinpointed targets, the military had drawn up an attack plan, and the political leadership had authorized the strike. The stage was set for Operation Sindoor.
Launching Operation Sindoor: Retaliatory Strikes Unfold
In the pre-dawn hours of May 7, 2025, India launched “Operation Sindoor”, a coordinated counter-terror operation against multiple targets across the border. At approximately 1:44 AM IST, the Indian Armed Forces carried out precision missile strikes on nine sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir. The Indian Armed Forces focused the swift attacks on terror camps and infrastructure they identified as supporting or behind the Pahalgam attack.
Details of Strike
The strikes were unprecedented in scale. Indian defense sources confirmed that the Armed Forces hit nine separate targets virtually simultaneously across a wide geographic area. Among the locations struck were Muzaffarabad and Kotli in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, long known as hubs for Lashkar-e-Taiba militants, and Bahawalpur in Punjab province, the headquarters of Jaish-e-Mohammad. Pakistani military officials later acknowledged that the sites hit included areas around Muzaffarabad, Kotli, as well as a strike in Bahawalpur’s Ahmedpur East locality. Indian missiles also hit targets in Pakistan’s Sialkot district and Chak Amru (both near the international border), and Gulpur in PoK, according to Indian security sources. These locations indicate that the operation aimed to cripple both Lashkar and Jaish infrastructure – from training facilities to arms depots – across Pakistan’s frontier.
Operation Sindoor : A Surprise
What made Operation Sindoor stand out was its jointness and surprise. The Indian Armed Forces meticulously planned the tri-services operation, with the Army, Air Force, and Navy each playing roles.According to officials, the strikes involved a mix of weaponry: the Army and Air Force used precision-guided munitions including surface-to-surface missiles and loitering drones, while the Navy stood by to provide strategic support. The Armed Forces launched all attacks from Indian territory without allowing any aircraft to cross into Pakistan’s airspace. This tactic – likely involving stand-off weapons such as long-range cruise missiles or smart bombs – achieved strategic surprise. The Indian missiles caught Pakistan’s air defenses off guard; their radars picked up the incoming threats only after the missiles struck their targets, and Indian launch platforms (whether aircraft or ground launchers) had already returned to safe zones. Residents near the target sites reported hearing loud explosions in the early hours, and images later showed buildings reduced to rubble in some locations. A senior Indian official stated that the Armed Forces successfully engaged all designated targets with a high degree of precision.
Within hours, details of the operation began to emerge in New Delhi. At 1:44 AM, the Defence Ministry and military’s media wing tweeted the news of Operation Sindoor’s success. The Indian Army’s social media account post “Justice is Served” shortly after the Armed Forces concluded the strikes, reflecting a sense of avengement for Pahalgam. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh simply posted “Bharat Mata Ki Jai!” (“Long live Mother India”) on X (Twitter) in celebration. Prime Minister Modi was awake and personally monitoring the operation throughout the night, sources said. By dawn, military officials briefed him that all strike packages had returned safely and all missiles had hit their marks.
Military Execution and Strategy for Operation Sindoor
From a military standpoint, Operation Sindoor showcased India’s evolving strategy of pre-emptive counter-terror strikes while managing escalation. Indian military planners calibrated the choice of weapons and targets to send a strong message to terrorist groups and their sponsors without pushing Pakistan into all-out war. India has demonstrated considerable restraint in selection of targets and method of execution,” the official statement read. Indeed, by using stand-off weapons (likely including the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile and Israeli-origin Harop loitering munitions) from within Indian airspace, the Indian forces minimized risk to their personnel while achieving surprise. Lt. Gen. Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, the Pakistani Army’s spokesperson, admitted, “This cowardly attack was carried out from within India’s airspace. They never intruded into Pakistani territory.” This suggests Indian jets or launch units did not cross the border at all, denying Pakistan a chance to engage them directly.
Homework Paid Off
Each of the nine targets was carefully chosen based on months of intelligence. The inclusion of Bahawalpur – deep in Pakistani heartland – indicated that India was specifically going after Jaish-e-Mohammad’s assets (JeM’s top leadership, including Masood Azhar, are based in Bahawalpur). The strikes in Muzaffarabad and Kotli were likely aimed at Lashkar-e-Taiba launchpads and training camps that intelligence linked to the Pahalgam attackers or their recruiters. The hits on sites like Sialkot and Chak Amru (near the border) possibly targeted smaller militant safe houses or forward supply camps. By striking targets across such a broad front (from Kashmir region to Punjab), the operation ensured that multiple terror outfits felt the heat simultaneously. Defense analysts noted that this joint operation had the hallmark of surgical precision seen in previous strikes, but on a larger scale. All three services contributed: the Air Force provided airborne sensors and delivery platforms, the Army’s artillery and missile units likely fired ground-based missiles, and Naval satellite intelligence or assets may have assisted with targeting. Reports later confirmed that coordinates for the strikes were provided by Indian intelligence agencies well in advance, allowing the military to hit the exact locations of terror hubs.
Strategic Dawn
India’s decision to strike during pre-dawn hours was also strategic – minimizing collateral damage and civilian presence around the targets. Pakistani sources claimed that the strikes hit two mosques, but Indian officials countered that militants had used civilian buildings as shields, causing any such damage. The operation’s codename “Sindoor” has drawn interest; while officials have not officially explained it, some sources say they chose it to signify the red vermilion mark of resolve and to hint at the “red lines” the terrorists had crossed. Notably, the Indian Armed Forces executed Operation Sindoor about two weeks after the Pahalgam attack—a relatively swift turnaround for such a complex operation—showing that military planners had likely prepared contingency plans for striking terror camps and only needed political approval and final intelligence to activate them.
Pakistan’s Reaction and Escalation Fears
Pakistan’s response to Operation Sindoor was sharp and swift, at least in rhetoric. Within hours of the strikes, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif addressed the nation, denouncing the Indian action as a “blatant act of war” and vowing that “Pakistan has every right to give a befitting reply”. The Pakistani Foreign Ministry issued a strongly worded statement condemning what it called India’s aggression against its sovereignty. Islamabad asserted that India’s claim of targeting terrorists was a “smokescreen” and that in reality Indian missiles had hit civilian areas. Pakistani officials reported that at least eight people were killed and over 35 injured on their side as a result of the strikes, including some civilians. Among the casualties, according to local authorities, was a young child in Bahawalpur who died when a missile struck near a mosque, and two others wounded there. These figures have not been independently verified, and India has remained officially silent on any estimates of militant casualties from the operation.
Escalation of Fear In Pakistan
Almost immediately after news of the Indian strikes broke, Pakistan’s military went on high alert. Army chief General Asim Munir chaired an emergency meeting with top commanders in Rawalpindi. Pakistan’s air force jets were scrambled; “All of our air force jets are airborne,” the Pakistani Army spokesman announced on television, while stressing that Indian aircraft did not enter Pakistani airspace. Along the Line of Control, heavy shelling erupted. Both sides exchanged intense artillery and mortar fire in at least three sectors of the LoC by daybreak, according to police and witness accounts. The Pakistani military began firing artillery in areas such as Bhimber Gali in Poonch district (J&K) shortly after the strikes, violating the ceasefire yet again. The Indian Army stated it responded “appropriately in a calibrated manner” to suppress Pakistani firing. There were initial fears that Pakistan might launch cross-border raids or even air strikes in retaliation. In Islamabad, Defense Minister Khawaja Asif even claimed in an interview that Pakistan’s forces had shot down five Indian aircraft and taken some Indian soldiers prisoner during the confrontation. However, this claim was not corroborated by any evidence and was strongly doubted by analysts – especially in light of Pakistan’s admission that Indian forces never actually entered their airspace. It’s likely this was rhetoric aimed at domestic audiences to save face after the surprise Indian move.
Prospect of Future Escalation
The prospect of further escalation loomed large. Both nations’ armed forces fully mobilized and adopted defensive postures. The Indian Air Force placed forward bases on high alert and instructed air defense units along the western border to prepare for any Pakistani missile or aircraft incursions. As a precaution, Indian aviation authorities temporarily shut down several civilian airports in North India on the morning of May 7—including Srinagar, Jammu, Amritsar, Leh, and Dharamshala—disrupting some civil flights. The Indian civil aviation regulator cited “operational reasons” for the closures and lifted them later in the day once they confirmed that Pakistan was not immediately retaliating with air strikes. Nevertheless, Pakistan’s leadership asserted that the country “will respond at a time and place of its own choosing”, leaving a cloud of uncertainty. Pakistani media speculated that the military might resort to covert action via militant proxies or limited military options along less guarded stretches of the border. By the evening of May 7, sporadic exchanges of fire were continuing at the LoC, but there were no reports of a major Pakistani military operation, indicating a tenuous pause.
Civilian Impact on Both Sides
While Operation Sindoor was a military success for India, it has serious implications for civilians in the region. In Kashmir, the initial victims were innocent tourists and locals who bore the brunt of the terrorists’ bullets. The targeted killing of tourists – including honeymooning couples – instilled fear in the local population and devastated the families of the victims, who hailed from various parts of India. The J&K tourism industry, which had been seeing a revival, faced immediate fallout: bookings to Pahalgam and nearby resorts dropped sharply after the massacre as tourists canceled trips amid security concerns. The government beefed up security for the upcoming Amarnath Yatra pilgrimage, which passes through Pahalgam, to prevent any further attacks on civilians.
Operational Safeguards
Following India’s counter-strikes, civilians near the Indo-Pak border and LoC have been on edge. The residents of border villages in Jammu and Kashmir spent several nights in community bunkers due to the continuous ceasefire violations leading up to and after the operation. On May 7, as artillery thundered across the LoC, authorities evacuated many families from frontier areas like Poonch, Rajouri, and Uri to safer locations. Officials also closed schools within 5 km of the border as a precaution in these areas. Kashmiri civilians arguably face the worst situation analyst Nitasha Kaul points out, “the people in the region, the Kashmiris, are caught between the competing and rival postures of India and Pakistan.” For them, the renewed hostilities mean a return to an uncertain life where a stray shell or a sudden crackdown can upend normalcy.
Paksitani Civilians Feeling Impact
On the Pakistani side, civilians also felt the impact. In Pakistani Kashmir (PoK), residents of Muzaffarabad woke up to the sound of explosions and later, retaliatory shelling by their own army. Some families reportedly fled from border towns like Chakothi and Neelum Valley deeper into PoK for safety, fearing Indian precision strikes could recur. In mainland Pakistan, the sight of a damaged building in Bahawalpur from the Indian missile strike – with rescue teams carrying out the injured – was a sobering reminder that militancy linked to Kashmir has now brought conflict into their hinterland. Pakistan’s government claimed that India’s strikes struck near a mosque and a madrassa, causing panic among locals. Though India insists it avoided civilian areas, even the perception of being under attack has rattled ordinary Pakistanis unaccustomed to direct strikes. Air travel in the region faced brief disruptions as well; on May 7, Pakistani civil aviation authorities halted flights for a few hours in northern cities as a precaution, which stranded travelers, while India had already closed several airports.
Internationally, there are concerns about the humanitarian situation if India and Pakistan slide into a broader conflict. Both governments have been urged to ensure the safety of civilians and abide by international humanitarian law. The United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres appealed for “maximum restraint” and reminded both countries that “the world cannot afford a military confrontation between India and Pakistan”. His statement implicitly underscored the catastrophic risk to civilians of any war between the two nuclear-armed nations. For now, Operation Sindoor remains a limited strike, but its fallout on everyday lives on both sides of the border is undeniable – from trauma and displacement to an atmosphere of fear that lingers in the valleys of Kashmir and the plains of Punjab.
Strategic Implications and Comparisons
Operation Sindoor represents a significant shift in India’s counter-terror strategy and carries weighty strategic implications. In the past, Indian responses to major terror attacks were often limited or covert. For instance, after the 2016 Uri attack (19 soldiers killed), India conducted localized special forces raids across the LoC, later termed “surgical strikes”. In 2019, after the Pulwama suicide bombing (40 paramilitary police killed), the Indian Air Force struck a single Jaish-e-Mohammad camp deep in Balakot, Pakistan. Those actions were carefully calibrated: retaliatory but restrained enough to avoid full-scale war. Operation Sindoor, however, surpasses those in scope – it involved multiple simultaneous strikes across a wider geography, for the first time openly hitting targets not just in contested Kashmir but inside Pakistan’s undisputed territory (Punjab province). It signals an assertive doctrine where India is willing to broaden the theater of counter-terror ops, using advanced stand-off weapons to hit perpetrators wherever they may be, even at the risk of escalation.
A Benchmark Set
Strategically, this operation may set a new deterrence benchmark. By delivering a punishing strike two weeks after Pahalgam, India has sent a message to militant groups and their backers: that any attack on Indian civilians will be met with a forceful response, potentially even across international borders. Indian officials are touting this as a necessary evolution, given that prior smaller-scale responses (Uri 2016, Balakot 2019) did not eliminate the threat of Pakistani proxy terrorism. An op-ed in The Indian Express noted that “the kinetic response after Uri and Pulwama was perhaps not enough… The Prime Minister has threatened to raze to dust whatever is left of the havens of terrorists,” referencing Mr. Modi’s resolve to hit terror sanctuaries hard. With Sindoor, India demonstrated a willingness to do just that. Comparatively, this approach mirrors the Israeli doctrine of disproportionate retaliation to terror attacks, though India has so far been careful to frame it within counter-terrorism, not war.
The Relation Between Two Countries Takes a New Turn
However, the operation also pushes the threshold of Indo-Pak conflict into new territory. Pakistan has labeled it an act of war and might feel compelled to respond asymmetrically if not directly. The risk of miscalculation looms; even a limited Indian strike on Pakistani soil is a gambit when both sides have nuclear capabilities. International observers have drawn parallels to the 2019 Balakot episode, after which aerial dogfights ensued and a captured Indian pilot was returned days later – a close brush with wider conflict. This time, the situation could be even more volatile, given more targets were hit. “This escalation is very concerning… within India there has been domestic pressure building up for a more militarist response, given the hyper-nationalist government in power,” said Nitasha Kaul, a Kashmir expert in London. “In that sense, sadly, this was a countdown to a greater escalation, and hopefully it won’t proceed much further beyond these strikes,” she added, cautioning against a cycle of retaliation.
Sindoor Laid New Military Technological Benchmark
Operation Sindoor also underscores the role of intelligence and precision weaponry in modern conflict. By leveraging real-time intel and using weapons like loitering munitions, India minimized collateral damage while achieving objectives. This could indicate a new template for counter-terror ops, where deniability is less a concern than mission success and global messaging. Unlike the covert 2016 strikes (acknowledged by India only afterwards) or the 2019 strike (initially clouded by competing narratives on efficacy), Operation Sindoor was publicly announced by India immediately, reflecting confidence in its legitimacy and execution.
Regionally, the operation might impact the insurgency in Kashmir. It comes at a time when violence in Kashmir had actually ebbed somewhat compared to the peak of the insurgency in the 1990s and 2000s. A harsh retaliatory strike could deter some cross-border infiltration in the short term. Indian Army sources report increased interception of communications among militant groups expressing panic and attempts to relocate their camps after the strikes. Yet, history cautions that militant networks often regroup. Pakistan’s security establishment might respond by being more secretive about hosting such camps or by relying on deniable actors. Strategically, India’s bold move might also invite greater international diplomatic involvement; global powers might feel urgency to restrain both sides to avoid a spiral. The United States, for example, has been in contact with New Delhi and Islamabad urging calm – U.S. President Donald Trump (in a surprising return to the White House after 2024 elections) remarked that the clashes were “a shame” and hoped “it ends very quickly”, while likely working behind the scenes to de-escalate.
Read More Contexts :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Pahalgam_attack#:~:text=The%202025%20Pahalgam%20attack%20was,11
