Operation Sindoor: A Few Preliminary Context

On May 7, 2025, India launched Operation Sindoor, a coordinated series of precision airstrikes targeting nine sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). The operation was a direct response to the April 22 terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, where 26 people—mostly Hindu pilgrims—were killed. Conducted by the Indian Air Force, the strikes involved Rafale fighter jets armed with AASM Hammer bombs and SCALP missiles. The 23-minute operation targeted infrastructure linked to extremist groups including Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and Hizbul Mujahideen.

The nine targeted sites were chosen depending on actionable information connecting them to infrastructure and terrorism activity.

Bahawalpur: Known as the headquarters of Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), this location has been a focal point for planning and executing attacks against India.

Muridke: Considered the base of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), responsible for multiple high-profile attacks, including the 2008 Mumbai attacks.

Muzaffarabad: Capital of PoK and a strategic hub for various militant groups.

Kotli: A significant training centre for militants operating in the region.

Gulpur: Identified as a logistical node facilitating the movement of militants across the Line of Control (LoC).

Bhimber: Another critical point for infiltration and training activities.

Bagh: Known for housing facilities linked to militant operations.

Chak Amru: Serves as a transit point for militants and arms.

Sialkot: A strategic location near the border, facilitating cross-border militant activities.

These sites were selected to prevent further assaults and disturb the operating capacity of terrorist groups.

Following Operation Sindoor, India launched a major diplomatic campaign to justify its actions and prevent further escalation. Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri briefed counterparts from key nations, including members of the UN Security Council and strategic partners in the Gulf region such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, emphasizing that the strikes were targeted, calibrated, and non-escalatory.

During a press briefing, Indian officials presented visual and documented evidence of the strikes on terrorist camps, reiterating that the operation was a measured act of self-defense, not a provocation. However, the situation remains fluid. Reports indicate that Pakistan’s military has been authorized to respond, raising concerns about potential escalation. A critical question now is how much international support Pakistan can rally if it proceeds with retaliatory strikes.

Adding to regional anxieties is an unconfirmed document circulating online, suggesting that Pakistan’s Heavy Industries Taxila requested key military equipment from NORINCO, a Chinese state-owned defense manufacturer, in late April. Whether China has responded to this request remains unclear.

As in any conflict, truth is often the first casualty. Independent analysts are actively working to debunk a wave of disinformation surrounding the strikes. India has remained steadfast in its narrative, asserting that the strikes were not acts of aggression but a demonstration of its right to self-defense and a credible deterrent against cross-border terrorism. Pakistan, meanwhile, has vowed to retaliate—a move India has warned would be viewed as escalatory, promising a firm and proportionate military response if provoked.

The critical question now is how far Pakistan is willing—or able—to escalate. As a garrison state increasingly influenced by hardline military-religious leadership, particularly following inflammatory remarks from its top generals regarding Kashmir’s status and the recent Pahalgam massacre, the threat of escalation cannot be dismissed. However, Pakistan faces internal constraints: rising unrest in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan, along with a crippling economic crisis, may limit its ability to sustain a prolonged confrontation. The government must now weigh the costs of stoking nationalist fervor against India against the urgent need to address its own domestic instability.

Harsh Pandey is a PhD Candidate at the School of International Studies, JNU, New Delhi.