In the wake of Operation Sindoor – launched by India in response to a deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam – Pakistan has disseminated narratives of strategic triumph, portraying India’s calculated and limited response as indicative of strategic weakness.
Such a characterization, however, fundamentally disregards the measured and deliberate nature of India’s operation, which was grounded in a doctrine of proportional response and strategic restraint.
It further overlooks India’s overwhelming military superiority and the structural vulnerabilities endemic to Pakistan’s internal political, economic, and military architecture – factors that severely constrain Islamabad’s capacity to wage and sustain a full-scale conflict.
The deliberate mischaracterization of India’s restraint as impotence serves neither the people of Pakistan nor its military establishment and economy in the long run.
Operation Sindoor: a limited, calibrated deterrence
On April 22, 2025, India experienced a devastating terrorist attack in Baisaran Valley near Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, in which 26 civilians, including foreign tourists, were killed. In response, India initiated Operation Sindoor on May 7, 2025 – a precision military campaign directed at terrorist infrastructure and associated assets located in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
Despite the operational efficacy of India’s response, Pakistan swiftly declared a strategic victory, citing minimal damage and retaliatory actions allegedly taken against Indian Air Force assets. Such proclamations, however, fail to account for the conscious and strategic restraint exercised by India.
Operation Sindoor was not conceived of as a full-spectrum military engagement but rather as a tactical operation intended to deliver a targeted and unequivocal message. Utilizing advanced airpower and missile technologies, Indian forces executed precision strikes targeting terrorist launchpads and logistical nodes. Verified open-source intelligence and satellite reconnaissance corroborate the neutralization of critical terrorist support infrastructure.
According to media reports, among the key achievements of the operation was the confirmed elimination of Abdul Rauf Azhar, the mastermind behind the abduction and beheading of Wall Street Journal correspondent Daniel Pearl in 2002 along with scores of other terrorists.
Abdul Rauf Azhar was reportedly operating from a fortified location within Pakistan-administered territory and had reestablished active links with multiple transnational extremist networks. His death, alongside the neutralization of scores of other high-value terrorist operatives, underscores the depth of India’s intelligence penetration and its ability to deliver justice across borders.
This strike was not merely symbolic; it represented India’s unwavering resolve to dismantle the ecosystem of impunity that has allowed transnational terrorism to thrive.
The operation fits squarely within India’s long-standing doctrine of “active but restrained” military engagement – an approach that seeks to diminish non-state militant capacities without destabilizing the broader regional order. This strategic calculus reflects not only India’s military capabilities but also its broader commitment to responsible international behavior.
India’s overwhelming military capabilities
India’s restrained approach in Operation Sindoor should not be misinterpreted as an indicator of strategic limitation or military deficiency. Rather, it is a reflection of deliberate doctrinal planning and mature strategic thought. India possesses one of the most powerful military establishments globally, equipped to address a wide spectrum of conventional and unconventional threats.
As of 2025, India’s armed forces comprise over 1.45 million active personnel, ranking it second globally in terms of troop strength. The country’s defense budget for fiscal year 2024–25 stood at approximately US$81 billion – eight times larger than Pakistan’s allocation of around $10 billion. This financial advantage has enabled India to undertake significant modernization initiatives, investing in technological innovation, force restructuring, and multi-domain capabilities.
The Indian Air Force (IAF) operates a fleet exceeding 2,200 combat and support aircraft, including advanced platforms such as the Su-30MKI, Rafale, and Tejas.
During Operation Sindoor, the IAF’s effectiveness was further underscored by its use of loitering munitions and long-range drones that executed precise strikes on key Pakistani targets – including airbases at Noor Khan and Rahimyar Khan – while evading and jamming Chinese-supplied air defense systems. The mission was completed in just 23 minutes, demonstrating India’s operational and technological superiority.
India’s air defense capabilities also include a mix of legacy and modern indigenous systems, such as the Pechora, OSA-AK, LLAD guns and the Akash short-range surface-to-air missile system. Integrated with the Indian Air Force’s IACCS (Integrated Air Command and Control System), these platforms formed a multi-tiered shield that effectively neutralized multiple retaliatory attempts by Pakistan on military installations across northern and western India.
India’s ability to detect and eliminate advanced foreign-supplied threats – including PL-15 missiles and Turkish-origin UAVs – highlighted the strength of its indigenously developed electronic warfare and counter-UAS systems.
On land, the Indian Army commands over 4,200 main battle tanks and a formidable complement of mechanized infantry and artillery units. The use of advanced systems –such as the ATAGS (Advanced Towed Artillery Gun System), the Dhanush artillery platform, and the indigenously built Arjun MBT – exemplifies the modernization drive under the “Make in India” initiative. These technologies played a critical role in layered ground-based air defense and strategic deterrence throughout Operation Sindoor.
The Indian Navy, for its part, has made considerable strides in becoming a blue-water force, with 12 destroyers, 17 frigates, and two fully operational aircraft carriers – the INS Vikramaditya and the domestically constructed INS Vikrant – providing credible maritime dominance in the Indian Ocean Region. Complementing these assets are indigenous naval platforms including frigates, corvettes, and submarines, which contribute to a robust maritime security posture.
India’s strategic deterrence is further bolstered by its nuclear triad, composed of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and air-delivered nuclear weapons. With the development of MIRV-capable systems such as Agni-V, India has firmly established itself among the world’s elite nuclear-capable states. These capabilities afford New Delhi significant deterrent power and strategic flexibility.
Moreover, India’s strategic posture has evolved to encompass new domains of conflict, including space and cyber operations. The creation of the Defense Space Agency and the Defense Cyber Agency marks a proactive shift in Indian military doctrine, ensuring preparedness across emerging and hybrid warfare theatres.
India’s space-based capabilities, particularly through ISRO, were evident in Operation Sindoor, where at least ten satellites continuously monitored India’s 7,000 km coastline and northern borders, providing critical situational awareness and command synchronization.
The drone warfare domain has also witnessed a transformative evolution. India’s drone industry, supported by the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme and a ban on imported drones, has matured rapidly. Entities like the Drone Federation of India now represent over 550 companies and 5,500 pilots.
Indigenous UAVs and suicide drones, such as those developed by Alpha Design Technologies, Tata Advanced Systems, and IG Drones, were central to the success of Operation Sindoor, making India’s UAV capabilities both strategic and scalable.
Viewed through this lens, Operation Sindoor must be interpreted not as a manifestation of weakness but as an intentional display of disciplined power projection. The limited nature of the operation was designed to assert deterrence, reestablish red lines, and prevent destabilization in an already volatile region. The doctrine of strategic restraint pursued by India in this instance is an articulation of state responsibility – not a failure of will.
Despite possessing unmatched coercive capabilities, India remains steadfast in its commitment to non-violence and peaceful coexistence, in line with the Gandhian ideals that underpin its national identity. The use of force, for India, remains a last resort – invoked only when national security and civilian safety are gravely threatened.
India’s historical responses to terrorism further support this pattern of calibrated and judicious conduct. From the 1993 Mumbai bombings and the 2001 Parliament attack to the 2008 Mumbai siege and the 2019 Pulwama incident, India has consistently chosen precision over escalation, and legality over unilateralism. In every instance, it has pursued a path that balances deterrence with diplomacy.
Pakistan’s structural and strategic vulnerabilities
Pakistan’s strategic posture, in contrast, is deeply undermined by its persistent internal vulnerabilities – ranging from economic fragility and political instability to deteriorating domestic security conditions. Despite its public declarations of preparedness, Pakistan lacks the institutional, fiscal, and social resilience to sustain a protracted conventional war with India.
According to projections by the International Monetary Fund, Pakistan’s GDP growth in 2025 is expected to remain subdued at approximately 2.6%, with inflation averaging 6.0%. Public debt has surpassed 73% of GDP, and the country’s external debt obligations now exceed USD 130 billion – indicating a severe limitation on Islamabad’s fiscal capacity to finance large-scale military operations.
Politically, Pakistan remains in turmoil. The 2024 general elections were fraught with allegations of rigging, authoritarianism, and interference by the military establishment – undermining democratic legitimacy and fragmenting national consensus. The civilian leadership remains in conflict with the military, further eroding institutional cohesion at a time when unity is critical for national defense.
Domestically, Pakistan faces intensifying threats from various insurgent and extremist groups. The resurgence of the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), along with escalating sectarian violence and an active Baloch separatist insurgency, has claimed over 300 lives among security personnel in the past year alone. These internal security challenges place enormous strain on Pakistan’s military and intelligence apparatus, reducing its operational bandwidth to respond to external threats effectively.
Beyond domestic turmoil, Pakistan’s military readiness for sustained conflict is deeply questionable. While it fields a sizable military force, independent assessments have raised concerns about munitions shortages, maintenance issues, and outdated command structures. Reports suggest that Pakistan lacks the capacity to engage in prolonged high-intensity warfare without external assistance – a fact that further highlights the asymmetry in military preparedness between the two nations.
Furthermore, political dysfunction impedes effective strategic planning. The absence of a unified political vision and frequent civil-military friction prevent the formation of coherent long-term defense strategies. In this context, Pakistan’s capacity to respond meaningfully to a calibrated Indian military campaign remains severely constrained.
Strategic overdependence on China: a double-edged sword
Pakistan’s growing strategic alignment with China, particularly in the context of the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), has introduced additional complexities. While CPEC promises investment worth over USD 62 billion, it has also generated concerns over debt dependence, sovereignty dilution, and localized resistance, particularly in Balochistan.
Military cooperation with China, including joint exercises and arms transfers, has increased Islamabad’s tactical capabilities. However, this dependency comes at the cost of strategic autonomy. The deepening asymmetry in the Sino-Pak relationship risks transforming Pakistan into a subordinate geopolitical appendage of Beijing, vulnerable to political coercion and economic exploitation.
Domestic unrest over Chinese-funded infrastructure projects, especially among marginalized ethnic groups, reflects broader societal unease with this strategic entanglement. These dynamics raise serious questions about the long-term viability of Pakistan’s current external alignments and their implications for national sovereignty.
Reassessing claims of Pakistan victory
The temporary cessation of hostilities after Operation Sindoor should not be mistaken as a concession by India. Rather, it was a conditional and humanitarian decision. Indian officials made it unequivocally clear that the continuation of peace is contingent upon the cessation of cross-border terrorism. India retains both the legal justification and operational readiness to resume hostilities should Pakistan fail to comply.
Claims of intercepting certain Indian missiles or downing a few aircraft – largely unsubstantiated when assessed against satellite imagery and independent verification – hold little significance in the broader strategic calculus. In strategic terms, victory is not determined by a handful of tactical successes but by the capacity to shape outcomes, sustain escalation dominance and reinforce deterrence.
Operation Sindoor accomplished its core objectives: delivering a clear message, degrading militant capabilities and reaffirming India’s regional primacy without triggering widespread destabilization.
India’s conduct during and after the operation reflects a profound maturity of strategic thinking. It embodies a responsible power’s refusal to be baited into uncontrolled conflict while defending its citizens and sovereignty with resolve and precision.
In contrast, Pakistan must undertake an urgent recalibration of its national priorities. It has to abandon adventurist policies, address its internal fragmentation and pursue meaningful reforms to ensure both domestic economic and political stability and regional peace.
The future of South Asia’s strategic stability will depend not on bellicose rhetoric, but on rational policy, mutual respect, and an unwavering commitment to coexistence. India has demonstrated its commitment. The onus now lies with Pakistan to reciprocate with equal seriousness and responsibility.
