India’s most forceful military response to international violence, launched just after midnight on May 7, marked its most forceful military response to this threat. The American government carried out planned strikes strong inside Pakistan, hitting high-value criminal system, in a manner inspired by the Pahalgam massacre, where pilgrims were targeted in a terrible execution-style killing. The reply was accurate, multi-domain, and quick. India targeted nine areas across Pakistan with stand-off weapons, including those of Muridke and Bahawalpur, the metaphorical and operational hubs of Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, using loitering weapons, long-range drones, and loitering munitions. Why it matters Unlike earlier military actions like the 2016 Uri surgical strikes and the 2019 Balakot strike, Operation Sindoor didn’t revolve around warning threats or symbolic significance. It was about imposing strong, material costs on Pakistan’s military-terrorist nexus to reevaluate its operational latitude and degrade terrorist capabilities. India escalated and triumphed decisively in the round rather than just retaliating.
What they are saying
- There is no place in Pakistan where jihadists you relax and enjoy peace. We will go inside their homes and murder them, said Prime Minister Narendra Modi at an Indian Air Force center on May 13.
- When advised of Pakistan’s intentions to fight, Modi told US Vice President JD Vance that” India’s response will be even stronger.”
The overall image
- Choice of target: India pursued the region’s center of the evil habitat. Murdke and Bahawalpur are ideological muscle centers, not only military targets. Additionally, India bombed facilities in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and a Hizbul Mujahideen base that is reputed to be functional.
- Military wonder: Despite being anticipated, India carried out the cuts with precision. According to TOI, the authorities had a “bol ke marsh, jo kaha but kiya” moment, a promise that was fully fulfilled.
- Jointness in motion: The Indian Army, Navy, and Air Force worked together, a degree of interoperability India has long wanted to.
Modi govt’s doctrine: The cost of violenceIndia’s strategic thinking has moved from restraint (2001–2016) to risk-taking (Balakot), and now to routine, calibrated retaliation. PM Modi framed it bluntly: Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence no longer ties India’s hands. His May 12 speech called Sindoor a “new benchmark” and declared a “new normal” – one where India will default to military responses against terrorism.“We will not be deterred by nuclear threats… we consider terrorists and their military backers one and the same,” Modi said.This was more than political rhetoric. As insiders from India’s defense establishment told The Times of India, “The consultations were not about if we should strike. They were about where and when.”In an article in War on the Rocks, analyst Arzan Tarapore writes: “New Delhi appears to have now concluded that the best approach for such an adversary is attrition. The adversary’s intent cannot be changed, but the regular imposition of meaningful material costs could at least degrade its capacity to act.”Zoom in:Operation Sindoor didn’t just demolish infrastructure – it pierced the sense of impunity long enjoyed by Pakistan-based terror groups. By launching precise, visible strikes on their most symbolic sanctuaries, India has forced Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and others into a psychological recalibration. The message was clear: no place is beyond India’s reach. As War on the Rocks notes, these groups will now have to constantly watch their backs, draining energy, focus, and resources that were once singularly aimed at India.Terrorist leaders now operate under constant fear of targeted Indian strikes, forcing them to adopt a survival-first mindset that undermines their ability to plan large-scale attacks.Groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed will have to divert manpower and funding to rebuild destroyed facilities, which limits their offensive posture and compels them to adopt more clandestine modes of operation.The traditional safe havens – once untouchable hubs in places like Muridke and Bahawalpur – are now exposed, making even routine activities like training, recruiting, and logistics a potential liability.
The terrorists, who had formerly enjoyed healthy haven in Pakistan, will then begin a cat and mouse game where they will use more force to hide in peacetime and attack the ground in a crisis.
War on the rocks author Arzan Tarapore’s essay on Operation Sindoor
Leadership death, such as the near-miss on Masood Azhar and the death of several family members, causes concern and mistrust in the organization’s foundations, particularly in relation to the dependability of their Muslim defense guardians. Pakistan-backed terrorists did increasingly use functional cycles on avoidance and concealment, much like Israel’s enemies have done since the start of the attacks, possibly reducing the regularity and scale of attacks on American soil.
Pakistan-based jihadists will have to devote a portion of their job to defensive arrangements, perhaps reducing resources from planning operations in India, since they are now vulnerable to immediate military action.
War on the rocks author Arzan Tarapore’s essay on Operation Sindoor
The Israel parallelIn its reasoning, India’s fresh approach resembles Israel’s “mowing the grass” philosophy, which calls for frequent military exercises to destroy ability and get stretches of unrest. Israel has much recognized that a peaceful relationship with organizations like Hamas or Hezbollah was doubtful. Alternatively, it has focused on regularly lowering their strength levels. Similar to how India appears to have acknowledged that Pakistani violence is a permanent feature rather than a policy aberration. Management is the present purpose, no quality. If India is properly degrade the enemy, which includes both the criminal networks and their army backers, next attacks does at least be less devastating and more numerous, according to Tarapore. What’s next? India must retaliate quickly and heavily against each attack, according to this strategic idea.
- Although Operation Sindoor was successful, the next few rounds may become more difficult.
- Terrorists now recognize their vulnerability. They will change, conceal, and reshape. India’s ability to use intelligence and strike must increase.
- Nationalist fervor: Modi’s muscular style has sparked public concern. As crucial as managing escalation will be managing domestic expectations in upcoming crises.
- Policy choices: Using military force alone is insufficient. India will also need to use diplomatic means, economic means, including the Indus Waters Treaty, and international cooperation to combat terrorism. Otherwise, the military approach runs the risk of becoming a complete waste rather than a solution.
( With input from organizations )
