On May 7, 2025, India’s armed forces launched Operation Sindoor, a coordinated air and ground campaign against militant infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). The strikes were explicitly described as a “preemptive and precautionary” response to a lethal terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir. In the Pahalgam attack on April 22, gunmen ambushed tourists in a meadow near the Himalayan resort town, killing 26 people (mostly Indian civilians and one Nepali). Indian officials blamed Pakistan-backed groups, and Prime Minister Narendra Modi convened an emergency security meeting. Citing credible intelligence of “further attacks… impending”, New Delhi ordered strikes on April 7–8, targeting nine identified terror camps and support facilities.
#PahalgamTerrorAttack
— ADG PI - INDIAN ARMY (@adgpi) May 6, 2025
Justice is Served.
Jai Hind! pic.twitter.com/Aruatj6OfA
Indian authorities said the strikes hit known militant camps in Pakistan and PoK. Official statements emphasized that no Pakistani military bases were struck – only alleged terror infrastructure. The Indian Ministry of Defence said Operation Sindoor was “precise, calculated and maintained a non-escalatory approach”, with the Army, Air Force and Navy hitting nine specific sites used for recruitment, training and launching attacks. For example, media reports listed camps run by Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammed, and Hizbul Mujahideen in areas such as Kotli and Muzaffarabad (PoK) as well as Bahawalpur and Muridke in Pakistan’s Punjab. The Indian Air Force conducted night raids, dropping precision-guided munitions and missiles under the cover of darkness. By dawn, officials reported that the strikes had killed at least 26 militants (including one child) and wounded dozens more. Also Read: India's Operation Sindoor: Market Stays Calm as India-Pakistan Tensions Rise
Immediately after the strikes, Pakistan erupted in crisis. Pakistani officials and media reported at least 26 fatalities on the Pakistani side – mostly civilians, including a child – and over 40 injured. Flooding the country’s news and social media, government-linked accounts made unverified claims of downing Indian jets or retaliating with missiles, but these were later debunked. In truth, Islamabad’s military confirmed firing back: Pakistan’s Air Force scrambled jets and anti-aircraft missiles. Pakistan claimed to have shot down several Indian planes (Sukhoi and MiG fighters), though it said its pilots “did not cross into Indian airspace” and all Pakistani aircraft returned safely. At the Line of Control (the de facto border in Kashmir), heavy shelling and small-arms fire broke out. Pakistani district officials reported at least six civilians killed in cross-border fire following the Indian strikes. In Indian-administered Kashmir, retaliatory firing from Pakistan caused some casualties and damage on the Indian side as well, though India reported no fatalities.
In the immediate aftermath, scenes of fear spread. Residents of Muzaffarabad (the PoK capital) described rushing to nearby hills as the city shook with blasts. In Muridke (near Lahore), survivors and rescuers combed rubble from a damaged mosque and buildings (see photo) after the strikes. An Al Jazeera report noted “at least 26 people have been killed overnight in Pakistan and 10 in Indian-administered Kashmir” during the exchanges. In India, Prime Minister Modi cut short his European trip and chaired an emergency cabinet meeting. The Indian Army took to social media with a message of resolve, tweeting simply “Justice is served. Jai Hind!”.
India’s Stated Objectives and Execution
Indian leaders framed Operation Sindoor as a focused anti-terror mission, not an act of war against Pakistan. In a press briefing with military commanders, Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said New Delhi acted after “intelligence monitoring showed that further attacks against India were impending”. The Defence Ministry emphasized it struck only “terrorist camps”, targeting recruitment and indoctrination centers or weapons depots. Official releases noted the operation was “restricted, measured, and non-escalatory, deliberately avoiding any Pakistani military bases. One statement stressed that nine locations were hit with “significant restraint” after the “brutal” Pahalgam attack, as India fulfilled its pledge to ensure accountability. Indian media later named several sites: e.g., Sarjal camp at Tehra Kalan and Syedna Bilal camp in Muzaffarabad (both PoK), and Markaz Subhan Allah* in Bahawalpur (Pakistan), among others. All were described as headquarters or hideouts of banned militant groups.
The strikes were carried out in the pre-dawn hours, with Indian jets and helicopters crossing into Pakistani-held territory. According to Indian sources, precision missiles and bombs obliterated the designated targets. New Delhi reported minimal friendly casualties or equipment losses. By mid-morning, officials announced that the operation had achieved its goals. “We only killed those who killed our people,” one senior official was quoted as saying. Immediately after the strikes, Indian forces on the Line of Control were placed on high alert, ready for any response from across the border.
The Pahalgam Attack Context
Operation Sindoor was explicitly linked to the April 22 Pahalgam massacre in Kashmir. In that attack, four gunmen emerged from a forest and opened fire on male tourists in the Baisaran meadow, killing 25 pilgrims and a local pony guide. The victims included civilians and one foreign national; such assaults on tourists have been rare in recent years. A Pakistan-linked militant shadow group, The Resistance Front (aligned with Lashkar-e-Taiba), claimed responsibility for Pahalgam, though India demanded proof of Pakistan’s involvement. India’s Home Minister Amit Shah characterized the carnage as “an act of war” by terrorists harbored on Pakistan soil, setting the stage for retaliatory action. In the weeks of tension that followed, both sides repeatedly exchanged blame. The Indian government said it had warned of possible infiltrations; opposition leaders urged vigilance but joined in calling for firm action. Congress chief Mallikarjun Kharge vowed to support *“strong steps against Pakistan, even as he criticized intelligence lapses.
Targets Hit in Pakistan and PoK
Operation Sindoor struck nine sites identified as terror infrastructure. Indian and Pakistani sources detail several key locations. According to press reports, Pakistani Punjab was hit at places like Bahawalpur (site of a Jaish-e-Mohammed training camp) and Muridke (near Lahore). In Pakistan-administered Kashmir, camps in Kotli and Muzaffarabad were bombed. Officials claimed all the targets housed militants, weapons, or training facilities; Pakistan’s government vehemently denied this, insisting that none were “militant camps” and calling India’s action a war crime. India’s Ministry of Defence made a point of noting that *“no Pakistani military facilities were hit, framing the operation as narrowly focused on terrorism.
Pakistan’s Reaction: Political and Military
Pakistan immediately condemned the strikes as an “act of war.” Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif addressed parliament, calling India’s operation “cowardly” and insisting Pakistan had no role in the Pahalgam attack. His government’s security officials issued scathing statements: the National Security Committee denounced India’s “deliberate targeting of civilians” as a heinous violation of human rights. Defence Minister Khawaja Asif vowed Pakistan “won’t take long to settle the score”. The Prime Minister’s office authorized the military to take “corresponding actions” in response.
Militarily, Pakistan’s army and air force sprang into action. They reported striking back at Indian posts and claimed to have downed several Indian jets over Azad Kashmir, killing around 10 Indian personnel. Pakistan also said Indian missiles hit civilian areas – for example, a mosque in Bahawalpur was reportedly struck, killing a child and wounding others. On the Line of Control, Pakistani troops shelled Indian villages, and Indian forces responded, resulting in at least six more deaths on the Pakistani side. In short, limited cross-border exchanges occurred on May 7–8 after Operation Sindoor, but neither side escalated into full-scale war.
Before the strikes, Pakistan had already signaled readiness to confront any Indian action. On May 3 – four days before Operation Sindoor – Pakistan test-fired its new Abdali ballistic missile (range ~450 km) in a military exercise, describing it as a readiness drill amid rising India-Pakistan tensions over Kashmir. After Sindoor, Pakistan’s missile and air defenses remained on alert. The military’s information arm (ISPR) actively combated misinformation online, debunking claims that Pakistani forces had launched major retaliatory strikes into India. By the second week of May, exchanges had returned to routine skirmishing levels.
International Reaction and Calls for Restraint
Global leaders reacted with alarm and urged calm. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres expressed deep concern over the cross-border strikes, calling for “maximum restraint” from both New Delhi and Islamabad. The UN spokesperson warned that the world “cannot afford a military confrontation” between two nuclear-armed states. Key powers quickly made statements. China’s foreign ministry said it “regrets India’s military actions” and opposed all terrorism, urging both sides to “remain calm and restrained”. Russia – an ally of both – said it was “deeply concerned” and likewise called on India and Pakistan to avoid further escalation. France publicly “understands India’s desire to protect itself” but urged both countries to protect civilians and exercise restraint.
The United Kingdom joined in, with Foreign Secretary David Lammy warning that current tensions are a “serious concern” and urging direct dialogue. The United States (with Donald Trump depicted as President in media accounts) issued carefully worded messages: Trump called the situation “a shame” and said “I hope it ends very quickly, while U.S. officials emphasized close monitoring and support for a peaceful resolution. India’s close partner Israel voiced support for India’s self-defense right; Israel’s ambassador praised India on social media, tweeting that “terrorists should know there’s no place to hide. Regional players like Iran and Qatar simply urged restraint and diplomacy. The overall tone was clear: the international community was deeply worried and pushing both countries to back down from a wider conflict.
Reaction in India
Within India, the strikes prompted an outpouring of nationalist sentiment and cautious relief. The timing over a broad Kashmir holiday period meant many civilians were directly affected by the original Pahalgam attack, so there was widespread public support for retaliatory action. On social media and in news coverage, messages of “justice” and “Jai Hind” proliferated. A LiveMint report noted that internet users “reacted strongly”, praising the armed forces. Tweets and posts celebrated the bombing of militant camps and called for full punishment of those responsible. The hashtag #OperationSindoor trended on X (Twitter) with images of blazing targets and the tricolor flag.
Political leaders across parties largely backed the operation. Prime Minister Modi remained cautious in public remarks but thanked the security forces for their swift action. Union Home Minister Amit Shah tweeted assurances that “we will not hesitate to take strong action against terrorism. In Parliament, parties expressed solidarity. Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge, while earlier critical of security lapses, publicly stated that the country “stands with the government if it takes strong steps against Pakistan”*. Local Kashmiri leaders, meanwhile, voiced mixed feelings: the Jammu & Kashmir administration hailed the strikes as justice for the attack, while some valley politicians worried about civilian safety as tensions mounted. Overall, the Indian political spectrum rallied around Modi’s handling of the crisis, even as debates over long-term strategy – security vs. diplomacy – continued.
Economic Impact and Market Response
Global markets were closely watching, but the immediate impact on India’s economy was muted. Indian stock exchanges opened lower on May 7 amid jitters, but quickly rebounded. By the end of trading, the BSE Sensex had gained about 0.2%, and the Nifty 50 rose roughly 0.24%. Analysts noted that investors remained confident in India’s economic fundamentals; a senior strategist observed that the operation was “already discounted” by the markets. High foreign portfolio inflows and strong domestic demand helped cushion any shock. The rupee also held steady against the dollar, and bond yields dipped slightly on safe-haven flows.
In stark contrast, Pakistani markets plunged. The Karachi Stock Exchange’s KSE-100 index fell over 5.5% intraday, its biggest drop in years. The Pakistani rupee weakened sharply. Commentators attributed the steep decline to Pakistan’s economic vulnerabilities: inflation, IMF obligations, and political instability made the market highly sensitive to conflict risk. One observer noted that “Karachi turned red while Mumbai stayed green” on the day of Operation Sindoor. Overall, the divergence highlighted global investors’ view of India as a stable economy and Pakistan as a risky frontier market in crisis.
Further Escalations and De-escalation Efforts
After the initial exchange of fire, neither side pursued a full-scale war, due largely to international pressure and the severe risks of nuclear escalation. India did not launch any further strikes or retaliatory raids. Pakistan’s leaders, despite fiery rhetoric, also held back major action. In the following days, global calls for de-escalation intensified. UN diplomats were briefed: India informed the United Nations Security Council of its strike, presenting it as a targeted counter-terrorism operation. The US, China, Russia, and others continued to press both capitals to open communication lines and resume diplomacy.
Meanwhile, clashes along the Line of Control remained sporadic but low-level. Both armies largely stayed in their rear positions, and a tense calm gradually settled. Humanitarian agencies reported the start of aid and relief to the affected border areas. International organizations like the UN and the Red Crescent stepped up appeals to protect civilians. By mid-May, global analysts judged the crisis to have peaked: containment seemed to be the focus rather than further strikes. Both India and Pakistan publicly agreed to avoid actions that could spiral out of control, even as each pledged to continue fighting terrorism. In the words of one US diplomat, *“the world cannot afford a military confrontation, and for the moment at least, both sides appeared to acknowledge that risk.
The days following Operation Sindoor saw a flurry of diplomacy. Backchannel talks resumed, including between intelligence and military chiefs, to clarify intentions and prevent misunderstandings. In Pakistan, protests erupted against India’s strikes, and the government maintained a hard line – even test-firing another missile on May 10 (a medium-range rocket) as a show of resolve. In India, Parliament held an all-party meeting where opposition parties pledged unity on national security, while urging the government to present evidence of Pakistani complicity.
Ultimately, Operation Sindoor marked the most serious India-Pakistan crisis in years, but it ended without the war that many feared. Both sides, weary of brinkmanship, stepped back in the week after May 7. The heightened alert along the border slowly receded, and by late May, every day military patrols had mostly returned to normal schedules. The operation’s legacy remains mixed: in India, it was widely hailed as decisive counter-terrorism, while in Pakistan, it deepened distrust of New Delhi’s intentions. Yet for now, both governments profess that they will pursue other means – security and dialogue – to deal with the threat of militancy.
Post a Comment