Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Anil Chauhan, addressing an event in Gorakhpur, shed light on the Indian military’s decision to deploy full-fledged air power instead of relying solely on drones or loitering munitions during Operation Sindoor.
The strikes, launched on May 7, 2025, came in response to the Pakistan-sponsored Pahalgam terror attack, which killed dozens of Indian pilgrims, all Hindus and security personnel. The operation marked one of the most decisive retaliatory actions in recent years, with Indian forces targeting camps deep inside Pakistan at Bahawalpur and Muridke, strongholds of globally designated terrorist groups.
“After the Pahalgam terror attack, we already had enhanced precision strike capabilities. But during deliberations with the political leadership, it was decided that drones and loitering munitions alone would not suffice. To achieve our political objectives and deliver a strong message, it was necessary to use air power,” the CDS said.
General Chauhan revealed that India’s political leadership gave a clear directive: destroy terrorist camps but avoid escalation unless provoked.
“The political leadership provided a clear direction with a clear message to destroy the terrorist camps, and retaliate only if we are attacked,” he said.
Unlike previous limited-response doctrines, Operation Sindoor gave the Indian armed forces full operational freedom, including the authority to plan, select, and execute targets across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK).
General Chauhan also linked Operation Sindoor to earlier operations, including the Uri surgical strikes (2016) and the Balakot airstrikes (2019) conducted after the Pulwama attack.
He pointed out that both India and Pakistan drew very different lessons from Balakot:
India’s lesson: invest in long-range precision strike weapons and improve post-strike damage assessment capabilities.
Pakistan’s lesson: focus heavily on air defence preparedness.
This divergence shaped the military strategies of both nations in subsequent years, eventually playing out during Operation Sindoor.
Operation Sindoor began with strikes on terrorist infrastructure in Bahawalpur and Muridke, two nerve centres of Pakistan-backed terror networks. Indian intelligence had confirmed the presence of active training camps and logistical bases in these locations.
As the operation unfolded, Pakistan retaliated by launching drones and missiles targeting Indian civilian and military assets in the western sector. However, the Indian armed forces swiftly escalated, striking high-value military targets inside Pakistan.
Among the targets hit were:
Rahim Yar Khan airbase in southern Punjab, a key Pakistani Air Force installation.
Nur Khan airbase in Rawalpindi, which had been used to support Pakistan’s air operations.
These precision strikes demonstrated India’s intent to neutralise both terror hubs and supporting military infrastructure, while keeping escalation under controlled parameters.
Why drones were not enough
Explaining why drones were not the primary option, General Chauhan stressed that while drones and loitering munitions are useful for tactical strikes, they cannot achieve strategic and political objectives at the national level.
“Drones are effective against specific targets, but the destruction of large terror camps and the need to send a decisive message to Pakistan required the employment of air power. The credibility of our response was as important as the physical damage caused,” he noted.
The use of air power ensured not only greater destruction of terror infrastructure but also international visibility, signalling India’s resolve against cross-border terrorism.
Despite the scale of Operation Sindoor, India’s approach reflected a calibrated strategy. While striking deep inside Pakistan, the political directive of “retaliate only if attacked” ensured that the operation did not spiral into uncontrolled conflict.
This approach reinforced India’s image as a responsible power that acts firmly against terrorism but avoids reckless escalation.
Operation Sindoor represents a significant evolution in India’s counter-terrorism doctrine, moving beyond defensive postures to assertive, high-precision strikes that combine military effectiveness with political messaging.
By choosing air power over drones, India ensured that its response to the Pahalgam attack was not just militarily successful but also strategically credible.
As General Anil Chauhan explained, the operation underlined the synergy between political direction and military execution, marking a new chapter in India’s fight against cross-border terrorism.
Comments