
On Operation Sindoor, a case of oppositioniitis
Nirupama Rao, whom I have held in regard for several decades, is seriously wrong on a couple of scores about why Pakistan succeeded in taking control of the narrative during Operation Sindoor. However, she does make some good points in her piece. It needs to be stated, with requisite — and imperative — eclaircissement, that, in its hallmark style, our neighbour was offering absurd falsehoods as fact; and that the better part of the world, predictably, was lapping it up.
Rao unfairly accuses the Indian media of 'hypernationalism' and levels a gamut of other allegations against it, while, in reality, large swathes of both print and broadcast media did a sterling job covering India's Operation Sindoor. Terms such as hypernationalism are deeply offensive, and it is intellectually lazy to simply throw them at the Indian media — and that is now a go-to strategy for a certain enclave — as they end up being patently uncharitable.
Rao is now saying that the Indian government 'must' develop a real-time crisis communication mechanism with strategic partners. That is what I have been requesting of our diplomatic corps for 30 years. Rao might easily have tackled the odious disinformation campaign against India when she was Foreign Secretary, between 2009 and 2011; or, if she had considered a weekly briefing of the hostile American press at her office, when she was India's Ambassador to the US between 2011 and 2013. Rao's suggestions come a few decades too late.
Pakistan said it won the 1971 war when, in reality, it had capitulated to India and General A A K Niazi handed over 93,000 prisoners of war to General Jagjit Singh Aurora. Ditto with Operation Sindoor. This is Pakistan's 'perennial volte face narrative', in which it commits — tragically — the most lethal error of all: That of consistently fooling itself. Polonius's advice would fall flat on a country that lacks a self, and whose raison d'être for 77 years has been obsessing with and perpetrating terrorist attacks on India. It is not quite enough that India gave Pakistan to Pakistan — that is, a million square kilometres of its own precious territory — but an edacious Pakistan wants more.
Kashmir has been an integral part of India for millenia: Think of Anandavardhana (820-890 AD), Bhallata (who wrote during the reign of King Shankaravarman in 883-902 AD), Kshemendra, Abhinavagupta, Utpaladeva and the glorious Kashmir Shaivism — India does not need to prove that Kashmir belongs to it.
J&K Chief Minister Omar Abdullah's word on the Indus Waters Treaty is the final word: 'We have always believed that the Indus Waters Treaty has been the most unfair document to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.'
Sitting onstage at prominent conferences with serial — and truculent — maligners of India, and, thereby, lending them credibility, is not what we expect of former diplomats of distinction. Why destroy India, our treasured homeland, on foreign shores or at home?
The best media briefings during Operation Sindoor were provided by India's armed forces, whose strategic knowledge, confidence, command, and extraordinary capability reduced nine of the enemy's terror bases to smithereens in 20 minutes. Eleven of Pakistan's air bases were also damaged, in short order. No volume of praise for India's armed forces is hyperbole. India is not in need of cute filler words used
as pilasters to try and shore up perfunctory arguments.
The resounding and almost aesthetic Indian victory — owing to its finesse, brevity, and perfection — of Operation Sindoor robs the West of its inordinately long exercise of hegemony. What is lost is 'the ideological rationale for reducing and reconstituting the (Indian) as someone to be ruled and managed'. That is the inconvenient truth. You might recall Immanuel Kant labelling Indians — and others — as being incapable of 'moral maturity'.
Operation Sindoor was a retaliatory act in response to Pakistan's cold-blooded and well-planned terrorist invasion of Pahalgam, which led to the massacre of 26 civilians. What was India supposed to do? Sit back and munch on nuts and sip Cinzano? Our neighbour has launched dozens of terrorist attacks on India, in which over 20,000 innocent civilians have been killed (a figure cited last Friday by Ambassador Parvathaneni Harish at the UN) and many more wounded. It helps to remember that India has about 200 million Muslims.
Rao says that India also failed in what she calls the 'financial domain.' Rao's official tenure in Washington, DC should have alerted her to the fact that the Americans simply don't listen to anyone once they have made up their minds.
I remember Senator Edward Kennedy — with admiration and gratitude — because he repeatedly accused Pakistan of genocide on the floor of the US Senate in 1971. He blamed the Nixon administration for the unfolding horror show: 'Nothing is more clear, or easily documented, than the systematic campaign of terror — and its genocidal consequences — launched by the Pakistan army on the night of March 25 (1971).'
Kennedy said that it was the Bengali Hindus who were being meticulously targeted, 'systematically slaughtered, and, in some places, painted with yellow patches marked 'H'.' Comparing one of the greatest humanitarian tragedies to the Holocaust, Kennedy said: 'America's heavy support of Islamabad is nothing short of complicity in the human and political tragedy of East Bengal.'
Then-Secretary of State Antony Blinken enriched Pakistan on 28 September 2022 with a staggering $450 million sustenance package for its F-16 fleet, right in the middle of 'dialogue' with India. How did Blinken justify this? Pakistan needed that package to 'fight' ISIS and al-Qaeda. That is ominously similar to the IMF dispatching $1 billion to Pakistan right after its heinous terrorist attack in Pahalgam. Never mind, then, that the butcher and the surgeon are the same entity.
President Donald Trump now repeatedly takes credit for having negotiated a 'ceasefire' between India and Pakistan, which India has refuted. More irksome is the constant equation of India to Pakistan: Bogus equivalences are vexatious. The much-maligned Prime Minister Narendra Modi has ascertained that India is no longer a blank slate on which anyone can scribble, and India is not indigent. Ultimately, it is India the Trump administration will be forced to turn to, to keep its arch-enemy, China, in check in the South China Sea.
Language comes to you as naturally as your breath; thus, notes of artifice generate unbearable dissonance (ativa dussaham). Russia unfailingly gets its messages across to the world. As John Mearsheimer recently said: 'The Russians are unequivocal on what has to be done to satisfy their demands.' India needs to get there too, without tarrying.
I am delighted that India has dispatched the peerless, eloquent, and intellectually rigorous Shashi Tharoor, Member of Parliament, to the US and a few other countries, to brief leaders on the incessant and barbaric terrorist attacks Pakistan launches on India. India needs to be left alone — a 5,000-year-old civilisation is finally reclaiming itself. Its economy has grown to now make it the fourth largest in the world; flagitious cross-border terrorism impedes the pace of its economic growth.
If there is a toss-up between winning a narrative war and the actual war — and not a 'moral' war, as Rao mentions — it is obviously the greater victory to win the real war, instead of a psyop narrative battle, based on decades of insane concoction and terrorism.
Many of us are chagrined to witness distinguished former members of India's diplomatic corps, and the bureaucracy, reposting material from 'X' by 'columnists' whose language blazes forth malapropisms, and who make a living out of India-bashing, and faux victimhood.
Opposition for the sake of opposition is juvenile: That's Oppositioniitis. When that emanates from India's former top-line government officials, it inflicts a deep and irreversible gash on the country. That feels like stabbing one of your parents — the attendant sense of betrayal is excruciatingly powerful.
(The writer was appointed distinguished fellow at Carnegie Mellon University in 1990. She is also a global adviser on public policy, communications, and international relations, and an award-winning Odissi and Bharatanatyam artiste and choreographer. Views are personal)

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


News18
21 minutes ago
- News18
Operation Sindoor Proves Dharmic Wars Can Be Fought Even In Our Times
Last Updated: India, through Operation Sindoor, has taught the world how to conduct a 'limited military operation' without unjustifiable collateral casualties and extended warfare It is anybody's guess why Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) Gen Anil Chauhan chose an overseas venue, Singapore, and two foreign journalists/news agencies, Reuters and Bloomberg, to reiterate his earlier acknowledgement of possible losses of air assets in Operation Sindoor. Of course, he had said almost as much at Savitribai Phule University in Pune earlier. Yet, the question remains why the CDS, or a political administrator, say, Prime Minister Narendra Modi or Defence Minister Rajnath Singh could not have said the same things, that too at a news conference in the national capital. After all, these preferred foreign news sources would have been represented by their Delhi-based correspondents, and others, mainly our own journalists, too would have benefited from an open interaction of the kind. The question however is where from here, how and for what. Yes, India set a kind of precedent on neutralising an adversary militarily without having to violate international borders directly. We also did it within a matter of days, which is not the case even with Israel's bombing out of a small parcel of land in Gaza, continually for months and months now. India showed to the world how to fight a modern war and win. During the Bangladesh War, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi gave Army chief Gen Sam Manekshaw three weeks to conclude the mission before international pressure caused a ceasefire. This time, too, the political leadership seemed to have taken into account the time-lines before a ceasefire became unavoidable. It's thus not about whether US President Donald Trump caused the ceasefire, as he only claimed. Instead, it is as much about the clear-cut political instructions that seem to have gone down the line, on the modalities and methodologies of warfare as it was about how and how fast our armed forces achieved the set goals and objectives. This aspect of Operation Sindoor has not been adequately acknowledged. What more, it is becoming increasingly clear that the operation would not have crossed into the second day after the Indian forces had neutralised terror sites in Pakistan and PoK. It is not unlikely that after the previous Surgical Strikes, a one-dayer of the kind would not have been appreciated as much by the public in this country as they did after the four-day military engagement. What has stood out since is that Operation Sindoor was as much a surgical strike as the previous ones. Only selected targets were bombed. Even Pakistan has not claimed collateral damage, especially in the form of loss of human lives from around the targeted sites. To that extent, too, India has proved that we were waging a 'dharmic war' with minimum war and maximum loss to the adversary's military capabilities—and nothing else. Compare it to the US war on Afghanistan and Iraq, the Ukraine War and Israel's Gaza strikes, and the picture will be complete. All these wars are in the post-Cold War. In the pre-Cold War period, you had the Vietnam War, which was a standing proof of how wars should not be fought—but ended up being fought, when Big Powers engaged in muscle-flexing at the expense of their poor cousins, far away from their borders. In a way, Operation Sindoor might have ended on day one had Pakistan not escalated the military engagement, to target Indian military targets and civilian settlements, too. It was unwanted and unwarranted, if and only if their command and political leadership had assessed the damage and accepted that the Indian shelling had stopped with terror targets. Suffice to point out that to this day, Islamabad or Rawalpindi, respectively the seat of political and military power, has not claimed that any or all of the day one targets of Operation Sindoor were not terror bases but were civilian habitations. By extending and expanding the scope of their adversary's operations, Pakistani military command commenced a war of attrition, which it lost out conclusively. In cross-border military strikes without IAF fighters crossing the International Border (IB) into Pakistan, India taught a lesson that will be remembered in post-Cold War global history of warfare. In doing so, the world may not want to classify Operation Sindoor as a 'classic war'. It would then be only to India's political advantage on the global theatre. What more, such constructs do not alter the ground reality one wee bit: Pakistan involved India in a military engagement, and lost squarely. Now, one needs to look at the truthfulness or otherwise of India's early claims that it was only a limited operation, confined to neutralising Pakistani terror-sites, and nothing more. Imagine a situation if Pakistan had not attacked India militarily from day two on. India would not have had a justifiable political reason to neutralise Pakistan's radar stations and air defences, without actually causing loss of their fighter aircraft. Given the way India chose the targets, both for day one and later on, and the way Indian forces carried out their assigned mission, it is becoming increasingly convincing that if they had taken aim at Pakistani air bases and their fighter aircraft in numbers, they would have also gone up, 'boom'. This would also go to prove the Indian claim of a limited, targeted operation, and not a full-fledged war (unless imposed on it by the other side). Nuclear bogey It is also now clear from the Kargil War on, how India has been able to keep military operations against Pakistan at the conventional level. Western governments and media hype up every India-Pakistan military operation to a nuclear war, making it as if the two South Asian adversarial neighbours are incapable of fighting a 'responsible war'. Operation Sindoor has proved India's proven path of peaceful coexistence and limited adversity in times of pressing needs. After all, this is one country in the world that at one point of time was a big power—and aspires to be one, again, any time soon—and still did not capture or retail territories. If there were limited engagements, there were justifiable reasons. The government also thought on its feet, and sending out political delegations the world over for briefing local governments about the compulsions that caused Operation Sindoor, and the conclusions that justified the same post facto, was also a top scorer like the political messaging and military operations. To have Opposition parliamentarians like Shashi Tharoor and Assadudin Owaisi to lead some of those teams clearly showed how united India was in times of war as much in times of peace. India, through Operation Sindoor, has taught the world how to conduct a 'limited military operation' without unjustifiable collateral casualties and extended warfare that anyway are destructive—as the world has seen in the post-Cold War era. But then wars are big business, and who else wants a short war! The writer is a Chennai-based policy analyst and political commentator. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely that of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views. Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: June 09, 2025, 17:55 IST News opinion Opinion | Operation Sindoor Proves Dharmic Wars Can Be Fought Even In Our Times


News18
29 minutes ago
- News18
Indian Student Handcuffed, Pinned At US Airport: 'Treated Like A Criminal'
Last Updated: An Indian student was handcuffed and pinned at Newark Airport, as shared by Kunal Jain on X. The student was crying and treated like a criminal by authorities A video has been going viral on social media where an Indian student was handcuffed and pinned at a US airport. Kunal Jain, an Indo-American social entrepreneur, took to X (formerly Twitter) to share a photo of the Indian student who was being deported from Newark Airport last night. He said the student was crying and was treated like a criminal by the authorities, as he was handcuffed and pinned to the ground. I witnessed a young Indian student being deported from Newark Airport last night— handcuffed, crying, treated like a criminal. He came chasing dreams, not causing harm. As an NRI, I felt helpless and heartbroken. This is a human tragedy. @IndianEmbassyUS #immigrationraids — Kunal Jain (@SONOFINDIA) June 8, 2025 'As an NRI, I felt helpless and heartbroken. This is a human tragedy," Jain wrote on X. Jain, President of HealthBots AI, said that the student was speaking in the Haryanvi language. 'I could recognise his accent where he was saying 'I'm not insane, these people are trying to make me look insane'," he wrote. In the post, Jain said, 'These children get their visas and get on a flight in the morning. For some reason, they are unable to explain the reason for their visit to the immigration authorities and are sent back on the evening flight tied up like criminals. Every day 3-4 such cases are happening. There have been more such cases in the last few days." First Published: June 09, 2025, 18:00 IST
&w=3840&q=100)

Business Standard
34 minutes ago
- Business Standard
CEC Kumar to speak on electoral integrity at IDEA Stockholm Conference
Chief Election Commissioner (CEC) of India Gyanesh Kumar has been invited to deliver the inaugural keynote address at the International IDEA Stockholm Conference on electoral integrity on 10 June. Kumar, who is leading a delegation of senior officials, interacted with members of the Indian diaspora in Sweden on Monday ahead of the conference. He is also scheduled to hold one-to-one bilateral meetings with the Chief Election Commissioners of nearly 20 countries, including the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, France, South Africa, Indonesia, Mexico, Mongolia and Switzerland. 'The massive scale of the Indian elections and the magnitude of the logistics involved in the exercise evinces keen interest amongst the Election Management Bodies (EMBs) across the world. Over 100 participants representing around 50 countries are taking part in the conference,' the Election Commission said in a statement. Kumar's keynote address comes at a time when questions have been raised in India over the neutrality of the Election Commission of India (ECI). On Saturday, Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi criticised the ECI's functioning and raised concerns about electoral integrity in a column published in multiple newspapers. Gandhi called the recent Maharashtra election 'a blueprint for rigged elections' and alleged that the next instance of 'match fixing' would occur in the Bihar polls. Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis responded in a separate column, accusing Gandhi of 'insulting' India's democratic processes and the people's mandate. 'The people have rejected Rahul Gandhi, and in retaliation, he is rejecting the people and their mandate,' Fadnavis wrote. Despite the public exchange, Gandhi has not formally submitted a letter to the ECI with his claims. According to established procedure, any constitutional body, including the ECI, requires an official written communication to issue a formal reply. India's ranking in the Electoral Democracy Index of the V-Dem Democracy Report 2023 has declined to 108th, from 100th in 2022. Since 2017, the report has categorised India under the 'electoral autocracy' classification. The ongoing international conference on electoral integrity and Kumar's participation are expected to draw attention to both the scale of India's electoral operations and the domestic discourse around democratic institutions.