Pak Terror Bases Were Hit Twice During Operation Sindoor, Say Sources. Here's How
New Delhi:
Pakistan's terrorist bases were hit twice during the armed forces' post-midnight "Operation Sindoor" today, sources have said. The 25-minute operation that started at 1.05 am, had involved 25 missiles that targeted terror camps at nine places in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and deep inside Pakistan.
India had attacked from many fronts to destroy the hubs of Lashkare-Taiba - whose proxy was involved in the attack on innocent tourists in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam - Jaish-e Mohammad and Hafiz Saeed's Jamaat-Ud Dawa, sources said. While the Air Force fired missiles from the sky to the ground, the Army also fired ground-to-ground missiles.
The strikes targeted terror camps across Muzaffarabad, Kotli, Rawalakot, Chakswari, Bhimber, Neelum Valley, Jhelum, Chakwal and as far south as Bahawalpur -- areas that were under the scanner of intelligence agencies for long. The agencies had zeroed in on the location of the terror camps through satellite imagery, human sources, and intercepted communications.
The armed forces used precision weapons from deep within Indian territory. The arsenal included air-launched SCALP cruise missiles, HAMMER precision-guided bombs and loitering munitions. The SCALP (Storm Shadow) missiles have a range of more than 250 km and were used to strike hardened targets, including reinforced bunkers and command posts.
The HAMMER (Highly Agile Modular Munition Extended Range) bombs were used against multi-storied buildings believed to house training modules and operational leadership. Loitering munitions, also known as kamikaze drones, provided real-time surveillance and struck high-value mobile targets as they emerged. These were fired from Indian Air Force aircraft that could even refuel mid-air.
Unlike the earlier strikes - the surgical strikes after the terror attack on Jammu and Kashmir's Uri in 2016 and air strikes after the attack on security forces in Pulwama - the "Operation Sindoor" was the most expansive cross-border strike conducted by India.
Sources have indicated that in the coming days, India can take similar action on other terrorist bases in Pakistan. The purpose is to send home the message that Pakistan stop promoting terrorist activities from its soil.
If Pakistan retaliates, India will also give a strong response, sources said. India gathered support at the global level before taking this military action.
The members of the United Nations Security Council - permanent and others -- were taken into confidence about the operation this evening. For India it was a diplomatic success, with no country apart from Turkey, openly supporting Pakistan. The Gulf countries were seen supporting India.
Russia, America, UK and France - the permanent members of the Security Council, have openly supported India while China's response was not seen to be too inclined towards Pakistan, leaving Islamabad isolated.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
27 minutes ago
- First Post
Can debt-ridden Pakistan afford to hike its defence budget?
Pakistan is expected to raise its defence budget for the 2025-26 fiscal year. The country's Planning Minister, Ahsan Iqbal, confirmed the move over the weekend, citing tensions with India as the reason. This comes as Islamabad's total public debt has reached a staggering PKR 76 trillion (around $269 billion), as per its economic survey 2024-25. However, the country's defence spending remains dwarfed by India's read more Chief of Army Staff of Pakistan Asim Munir holds a microphone during his visit at the Tilla Field Firing Ranges (TFFR) to witness the Exercise Hammer Strike, a high-intensity field training exercise conducted by the Pakistan Army's Mangla Strike Corps, in Mangla, Pakistan May 1, 2025. Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) via Reuters Pakistan is increasing its defence budget amid recent tensions with India. The country's Planning Minister, Ahsan Iqbal, said on the weekend that the government will hike its defence budget for the 2025-26 fiscal year. The move comes even as Pakistan remains debt-ridden and the country faces economic instability and high inflation. As Pakistan increases its defence budget, we take a look at how it compares with India's. Pakistan to raise defence budget Pakistan's Planning Minister Ahsan Iqbal confirmed on Saturday (June 7) that the government will increase the defence budget. 'It is our national duty to provide the armed forces with whatever they need in this budget to bolster their capacity and defend our country in the future. It has been proven that we have a dangerous neighbour (India) who attacked us in the night, but we gave them a befitting response,' he was quoted as saying by Pakistan's Dawn. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Iqbal said the country must 'remain ready to respond if they attack again'. The likely step comes amid Pakistan's economic woes. The country's economic survey 2024-25 revealed that Islamabad paid $7.8 billion in external debt service payments in the previous financial year. A boy plays with a soccer ball next to a smouldering pile of rubbish, ahead of the World Environment Day, in Karachi, Pakistan, June 4, 2025. Reuters The country is spending more than 1.9 per cent of its gross domestic product (GDP) on debt service payments, according to the survey. Pakistan's total public debt has reached a staggering PKR 76 trillion (around $269 billion), almost double since 2020-21. Of this, Islamabad owes $87.4 billion to other countries and multilateral agencies. Pakistan has to pay China $15 billion – the largest amount among bilateral lenders. This is followed by Japan at $3 billion and France at over $1 billion. The Shehbaz Sharif government's decision to hike the military budget comes amid significant damage to Pakistani airbases and air defence systems in the strikes by India under Operation Sindoor in the wake of the Pahalgam terror attack. Pakistan's military budget Pakistan will unveil its annual budget for the coming fiscal year today (June 10), reported to be a PKR 17.6 trillion budget. According to Reuters, analysts predict a rise of about 20 per cent in the country's defence budget. Pakistan had increased its defence budget by 16.4 per cent last year. Pakistan allocated PKR 2.1 trillion for defence in the FY 2024-25, including $2 billion for equipment and other assets. The country's military expenditure stood at $10.2 billion for 2024-25, data by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) revealed. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD To counter India's technologically advanced forces, Islamabad has focused its defence spending on maintaining nuclear capabilities and expanding its missile systems. Pakistan has an edge over India only in mobile rocket systems, 600 over New Delhi's 264, as per an Economic Times (ET) report. India, Pak comparison India has a bigger military than Pakistan and notably higher defence spending. For the 2025-26 fiscal year, India set aside $78.7 billion for defence spending, a 9.5 per cent rise from the previous year. India's military spending for 2024-25 was at $86.1 billion, as per SIPRI data. This makes the country the fifth-largest military spender in the world. The world's most populated country's defence budget has grown in the past decade. In 2013, India's military spending was at $41 billion. This nearly doubled to $80 billion by 2024, as per data from Macrotrends. India is seeking to enhance its defence capabilities by expanding the domestic production of weapon systems to reduce dependence on foreign suppliers. It has also enhanced its air power by making key purchases such as Rafale fighter jets. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD When it comes to manpower, India has 14.5 lakh active military personnel, as compared to its rival neighbour's 654,000. India boasts 730 combat-ready aircraft, while Pakistan has 452 military aircraft. India's military has 4,201 tanks and roughly 149,000 armoured vehicles, with Pakistan possessing only 2,627 tanks and 17,500 armoured units. India's naval power is also superior to Pakistan's. The Indian Navy operates 293 vessels, including two aircraft carriers, 18 submarines, and 13 destroyers. Pakistan, on the other hand, has 121 vessels but does not have aircraft carriers or destroyers. With inputs from agencies
India Today
43 minutes ago
- India Today
Should we stay or leave? Indian students at Harvard caught in Trump's crossfire
Indian students at Harvard say they are navigating a "rollercoaster" of uncertainty and anxiety amid the Trump administration's relentless battle against the university while also dealing with a dearth of job opportunities."It's just been a time of not quite knowing what to do, whether we should make our moves back home, or whether we should try and figure something out here," an Indian student, who graduated last month from the Harvard Kennedy School, said, not wishing to be students at Harvard, speaking to news agency PTI on the condition of anonymity, shared their concerns and experiences of the last few months during which the prestigious university has seen relentless attacks by the Trump administration. The administration's actions include a freeze of USD 2.2 billion in grants, revocation of the university's eligibility to enroll international students and suspension of entry of foreign nationals seeking to study or participate in exchange programmes at Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has said that Harvard's leadership has created an "unsafe campus environment by permitting anti-American, pro-terrorist agitators to harass and physically assault individuals, including many Jewish students and otherwise obstruct its once-venerable learning environment".US President Donald Trump, in a proclamation last week, said Harvard had refused recent requests of the DHS for information about foreign students' "known illegal activity", "known dangerous and violent activity", "known threats to other students or university personnel" and other related Indian student, who graduated from the Harvard Graduate School of Design after completing a two-year course, said students come to American institutions with plans of finishing their studies and then finding jobs to work for a few years in the she described the situation of the past few months as being a "rollercoaster"."With all the uncertainty, I can say that a lot of people who are hiring were generally hesitant of international students and maybe the Harvard tag helped earlier, but that's not the same right now at this particular moment," she student from Harvard Kennedy School pointed out that she was in a "desperate job search" at the moment, noting how difficult it was to get a job in the current environment."Employers have just stopped entertaining any international students, forget international students from Harvard, because our visa statuses are so volatile that who would want to employ us right now," she said she doesn't know whether she will be going back to India, staying back or heading to a different country altogether."That uncertainty is a lot in a country like America where you're paying" huge amounts of money in added that she thinks this is a short-term turbulence and things will settle down in the future. "But while we're caught in the crossfire, I think it's been difficult to plan and so it's stressful for sure."The students also pointed out that funding cuts initiated by the Trump administration were impacting jobs in the policy space, climate change, healthcare and public health Design School student recalled that just days before graduating last month, students found out that the Trump administration had terminated Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Programme (SEVP) certification, which meant the university could no longer enroll foreign students and existing foreign students must transfer or lose their legal status."We had just finished our final presentations, we were celebrating over lunch and we saw this news. It was quite unbelievable. Six months ago, you could never predict that something like this would happen," she however, urged foreign students not to feel discouraged by the current situation."This should not discourage people. Because I think what institutions like Harvard also do is that they make you a global citizen. And if not America, people are finding pathways elsewhere," she students say they had planned to move back to India eventually but had hoped to work in the US for the initial few years, both to get experience in the American job market and also to earn to pay back the significant student loans they young student, who graduated from Harvard Kennedy School, said while the current situation has been full of "unpredictability", at some levels students are building some kind of resistance, immunity to respond to developments in real-time, because the Trump administration's moves against Harvard have been blocked and stalled by the courts."The challenges that we face on a day-to-day basis are probably in terms of job opportunities, how we plan our future and the next steps," he said."I know of some classmates of mine who have been in the final stages of interviews with a few companies, but once they found out that these students were from Harvard, they were like 'that might pose a few issues later on. So, we'll move on with another candidate'," the student said."I've seen a higher number of people who are going back (to India). They have made up their mind that it's not worth staying and then being in a state of uncertainty, away from family and home, sacrificing a lot of things for a future that remains highly uncertain. So, that holds lesser value now for a lot of my peers," he cited media reports that said the State Department had told US consulates globally to resume processing visa applications for students planning to attend Harvard University. "All this is a signalling effect currently, which is hurting all of us a lot. Because you don't really know what, where you can apply, what you can do, employees are hesitant."He added that he had also been talking to a lot of students from India who are set to arrive in the US to commence studies at Harvard around September this year."Generally, yes, the concern has increased a lot in terms of what kind of opportunities exist, because they would be leaving a lot of things back home. The opportunity cost is higher than ever."He said incoming students or those planning to come to the US in the future to study were hesitant and considering whether they should apply to universities in Europe and elsewhere given "the kind of environment which has been created for international students generally in the US", which will have far-reaching said that while no one he has spoken to among the incoming students has been denied a visa, "some are reconsidering. They are unsure since there's fear of losing funding and scholarships they've received this year if they defer or don't join".According to statistics on the website of Harvard International Office, there are 788 students and scholars from India at all schools under Harvard University for the 2024-25 academic Global Support Services said on its website that each year, anywhere from 500-800 Indian students and scholars study at hosts a total of about 10,158 students and scholars from around the world across its schools, according to Harvard International Office Kennedy School student pointed to the "American Dream" that used to bring students from India and elsewhere to the US."I think that has been significantly affected. It's definitely not the same as what it used to be, even, I would say, five years ago, because a lot of this damage is unrepairable."But amid all this, what he found "heartening" was the university administration "stepping up" and putting forward a more resolute and strong show of support for the students."The other thing which has been absolutely amazing to see is students showing more support for their international peers."Tune InMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Donald Trump#United States of America
India Today
44 minutes ago
- India Today
Five reasons why Indian sub-continent has changed post Operation Sindoor
Over a month ago, Indian jets and ground-based missile launchers inflicted the most damage on Pakistan since the 1971 Indo-Pak war. India attacked terrorist infrastructure and wrecked Pakistani airbases and radars in a swift series of retaliatory air and ground strikes. India has held the Indus Water Treaty in abeyance for the first time since its 1960 reasons why the ongoing Operation Sindoor is arguably India's greatest strategic move since the 1998 Pokharan-2 nuclear ENDS PAKISTAN'S NUCLEAR BLACKMAILPakistan covertly acquired nuclear weapons capability in the 1980s before India did. India tested a nuclear device in 1974 but that device was not a weapon as in, in a form that could be delivered on to target. It is one of the sub-continent conundrums that while India tested first, it began weaponising later, only in the late 1980s after intelligence suggested that the Pakistani nuclear weapons programme was racing ahead. When the Pakistan military acquired nuclear weapons capability in the 1980s, it changed its mindset. The Pakistan Army believed that India would not punish it for terror attacks using its conventional military superiority because it feared Pakistan would use nuclear weapons. This belief was reinforced when multiple terror strikes on Mumbai, in 1993, 2006 and 2008 went unpunished. In fact, General Musharaff launched the Kargil operation just six months after the 1998 Indian and Pakistani nuclear believed India would not use its army to strike at Pakistan. His point was reinforced by Operation Parakram in 2001-02 when India responded to the attack on India's parliament by deploying its entire military along the borders, but withdrew them six months later. This standoff led to what scholars like Commodore C Uday Bhaskar have called 'Nuclear Weapons Enabled Terrorism' or NWET. This policy has now seems to have reached the end of its life. Prime Minister Modi's government has shown it is not deterred by Pakistan's nuclear weapons or its nuclear blackmail a fact explicitly mentioned by Prime Minister Modi on May 12.2. ENDS DISTINCTION BETWEEN PAKISTANI STATE AND NON-STATEThe Pakistan Army has always used non-state actors as an adjunct of the state. In 1947, it used tribal militias from the North West Frontier regions to invade Jammu and Kashmir. In 1965, it infiltrated special forces disguised as tribals to provoke an insurrection in Jammu and Kashmir. In 1999, it infiltrated its Northern Light Infantry disguised as militants to capture the heights of Kargil. Since the 1980s, the Pak Army and its ISI honed and perfected its terror infrastructure skills in the shadow of the Afghan war (1979-1988), the West-funded proxy war against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. When the Afghan War ended, Pakistan used the leftover infrastructure of Operation Cyclone warehouses filled with weapons and tens of thousands of radicalised mujahideen, to wage war against India, first in Punjab, and later in Jammu and Kashmir. All along, the Pakistan Army kept up the pretence of violent groups like the LeT and Jaish-e-Mohammed being 'non-state actors', over whom the state had no control when terrorist groups like the TTP turned against it, Pakistan used the attacks to play the victim card. Each time India attempted to point at Pakistan's state sponsorship of terror, Islamabad maintained it was also a victim of terrorism. Pakistan used this stratagem to deceive the West in the two-decade War on Terror in Afghanistan (2001-2021). It deceived the US that it was with them while it was covertly training and sheltering the Taliban. 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden was hidden in a safehouse just a kilometre away from the Pakistan Military Academy, India, the mask fell off on April 16, 2025. On that day, army chief General Asim Munir who delivered a highly provocative and communal speech advocating the Two Nation Theory. On April 22, 26 Indian tourists and one Nepali national were massacred by Pakistani terrorists. Post Operation Sindoor, the Pakistan army has accorded military funerals to dead terrorists. Terrorist leaders have openly appeared on platforms with politicians. The mask of deniability has fallen off. The blame for all future terror strikes will be laid squarely at the doorstep of the Pakistan RAISES PAKISTAN'S TERROR SPONSORSHIP COSTSTerrorism was a low-cost option for the Pakistan Army. By spending a few crores on running training camps and terror infrastructure over the years, it tied down entire divisions of the Indian Army in Jammu and Kashmir. Every Indian Army division tied down in J&K, the Pakistan Army believed, was one less than could be deployed against it in a conventional emboldened Pakistan Army continued to inflict what it believed was death by a thousand cuts on India, spreading attacks to the mainland. When terror groups like the LeT became self-sufficient, running their outfits through public donations, the financial burden on the Pakistan Army and its ISI was further Operation Sindoor rampage by India destroyed terrorist training camps and military infrastructure inside Pakistan. A bankrupt Pakistan, living a hand- to- handout existence will have to decide where it will need to spend its precious foreign exchange on importing more fighter jets and missiles, or feeding its people. Terror sponsorship is no longer a low-cost Operation Sindoor end Pakistan-sponsored terrorism ? It is unlikely. This is because the Pakistan Army defines victory very differently, as the scholar C Christine Fair once for the Pakistan Army is not when it loses half its country and its military infrastructure is wrecked. Defeat for the Pakistan Army is only when it stops Pakistan Army is actually a gigantic business corporation. The military runs a business empire, construction companies, housing corporations, security agencies and logistics firms which benefit a key military elite. This business empire is estimated at over $100 billion. So deeply entrenched is this autonomous state within a state that there's actually a term for it, Milbus or Military Business, coined by Pakistani scholar Ayesha Siddiqa. The Pakistan Army chief is also the MD and CEO of this corporation. What Operation Sindoor has done is to force the Pakistan Army chief to do a cost-benefit analysis before launching a terror strike against India. 'Will this attack deliver more for me than the cost of retaliation from India?'advertisement4. BOOSTED INDIA'S INDIGENOUS WEAPONSOne of the key thrust areas of the Modi government was indigenous weapons systems. This paid off handsomely during Operation Sindoor when indigenously developed solutions proved to be star of Operation Sindoor was the Russian-designed indigenously produced Su-30MKI and the Brahmos supersonic cruise missile. India is the only country in the world with this combination- a fighter jet carrying a heavy supersonic cruise missile with a 200 kg warhead. Because the missile flies at nearly three times the speed of sound, it strikes targets with nine times the kinetic energy of ordinary missiles. This combination was an Indian invention — the product of the Indian engineers at Brahmos aerospace, the IAF and Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL). The indigenously developed Integrated Air Command and Control System (IACCS) knits all of India's ground-based air defences into one network, beating back Pakistan's repeated air assaults. India's startups too supplied drones that were used by the Indian military in strikes against Pakistani targets. Operation Sindoor's lessons will further boost the indigenous defence ecosystem, accelerating the creation of a domestic military industrial complex.5. IDENTIFIED FRIEND AND FOEIn the fog of war, the biggest challenge is to identify who your friends and foes are. For India, Operation Sindoor cleared some of the haze. The Turkiye, Azerbaijan and China nexus was always one that backed Pakistan. This was more pronounced as all three came out in strong support of Pakistan backing it with diplomatic and military support.A mercurial Donald Trump, who claimed to have used trade as a lever to get India to stop shooting at Pakistan, will only reinforce New Delhi's belief that American weapons come with strings attached. A senior MoD bureaucrat explained to me why India would never buy American fighter jets. 'Because they will never allow you to fight the wars they don't want you to.'
