logo
Operation Sindoor's Lesson: Assertiveness Is Just Step One For A ‘Viksit Bharat'

Operation Sindoor's Lesson: Assertiveness Is Just Step One For A ‘Viksit Bharat'

News1819-05-2025

Last Updated:
The road to 'Viksit Bharat' requires not just a robust security posture, but a concerted effort to bolster our military, economy, and national character from within
War scenarios, as elucidated in the previous part, have remained viable. However, there is a paradigm shift towards terrorist attacks and 'dousing the fire' tactics being employed by Pakistan—limiting the window of opportunity for Bharat, while allowing it to raise the stakes for Pakistan.
Terror Attacks Since 2014 And Bharat's Response
In recent times, the scale of skirmishes with Pakistan has reduced, and we now mostly witness an active Line of Control (LoC). Pakistan's attempts—though diminished—persist in conducting terrorist attacks and furthering its nefarious plans of Islamist jihad in the heartland of Bharat, albeit through misinformation and propaganda fuelling such dastardly endeavours. The smart fence along the LoC has greatly hampered Pakistan's terror designs. Its increasing reliance on Over-Ground Workers (OGWs) and sleeper cells has, in a way, worked to our advantage, as Bharat continues to eliminate these hidden terrorists and hunt them down.
The typical pattern—from letting attacks happen, to striking back tactically, to eventually engaging in dialogue under pressure from global opinion—has now shifted. We have developed adequate punitive responses for Pakistan, as seen after the Uri attack through surgical strikes, post-Pulwama air operations, and now during Operation Sindoor. In all three instances, Bharat targeted terror camps and infrastructure in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK); but Operation Sindoor went further, striking terrorist headquarters in mainland Pakistan.
The propensity and immunity with which these strikes were conducted demonstrate a range of mechanisms available to inflict damage with precision and restraint—minimising collateral damage while earning global appreciation. With each such strike, the lethality, precision, and psychological toll on Pakistan have increased, raising serious questions around red lines, nuclear intent and capability, and the escalation ladder—all tools of tantrum Pakistan had previously used to deter Bharat from taking such actions.
Had Operation Sindoor continued for another two or three days beyond 10 May 2025, it is likely Pakistan would have been severely crippled—facing deeper restraint from global powers. One can never be sure when 'enough is enough', but this time, in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terrorist attack, Pakistan was saved due to a leak, which embarrassed its funders and suppliers alike.
What Does Bharat Need To Do?
Given the narration thus far, it is evident that we have evolved as a nation in our resolve to punish Pakistan for its terrorism and misadventures. We are now better prepared to take punitive action, and much of global opinion stands with us. However, we still face a handicap in perception warfare.
Bharat's growth invites envy, and some global actors continue to sustain the Pakistani proxy they once created—arming and supporting terror networks that mushroomed from its soil. Only now is the snake they nurtured beginning to bite the world at large.
Are we truly superior to Pakistan? Have we fully neutralised terrorism emanating from its territory? Do we possess conventional military superiority? Will those who use Pakistan as a proxy arm it further against Bharat? Can we count on the USA and China as friends? Can the European Union be trusted blindly? Who are our all-weather allies with whom we can co-develop better military hardware and software?
Will Pakistan resort to nuclear weapons—and what can we do in such a case? How much can our economy sustain in the event of a war? Are we truly invincible against Pakistan?
There are many lingering questions, and much cannot be answered in black and white, as probabilities and scenarios are multiple—and in some cases, mutually exclusive. However, the last question above does have a definite answer, and that is a firm no. And since that emphatic 'no' exists, we need to introspect and carve a pathway to strengthen our national power for the future.
What are our deficiencies, lacunae, and gaps? One can write about them separately. But given the highlights we have already examined in this paper—across the three scenarios and feasible actions during terrorist strikes—particularly in the context of declarations made by Bharat during Operation Sindoor, such as: that 'no first use' is not mandatory, and that any terrorist attack or proxy war will be construed as an 'Act Of War', Bharat has significant latitude to respond—and at its discretion.
Let me briefly outline what Bharat can and ought to do across various domains of national power:
A. Military Capacity Enhancement
Bharat is two decades behind China in military preparedness and is not adequately poised for a two- or three-front war, despite such scenarios being increasingly plausible. Given the wide range of terrain conditions in which we must operate—especially for ground forces—we need to develop the following capabilities:
Enhanced and modern operational infrastructure, including administrative systems, along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) on the Tibetan Plateau, the Line of Control (LoC), and the international borders (IB) with Pakistan and Bangladesh.
Modernisation of ground forces with upgraded equipment, weapons, personal gear, surveillance tools, electronic warfare (EW) capabilities, cyber-awareness, air defence (AD) systems, and the ability to operate in a nuclear environment or 'fight dirty'.
Co-development of sixth-generation aircraft, alongside increased production of indigenised systems. Bharat should also continue imports with adequate service, parts, tools, and accessories (SPTA) support from countries like Russia and France to maintain and enhance the current fleet. This includes modernising the Indian Air Force (IAF) with advanced AD and EW capabilities.
Co-develop or domestically manufacture at least five additional aircraft carrier fleets equipped with indigenous hardware, weapon systems, missiles, and aircraft—targeted for completion within the next 5 to 10 years.
Leverage home-grown technologies to strengthen the missile arsenal, including multi-range delivery systems across all three services, while achieving sufficient tactical nuclear capability.
Mechanise at least two-thirds of the current infantry, excluding glaciated and high-altitude areas where manoeuvre warfare is infeasible. This mechanisation initiative was originally envisioned during General K. Sundarji's tenure as Chief of Army Staff, but it came to a grinding halt due to economic constraints, bureaucratic indecision, and military leadership's inability to press forward. This failure has severely limited our offensive options and constrained us within the ambit of a nuclear deterrence posture.
Pakistan possesses nuclear capabilities and is willing to employ tactical nuclear weapons. To match and deter this threat effectively, Bharat needs mechanised forces capable of transporting troops safely into battle under nuclear-threat conditions. Failure to achieve this may eventually lead to disaster in a future conventional conflict—an outcome we have so far managed to avoid, and deter our enemies from initiating.
However, by the next decade or so, that strategic advantage may erode, especially as Pakistan's armed forces receive a fresh infusion of modern weapon systems—whether through proxies or directly from countries such as the USA and China, among others.
B. Perception Warfare
For a long time, we have been shy of creating assets that are useful not only for perception management but also have the capability to network and interact globally to gain better and faster intelligence. Bharat must work on a holistic Perception Warfare Department under HQ Integrated Defence Staff with elements of military, cyber experts, internal security agencies, PMF, intelligence agencies, MEA with its embassies across the world, industry, polity, media, diaspora, ISRO, NTRO, veterans from diverse fields as needed, friendly foreign countries on laid-down terms, etc. Reviving the Technical Support Division (TSD), or a similar organisation, and not being politically correct about it, should be a stance. This will be beneficial to create assets, conduct covert operations, curb and pre-empt terrorist activities, including targeting terrorists and their handlers deep inside enemy territories, and more unconventional tasks, as necessary.
Striking the enemy and eliminating leadership must be an ongoing process and that calls for specialisation without interference; albeit with due checks and reporting to the highest offices, as needed. In Pakistan, we have a failed state that thrives on extreme Islamist ideology, and to defeat such a country, it needs more and constant degradation of its intent and breaking it into pieces, such that constant turmoil grips it within and along other borders too. We also need to cleanse within the 'anti-national algae' that grows and mushrooms with support from foreign inimicals. We must create avenues to support teams and groups operating in Bharat and abroad financially, such that we are able to reach out to think tanks, world bodies and agencies, and people who matter, to influence events—and post-events too. Funding a group of diaspora in the UK, USA, Canada, etc. will be useful in the long run.
C. Developing National Fibre And Fortitude
Bharat, as we know it today, is fragmented with shades of citizens, ranging from nationalists to wokes to anti-nationals. While the first and the last are discernible and can be acted upon with firmness, the woke need special attention, as most are from the current generation of teenagers up to those in their 30s—who have been fed with a version of history that doesn't build enough pride, and where Western influences have been subtly infused through many aspects. Our education system, as such, needs major refinement and changes, and unless that is done, we are on a time-curve of doomsday, so far as moral and nationalistic fibre is concerned.
Our nation also needs to develop fortitude in difficult times and be able to appreciate the intentions of enemies, their tactics, media negativity, and the influence of agencies and institutions—including educational ones—and even comments made by other governments. One can appreciate the grooming of a young Israeli and their fortitude to return from safer places like the USA, etc., to fight and contribute in an armed conflict in Gaza, post the 7/10 attacks on their soil by Hamas. A nation has to be made strong internally, and that takes generations—but weakening it takes just a few decades. The 'Gurukul' system was effective as it trained scholar-warriors and nationalists, and our modern syllabus needs to be ingrained with teachings that foster national pride and commitment.
D. Pathway Of 'Atmanirbhar Bharat'
It is an absolutely critical necessity that we promote and produce weapons and fighting support systems in Bharat. At best, we should have co-development cases with friendly countries only—Russia and Israel, to reiterate, are the ones we must trust. All imports through COTS (Commercial Off The Shelf) procurement should be minimal and strictly stipulated for manufacturing in Bharat within a specific timeframe, such that we force ourselves to develop a competitive technological edge in that domain at the earliest.
iDEX and similar platforms need to be adequately funded to enable proper scale-ups, without these companies getting funded by foreign entities. Allied industries that support military hardware, software, and related products must also be indigenous.
E. Curating Geographical Advantage
In many places—especially along the LoC—we are at a position of disadvantage. Given the fact that we have a right to our territories in PoK, and also that Pakistan has recently suspended the Shimla Agreement, we need to have a 'roll-on plan' to nibble territories, with a view to improving our defensive posture along the LoC. These sporadic to limited offensive actions during the year will serve as a caution to Pakistan and reduce infiltration attempts, as some calculated aggression is carried out across the LoC by Bharat.
F. Encourage Diversified Population Growth In Kashmir
Kashmir has been the focal point of Pakistan's funding, terrorism, and more—under the garb of Islamic caliphate and its own misplaced claims of sovereignty. Kashmir is an integral part of Bharat, and the exodus of Kashmiri Pandits remains a blot on the then government and military leadership, which let mayhem prevail. It is time to undo that error and ensure that people and businesses move into Kashmir so that the population becomes more heterogeneous.
With a bounty of minerals and rare earths, it is incumbent upon Bharat to ensure that normalcy in Kashmir is such that the cost of meddling there for Pakistan is equivalent to striking New Delhi. Therefore, state a plan and stick to it—irrespective of which political party governs Delhi or Srinagar. Do not let Pakistan see Kashmir as a demography that suits its ideological battles.
G. Economic Surge With Security: Nothing Else Matters in the 21st Century
Bharat is on a pathway of transition—from a developing to a developed nation—and the call for 'Viksit Bharat' by 2047 by the Prime Minister mandates a relentless economic growth curve, with all dimensions of security aligned to support that enviable progress. Development in infrastructure, healthcare, education, energy, defence, enabling technologies and more is critical to sustain the needs and aspirations of 1.4 billion plus, who will likely grow to 1.85 billion by 2070—a timeline by which Bharat intends to become a net-zero country.
All of this requires high investments, best practices, collaborations, and strategic choices. Bharat must make the right partnerships with friendly countries and lead the conversation on investments. At the same time, rivals like Pakistan, an envious China, and others will count—and attempt to slow Bharat down. Bharat must optimise its internal economy and generate funds domestically to support growth and better standards of living for its citizens.
Ignoring minor skirmishes unless absolutely necessary for escalation should be the norm. Punitive actions must be brief, effective, and well communicated—to limit enemy countermeasures.
H. Societal Stability And National Ideology
Frequent infighting and political bickering have devastated Bharat since the Mughal invasions and British rule, where divide-and-rule policies prevailed. Even today, petty politics continues to divide Bharat on caste, language, income, and more—ushering in asymptotic clichés, weakening the societal fabric, and even deriding Bharat abroad, as we have seen with politicians who hold responsible positions and are privy to sensitive information.
We must observe the declining fabric of societies like the UK and USA, where wokeism has stripped them of their values, and the edifice of their governance has been weakened. Bharat has rich civilisational roots, but their deterioration in recent decades has been alarming. The current generations have not contributed enough towards its revival.
We need to push a 'restart button' for our education system and its ingrained philosophy—such that we preserve the best from our past, suitably enabled by the virtues of the present, especially in technology and future sciences. We must build a national ideology that is overwhelming and empowering for future citizens and the diaspora.
Institutions like RSS can do more in the service of Bharat and help bring together like-minded individuals who can shape and steer the course for a better, bolder, and beautiful Bharat.
I. Leadership Through Acumen
Bharat must create systems within systems that support a long-term vision of prosperity and peace—defined by clear targets and enforced where necessary. While the basic polity is based on elections and bureaucracy is run by cadre, there is a strong case—just like RSS benefits from the advice of luminaries—that the government must build attached structures to bring in experts, and fill the Rajya Sabha with citizens who will work more and enjoy privileges less.
The experiment of appointing Joint Secretaries from the private sector under Team Modi proved successful, with significant contributions made in the ministries where they served. We must extend this idea and introduce more lateral leadership, even up to the level of secretaries.
The cushy, assured promotion and growth enjoyed by the bureaucracy must come to an end. We must promote excellence from the vast pool of citizens—including veterans from diverse fields. No public sector organisation guarantees promotions and growth like the IAS cadre. While politicians must fight elections and other institutions advance through merit, IAS operates by its own benchmark—one that must be dismantled and replaced with a new one soon.
J. Make Military Elite And Wanted
A nation is only as strong and resilient as its military. In Bharat, the status of the military has been constantly downgraded, and the parity with other services like the IAS and IPS is rather humiliating—the warrant of precedence only adds to the agony.
Gone are the days when the military was schooled to ignore 'small things' in the belief that it had a larger role to play. The attraction of youth towards military service has declined, and the shortage of officers tells its own story. It is quite disheartening to see a Lieutenant General salute and call 'Sir' someone who is 25 per cent junior in service and stature—while even an MLA believes himself to be larger than a Corps Commander.
This anomaly, which is well-known and well-established, must be corrected soon—and no compromise should be acceptable to the polity. Operation Sindoor is also an example of how sluggishness sets in during decision-making, and how military commanders often appear to be mere pawns within the larger national structure.
Since the time of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, and without exception, the respect and remuneration afforded to the soldier has been craftily degraded by the bureaucracy—with the polity consenting to this erosion. It seems that, over the decades since independence, the bureaucracy (including IAS and IPS) has usurped power by staying close to the polity, while the soldier who defends the nation has slowly become a 'stranger in town'.
Bharat now stands at the cusp of becoming a developed nation—powerful across all dimensions of national power—and Operation Sindoor signals where we ought to be militarily. But truth be told, we are still far from where we need to be in terms of military capacities. As a nation with the aspirations and dreams of 1.4+ billion citizens, we cannot afford to be second-best militarily—not as the largest democracy on Earth.
We must collectively envision a stronger and surer Bharat—and do more for our nation, our Bharat.
top videos
View all
Jai Hind!
Colonel Rohit Dev, a 2nd Generation Army Officer, is an Adjunct Professor at the Rashtriya Raksha University, a geopolitical analyst and a primetime TV personality. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect News18's views.
tags :
Indian military Operation Sindoor pahalgam terror attack
Location :
New Delhi, India, India
First Published:
May 19, 2025, 12:41 IST
News opinion Opinion | Operation Sindoor's Lesson: Assertiveness Is Just Step One For A 'Viksit Bharat'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

India is not imposing a trade ban on Pakistan supporter Turkey due to..., even Erdogan will be unaware of this reason
India is not imposing a trade ban on Pakistan supporter Turkey due to..., even Erdogan will be unaware of this reason

India.com

time34 minutes ago

  • India.com

India is not imposing a trade ban on Pakistan supporter Turkey due to..., even Erdogan will be unaware of this reason

India is not imposing a trade ban on Pakistan supporter Turkey due to..., even Erdogan will be unaware of this reason Even after Turkey openly supported Pakistan during Operation Sindoor, India has not taken any drastic step against the foe country. In fact, the government has adopted a very soft stance regarding trade. The reason for this is that India sells more goods to Turkey than it buys from it. In this way, India earns a profit of 2.73 billion dollars every year. When Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan not only made statements in favour of Pakistan but also sent drones, every Indian was so angry that demands started rising to stop everything from tourism to trade with Turkey. Why is India not banning trade with Turkey? According to the report of The Indian Express, an official said that the government has received many applications demanding a ban on the import of goods from Turkey. He said that apple producers of Himachal Pradesh and marble traders of Udaipur have demanded a ban on importing goods from Turkey, but India has a trade surplus with Turkey, that is, India sells more goods to Turkey than it buys from there. The official said that if trade with Turkey was banned, it would be a strong geopolitical message, but it would depend on how far you want to take it. What does India-Turkey trade in? Another reason for continuing trade with Turkey is that the trade surplus includes industrial exports. Such as engineering goods, electronics, organic-inorganic chemicals, whose export has increased significantly in the last five years. On the other hand, if we talk about Turkey, India mainly imports fruits, dry fruits, gold and marble from it. However, apple traders and marble traders of Udaipur, angry with Turkey for supporting Pakistan during Operation Sindoor , had demanded a ban on imports from Turkey. In this regard, he had also written a letter to the Prime Minister's Office. In the last few years, Turkey had also increased the import of petroleum products, but in the financial year 2025, it saw a decline. How much did India and Turkey trade last year? According to official figures, Turkey imported goods worth $2.99 ​​billion to India last year, out of which fruits and dry fruits worth $107.12 million were purchased. At the same time, gold worth $270.83 million was purchased in the financial year 2025, which was more than in 2024. In 2024, gold worth $104.56 million came from Turkey to India. Talking about India, exports worth $5.72 billion were made to Turkey in the financial year 2025, out of which 50 percent i.e. $3 billion was engineering exports. Micro, Small Medium Enterprises (MSME) exports accounted for 35-40 percent. According to this, India has sold more goods worth $2.73 billion than Turkey.

Is This How India Will 'Dehyphenate' Itself From Pakistan?
Is This How India Will 'Dehyphenate' Itself From Pakistan?

NDTV

time42 minutes ago

  • NDTV

Is This How India Will 'Dehyphenate' Itself From Pakistan?

"The enemy is anybody who's going to get you killed, no matter which side he's on," said Yossarian, the 'hero' of Joseph Heller's 1961 cult classic Catch-22. This absurdly dark and hilarious novel, set during the Second World War, contains some of the most astute observations on war and peace, a theme for our times. Or all times. Apart from one's own commanders, like Colonel Cathcart of Catch-22, the enemy could also be suboptimal actions driven by fallacious estimations of self. While our armed forces, as commanded, demonstrated their professionalism and precision, the same has been seen as lacking from other quarters in the aftermath of Operation Sindoor. Despite India's consistent attempts at keeping the Kashmir issue out of the arena of international interference, Pakistan has doubled down on its efforts to the contrary and achieved at least some degree of success. India, regrettably, has also got 're-hyphenated' with Pakistan despite our government's forceful iterations that the victims and perpetrators of terrorism cannot be treated at par by the international community. Pak Is No Match The irony of the current situation is that India may have played some part in bringing this rehyphenation upon itself. Rather than setting the paradigm, India is seen as playing catch-up in its diplomatic oeuvre. Immediately after the high offices of the Pakistani government, including Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif, embarked on their international mission to convince the world about India's alleged aggression, seven all-party committees were dispatched by India to different parts of the world. We are yet to see what such delegations have achieved for the long run, apart from generating newsy moments. As the world's fourth-largest economy, India has a stature that Pakistan can only aspire to achieve. Sharif's statement about India being more wary of the cost of war than Pakistan because the latter is still in a struggling phase is darkly humorous and unintentionally ingenious. It doesn't behove a superpower like India to be following Pakistan's diplomatic footsteps. The soon-to-retire chief of the Florida-based United States Central Command, General Michael E. Kurilla, has recently called Pakistan a "phenomenal partner" whose value "will only increase as the Taliban continues to face security challenges within its borders". President Donald Trump, too, has been underscoring how the US values its "beautiful" relationship with both India and Pakistan, which have "great" leaders. Rather than dismissing this 'both-siding' as classic Trump balderdash, India should devise a robust plan to offset Pakistan's geopolitical arm-twisting of the West. Pak's Sneaky Ways The Afghanistan-Pakistan hyphenation is what has been driving the West's response to Islamabad's backing of the terror outfits in Kashmir and other parts of India. Pakistan has managed to convince the West, especially the US, of its indispensable status in eliminating actors that pose a direct threat to people and property in the Global North. India's renewed engagement with the Taliban, short of recognising them, has only limited potential to counter Pakistan's perceived value as a partner of the West to counter terrorist threats originating from Central and South Asia. The spectre of ISIS-K looms large on any Western attempt at holding Pakistan responsible for terror activities in India. Pakistan has utilised multilateral platforms, such as the UN, to its utmost benefit. Currently, as a non-permanent member of the UNSC, Pakistan serves as the Chair of the 1988 Taliban Sanctions Committee, Vice Chair of the 1373 Counter-Terrorism Committee, and Co-Chair of two informal working groups. It is also set to become the rotational president of the UNSC in July. While these positions do not hold any substantive powers, Pakistan can be expected to initiate meetings and debates to internationalise the Kashmir issue. The Kashmir Question India may have brushed these concerns away in the past, upholding its policy of keeping Kashmir as an internal matter, but it will appear a little hypocritical now. Once you reach out to the world with an aim to share your side of the story, you cannot accuse the other party of doing the same. There has been a spirit of tentativeness with which multilateral platforms have treated India-Pakistan tensions. A large number of nations are not even aware of Kashmir and the eight-decade-long dispute over it. All they have perhaps seen is a half-hearted inscription on UN maps showing the border between the two countries. More importantly, India can no longer claim that it does not care for the "opinion" of the international community, particularly the US, when it was a foreign commander in chief of the armed forces who "announced" - however unwarrantedly - the ceasefire or the "pause" during Operation Sindoor. Classical Greek playwright and master of comedies Aristophanes said, "Men of sense often learn from their enemies. It is from their foes, not their friends, that cities learn the lesson of building high walls and ships of war; and this lesson saves their children, their homes, and their properties". While it may be important to learn from Pakistan the art of conning everyone all the time, India must continue to act like the regional power and global arbiter that it posits itself as.

Germany's defence awakening is rooted in geopolitical realities
Germany's defence awakening is rooted in geopolitical realities

Indian Express

timean hour ago

  • Indian Express

Germany's defence awakening is rooted in geopolitical realities

Germany's post-World War II identity has long rested on pacifism, diplomacy, and a deep aversion to military assertiveness. It changed dramatically in 2022 when Russia's invasion of Ukraine jolted Berlin into a strategic reset. Chancellor Olaf Scholz called it a Zeitenwende — a turning point — announcing Germany would commit 2 per cent of its GDP to defence spending and create a €100 billion special fund to modernise the Bundeswehr. It marked a historic departure from decades of military restraint. In 2025, the new Chancellor Friedrich Merz doubled down on this trajectory. In his first address to the Bundestag, Merz vowed to transform the Bundeswehr into 'the strongest conventional army in Europe.' He coupled this with a sweeping economic recovery package and a tough new migration policy. 'Germany and Europe must become so strong together that we never have to use our weapons,' he said. To realise this vision, Merz pledged unlimited financial backing for the military, and suggested that Germany would shoulder greater responsibility within NATO and the European Union. Defence Minister Boris Pistorius echoed this ambition, suggesting a long-term goal of raising defence spending to as much as 5 per cent of GDP — a dramatic leap from the current ~2 per cent. The Merz-led coalition secured a key parliamentary provision: Defence spending beyond 1 per cent of GDP would be exempt from the constitutionally enshrined 'debt brake'. The legal framework is in place. The ambition is clear. But will the German public support hold? Initially, it seemed so. In 2022, the emotional shock of war in Europe led to broad support for increased military expenditure. Nearly 70 per cent of Germans backed the move — remarkable in a country so wary of militarism. The special fund enabled Germany to order F-35 fighter jets, procure Israel's Arrow 3 missile defence system, invest in cyber capabilities, and digitise command operations. For many, this was not militarism, but a belated correction of decades of underinvestment. But by 2025, that enthusiasm has tapered. A Koerber Stiftung poll from November 2024 found that while 73 per cent of Germans favoured greater investment in European security, 58 per cent opposed Germany playing a leading role if the US retreated from global affairs. Currently, around 55 per cent support strengthening national defence. Support for the far-right AfD, which advocates a more restrained defence posture, has grown. Cracks are appearing in the national consensus. Several fault lines now threaten the sustainability of Germany's defence transformation. First, economic concerns are mounting. Inflation, stagnation, and budget constraints have sharpened debates over fiscal priorities. Critics ask whether Germany can afford to spend billions on tanks and jets while underfunding schools, housing, and its energy transition. With austerity on the horizon, Germans are being forced to choose between security and social services. Many want both — but doubt whether both are affordable. Second, implementation has been slower than expected. Bureaucratic inertia, procurement delays, and supply chain disruptions have hampered progress. The Bundeswehr remains under-equipped in key areas. Reports of soldiers lacking basic gear persist, and many major systems are still years from deployment. If voters perceive the Zeitenwende as mostly talk with little delivery, support will wane further. Third, Germany's pacifist tradition remains strong. On the political left and among younger voters, scepticism toward militarisation is pronounced. Some fear entanglement in foreign wars; others are uneasy with NATO's expanding mission. In eastern Germany, with its historic links to Russia and persistent economic grievances, alignment with the West is more contested. The political implications are complicated. Defence expansion finds strongest support among Merz's CDU/CSU and the SPD. The Greens, though supportive of Ukraine, are divided between their anti-war roots and current geopolitical realities. The Free Democrats (FDP) support spending but worry about fiscal discipline. Meanwhile, Die Linke and the AfD oppose rearmament from opposite ideological perspectives. Parliamentary arithmetic could thus prove tricky, despite constitutional backing for the special fund. Another challenge: Any defence procurement over €25 million still requires approval from the Bundestag's Budget Committee. This postwar safeguard against militarism makes defence planning highly sensitive to shifting coalitions, public opinion, and political bargaining. There's no doubt that Zeitenwende marks a new era. For the first time since reunification, Germany is taking its defence obligations seriously. NATO allies — especially in Eastern Europe — have welcomed the shift. Even the US, long frustrated by Germany's military hesitancy, acknowledged the change during Chancellor Merz's visit to Washington on June 6, with Donald Trump cautiously commending the new direction. But transformation requires more than budgets and weapons — it needs a cultural shift. Germany must forge a new strategic consensus: That military readiness is a safeguard for peace, not a threat to it. This demands political leadership, public dialogue, and tangible improvements in the Bundeswehr's capabilities. Critics who argue that defence spending diverts resources from social needs often ignore a fundamental truth: Without security, prosperity cannot be sustained. Germany's export-driven economy depends on a stable global order — one now threatened by Russian aggression, cyberwarfare, terrorism, and authoritarianism. The days of complacency are over. At the same time, defence advocates must tread carefully. German strategic culture remains cautious. Any sense that the Bundeswehr is being rebuilt for adventurism — or that civil liberties are being eroded in the name of security — could provoke backlash. Transparency, restraint, and adherence to democratic norms are essential. Germany's real test lies not just in spending more, but in spending wisely. That means delivering visible outcomes: Enhanced operational readiness, better troop morale, and credible deterrence. It also means preserving democratic values while projecting stability. The Zeitenwende Plus is not a singular moment but a sustained commitment. Germany must internalise that its global role has changed — not just because of Ukraine, but because the geopolitical environment demands it. A well-equipped, principled Germany can be a pillar of European security — but only if its leaders bring the public with them, not only in moments of crisis, but through steady, transparent governance. In the end, Germany's defence awakening will not be measured by euros spent — but by what it defends, and how. The writer is former ambassador to Germany, Indonesia, Ethiopia ASEAN and the African Union

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store