Operation Mahadev and India's shifting role in South Asia
Listen to article
India recently launched Operation Mahadev in Lidwas, near Srinagar, targeting militants allegedly involved in the April 22 Pahalgam attack. While the government called it a success, there is still no verified evidence linking those killed to the Pahalgam attack. This recurring gap between military actions and verifiable outcomes is eroding India's credibility, both domestically and internationally. What complicates matters further is the abrupt transition from Operation Sindoor to Operation Mahadev, not due to a strategic pause initiated by India, but because of a ceasefire — one reportedly brokered by the United States.
This shift in the tempo of military actions highlights something deeper: India's discomfort in navigating a region where it is no longer the sole power broker. And that discomfort has only grown more visible as India struggles to balance its internal political narrative with external strategic realities.
In the ongoing Monsoon Session of Parliament, the Pahalgam attack and India's retaliatory actions have sparked heated debate. Home Minister Amit Shah claimed those killed in Operation Mahadev were carrying Pakistani voter IDs and — oddly enough — Pakistani chocolates, as supposed proof of foreign involvement.
But across the aisle, former Home Minister P Chidambaram cautioned against drawing premature conclusions. He pointed out that no independent investigation had yet established Pakistan's direct role in the Pahalgam attack. His remarks echoed concerns of many analysts who questioned whether India had once again rushed into a military response without solid ground.
Rahul Gandhi added fuel to the fire, claiming that Indian pilots were given strict instructions not to engage Pakistan's defence systems, and that Islamabad had prior knowledge of the strike's limits. Whether these claims are fully accurate or politically motivated, they raised doubts over the true intent and efficacy of Operation Sindoor — was it a military response or a public performance?
The four-day standoff between May 7 and May 11 brought South Asia to the brink. India claimed to have struck nine terror sites and disrupted eleven Pakistani air bases. Pakistan responded with Operation Bunyan-ul-Marsoos, claiming it had downed six Indian jets, including Rafales, and intercepted several drones.
Then came a sudden ceasefire — not the result of bilateral talks, but reportedly due to US intervention. Former President Donald Trump didn't hesitate to take credit, claiming it was his diplomatic pressure that ended the hostilities. He even endorsed Pakistan's claim of shooting down Indian jets. Strikingly, New Delhi offered no rebuttal, no clarification, not even a token denial.
That silence was more than a diplomatic gesture. It suggested an unease within India about how to handle its diminishing ability to control the narrative - both at home and abroad.
India has long projected itself as South Asia's natural leader — economically, militarily and diplomatically. But in this episode, the heavy lifting to halt escalation came not from New Delhi, but from Washington. That exposed a growing dependency on Western partners to manage regional crises, calling into question India's cherished notion of "strategic autonomy."
The broader message from this episode is that South Asia is no longer India's undisputed sphere of influence. The region has entered a new phase, where external actors like the US — and increasingly, China — shape events with more agility than India does.
China, while officially silent during this latest crisis, remains a critical player. Its growing ties with Pakistan, military infrastructure in disputed regions and deep economic engagement with South Asian countries make it a strategic counterweight to India. While New Delhi focuses on containing Pakistan, Beijing continues to expand its footprint — not just in military terms, but also through economic corridors, port access and diplomatic alliances. India's strategic myopia risks ceding more ground to China than it can afford.
India stands at a crossroads. Its aspiration to lead South Asia is real — and achievable. But that requires shifting from theatrics to transparency, from overstatement to credibility. Here's what New Delhi should consider moving forward:
If military operations are to gain public and global support, India must present transparent, independently verifiable proof. That includes forensic intelligence, clear identification of targets and post-operation disclosures. The age of unquestioned nationalistic fervour is waning — citizens and allies alike demand facts.
India needs to redefine what autonomy means in a multipolar world. Relying on US intervention, while convenient, cannot be the default. Strategic autonomy doesn't mean going solo; it means building coalitions that share your long-term vision. That includes mending ties with neighbours rather than attempting to dominate them.
India's greatest challenge today is not Pakistan. It is in managing its own ambitions in a region that is no longer playing by the old rules. Operations like Sindoor and Mahadev may offer political capital in the short run, but true leadership will come only when India chooses clarity over confusion, and substance over showmanship.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
44 minutes ago
- Express Tribune
TTP and abettors
Listen to article The fragile ceasefire between India and Pakistan following May's military clashes has created a situation ripe for exploitation by terrorists. Increased focus on the eastern border means fewer resources are available for the western border and counterterrorism operations in Balochistan, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and elsewhere. This is evidenced by recent attacks, including those by Baloch nationalist terrorist groups and the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). In the case of TTP, the situation is also exacerbated by the fact that the TTP can act with impunity from Afghanistan. A recent UN report backed up Pakistan's position on the issue, noting that the TTP continues "to receive substantial logistical and operational support" from the Afghan Taliban, and that the terrorist group has "continued access to a range of weapons, enhancing the lethality of attacks". The group's size has also swelled to an estimated 6,000 fighters — more than an average army brigade. Curiously, the report also noted that despite the Afghan Taliban being at war with Daesh in Afghanistan, the TTP and Daesh maintain "tactical-level connections" with Daesh. In a similar vein, despite their completely different motivations, the TTP is reportedly hosting and training Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) terrorists at its camps in southern Afghanistan. This raises the question whether the TTP is still primarily a religious extremist group, or just another anti-Pakistan terrorist group, as Islamabad has recently argued. This would also support Pakistan's argument that Baloch nationalist terrorists and the TTP are all receiving Indian funding. Meanwhile, Daesh is also reportedly using the Indian government's anti-Muslim dog whistles — directed at Pakistan — as a recruitment tool. Given India's propensity to blame Pakistan for any violence against it, rather than New Delhi's own policing or intelligence failures, Daesh or its affiliates could easily spark the fire that leads to war in the subcontinent.
Express Tribune
7 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Imran's sons call on Trump to intervene for father's release
Listen to article The sons of former prime minister Imran Khan have appealed for international attention to what they describe as their father's 'inhumane' incarceration, calling particularly on former US President Donald Trump to use his influence to support his release. In a wide-ranging interview with British journalist Piers Morgan, the two brothers expressed deep concern over the deteriorating health and prison conditions of their father, who has been in custody at Adiala Jail since August 2023. 'We'd urge Pakistan's leaders to respect democracy, respect the will of the Pakistani people — which was clear despite the massive rigging in February's elections — and to give him a fair trial,' said Sulaiman Khan. The brothers, who have largely avoided the spotlight in the past, broke their public silence over their father's imprisonment in May this year. The brothers said they were compelled to speak out due to the desperate circumstances surrounding their father's detention. 'We're quite private people… but it's getting to a stage where we're desperate. We want to do whatever we can,' said Kasim. Sulaiman and Kasim revealed that they have not seen their father in nearly three years, and have not spoken to him for over four months. Read More: Imran being kept in 'poor conditions', says Kasim Khan 'A Pakistani court mandated weekly phone calls, but we would sometimes go two or three months without contact,' said Sulaiman. 'Often, we'd receive a message at 2am saying we would speak to him at 9am. If we missed that, the chance was gone — it rolled on another two months.' The brothers said they had not been allowed a single phone call since their last public interview, suggesting that authorities were using this to 'cause him further distress.' Describing Khan's current conditions in jail, the brothers alleged he was confined to a small cell for 22 hours a day with limited access to books, his legal team, and even his physician. 'He's washing himself with visibly murky, discoloured water. The hygiene levels are abysmal,' said Kasim. 'Ten people have died in that prison due to hepatitis C, which is believed to have spread through unsanitary conditions.' They also alleged that authorities had restricted access to the few books Khan was allowed to read, and said his physical and mental well-being was increasingly at risk. Also Read: Iranian president lands in Pakistan on first official visit 'There have been moments where I've thought: am I going to see him again?' Kasim said quietly. 'This is the longest I've gone without speaking to him. The fear is very real.' The brothers said they had explored the possibility of visiting Pakistan to see their father but were warned by sources within the Pakistani government and their own extended network that they would likely be arrested upon arrival. 'We still applied for visas and haven't received any response yet,' they said, adding that they remained hopeful of travelling to Pakistan when circumstances allowed. Sulaiman and Kasim also called on the international community — particularly US President Donald Trump — to use his influence to support their father's release. Read: Pakistan Army inducts Z-10ME attack helicopters under COAS' supervision 'If anyone can make a difference, it's him,' said Sulaiman. 'Trump and my father had a great relationship when both were in office. They respected each other, and we know he's one of the few people who could get the establishment in Pakistan to act.' They also acknowledged support from US Special Presidential Envoy Richard Grenell, who has publicly advocated for Khan's release on social media. 'We would love to speak to Trump or find some way he could help. At the end of the day, all we want is to free our father, restore democracy in Pakistan, and ensure his basic human rights are respected,' Sulaiman said.
Express Tribune
8 hours ago
- Express Tribune
How Pakistan shot down Indian jets with Chinese tech
Rafale fighter jet taxis on the tarmac during its induction ceremony at an air force station in Ambala, India, September 10, REUTERS Listen to article Just after midnight on May 7, the screen in the Pakistan Air Force's operations room lit up in red with the positions of dozens of active enemy planes across the border in India. Air Chief Mshl. Zaheer Sidhu had been sleeping on a mattress just off that room for days in anticipation of an Indian assault. New Delhi had claimed Islamabad for backing militants who carried out an attack the previous month in Indian Kashmir, which killed 26 civilians. Despite Islamabad denying any involvement, India had vowed a response, which came in the early hours of May 7 with air strikes on Pakistan. Sidhu ordered Pakistan's prized Chinese-made J-10C jets to scramble. A senior Pakistani Air Force (PAF) official, who was present in the operations room, said Sidhu instructed his staff to target Rafales, a French-made fighter that is the jewel of India's fleet and had never been downed in battle. "He wanted Rafales," said the official. The hour-long fight, which took place in darkness, involved some 110 aircraft, experts estimate, making it the world's largest air battle in decades. The J-10s shot down at least one Rafale, Reuters reported in May, citing US officials. However Pakistan downed at least 6 jet aircrafts in the war. Its downing surprised many in the military community and raised questions about the effectiveness of Western military hardware against untested Chinese alternatives. Read More: FO slams India's 'Operation Mahadev' as 'entirely fabricated' Shares of Dassault, which makes the Rafale, dipped after reports the fighter had been shot down. Indonesia, which has outstanding Rafale orders, has said it is now considering purchasing J-10s – a major boost to China's efforts to sell the aircraft overseas. But Reuters interviews with two Indian officials and three of their Pakistani counterparts found that the performance of the Rafale wasn't the key problem: Central to its downing was an Indian intelligence failure concerning the range of the China-made PL-15 missile fired by the J-10 fighter. China and Pakistan are the only countries to operate both J-10s, known as Vigorous Dragons, and PL-15s. The faulty intelligence gave the Rafale pilots a false sense of confidence they were out of Pakistani firing distance, which they believed was only around 150 km, the Indian officials said, referring to the widely cited range of PL-15's export variant. "We ambushed them," the PAF official said, adding that Islamabad conducted an electronic warfare assault on Delhi's systems in an attempt to confuse Indian pilots. Indian officials dispute the effectiveness of those efforts. "The Indians were not expecting to be shot at," said Justin Bronk, air warfare expert at London's Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think-tank. "And the PL-15 is clearly very capable at long range." A Chinese Chengdu J-10 fighter aircraft performs a flight during the Aviadarts competition, as part of the International Army Games 2021, at the Dubrovichi range outside Ryazan, Russia, August 27, REUTERS The PL-15 that hit the Rafale was fired from around 200km (124.27 mi) away, according to Pakistani officials, and even farther according to Indian officials. That would make it among the longest-range air-to-air strikes recorded. India's defense and foreign ministries did not return requests for comment about the intelligence mistakes. Delhi hasn't acknowledged a Rafale being shot down, but France's air chief told reporters in June that he had seen evidence of the loss of that fighter and two other aircraft flown by India, including a Russian-made Sukhoi. A top Dassault executive also told French lawmakers that month that India had lost a Rafale in operations, though he didn't have specific details. Pakistan's military referred to past comments by a spokesperson who said that its professional preparedness and resolve was more important than the weaponry it had deployed. China's defense ministry did not respond to Reuters' questions. Dassault and UAC, the manufacturer of the Sukhoi, also did not return requests for comment. "Situational awareness" Reuters spoke to eight Pakistani and two Indian officials to piece together an account of the aerial battle, which marked the start of four days of fighting between the two nuclear-armed neighbors that caused alarm in Washington. The officials all spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss national security matters. Not only did Islamabad have the element of surprise with its missiles' range, the Pakistani and Indian officials said, but it managed to more efficiently connect its military hardware to surveillance on the ground and in the air, providing it with a clearer picture of the battlefield. Such networks, known as "kill chains," have become a crucial element of modern warfare. Four Pakistani officials said they created a "kill chain," or a multi-domain operation, by linking air, land and space sensors. The network included a Pakistani-developed system, Data Link 17, which connected Chinese military hardware with other equipment, including a Swedish-made surveillance plane, two Pakistani officials said. The system allowed the J-10s flying closer to India to obtain radar feeds from the surveillance plane cruising further away, meaning the Chinese-made fighters could turn their radars off and fly undetected, according to experts. Pakistan's military did not respond to requests for comment on this point. Delhi is trying to set up a similar network, the Indian officials said, adding that their process was more complicated because the country sourced aircraft from a wide range of exporters. Retired UK Air Mshl. Greg Bagwell, now a fellow at RUSI, said the episode didn't conclusively prove the superiority of either Chinese or Western air assets but it showed the importance of having the right information and using it. 'The winner in this was the side that had the best situational awareness,' said Bagwell. Change in the tactics After India in the early hours of May 7 struck targets in Pakistan that it claimed terrorist infrastructure, Sidhu ordered his squadrons to switch from defense to attack. Also Read: India's rhetoric fueling instability: FO Five PAF officials said India had deployed some 70 planes, which was more than they had expected and provided Islamabad's PL-15s with a target-rich environment. India has not said how many planes were used. The May 7 battle marked the first big air contest of the modern era in which weaponry is used to strike targets beyond visual range, said Bagwell, noting both India and Pakistan's planes remained well within their airspaces across the duration of the fight. Five Pakistani officials said an electronic assault on Indian sensors and communications systems reduced the situational awareness of the Rafale's pilots. The two Indian officials said the Rafales were not blinded during the skirmishes and that Indian satellites were not jammed. But they acknowledged that Pakistan appeared to have disrupted the Sukhoi, whose systems Delhi is now upgrading. Other Indian security officials have deflected questions away from the Rafale, a centerpiece of India's military modernization, to the orders given to the air force. India's defense attaché in Jakarta told a university seminar that Delhi had lost some aircraft "only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack (Pakistan's) military establishments and their air defenses." India's chief of defense staff Gen. Anil Chauhan previously told Reuters that Delhi quickly "rectified tactics" after the initial losses. After the May 7 air battle, India began targeting Pakistani military infrastructure and asserting its strength in the skies. Its Indian-made BrahMos supersonic cruise missile repeatedly sliced through Pakistan's air defenses, according to officials on both sides. On May 10, India claimed it struck at least nine air bases and radar sites in Pakistan. It also hit a surveillance plane parked in a hangar in southern Pakistan, according to Indian and Pakistani officials. A ceasefire was agreed later that day, after US officials held talks with both sides. 'Live inputs' In the aftermath of the episode, India's deputy army chief Lt. Gen. Rahul Singh accused Pakistan of receiving 'live inputs' from China during the battles, implying radar and satellite feeds. He did not provide evidence and Islamabad denies the allegation. When asked at a July briefing about Beijing's military partnership with Pakistan, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters the work was "part of the normal cooperation between the two countries and does not target any third party." Beijing's air chief Lt. Gen. Wang Gang visited Pakistan in July to discuss how Islamabad had used Chinese equipment to put together the "kill chain' for the Rafale, two PAF officials said. China did not respond when asked about that interaction. The Pakistani military said in a statement in July that Wang had expressed "keen interest in learning from PAF's battle-proven experience in Multi Domain Operations."
