Latest news with #A.K.Bharti
The Wire
4 days ago
- Politics
- The Wire
The French Are Anxious to Know the Fate of Rafales in Operation Sindoor Combat
IAF fighter aircraft Rafale flies past during the 13th edition of Aero India, in Bengaluru. Photo: PTI/File New Delhi: For the first time, France's armed forces ministry has said it is in contact with the Indian government to 'better understand' the circumstances surrounding French-origin aircraft during the recent hostilities between India and Pakistan. At a press conference in Paris on Tuesday, a spokesperson for the French defence ministry said the situation remained unclear and that Paris was attempting to make sense of conflicting accounts. 'Regarding the conflict taking place between India and Pakistan, what I mainly observe is that we are in the fog of war and that there is an intense information war. In other words, what we know most of all today is that we don't know what happened. So indeed, there are a number of allegations that I will not repeat, since there is no confirmed information,' the spokesperson said. France is understood to be particularly concerned about reports suggesting that Rafale aircrafts, supplied by Dassault Aviation and widely considered the backbone of India's combat air fleet, may have been lost in action during Operation Sindoor. 'The issue of the Rafale is, of course, of primary importance to us. We are naturally keen to understand what happened, and so we are trying to stay as close as possible to our Indian partner to better understand the situation,' the spokesperson added. 'Obviously, the most significant feedback will come from this use in high-intensity combat, which apparently, according to some reports, involved several hundred aircraft. So, of course, we are following these events as closely as possible,' the spokesperson said. Noting that the Rafale had seen two decades of active service across various theatres of war, the official said any confirmation of a combat loss would mark a first in the aircraft's operational history. 'What we can especially note today is that the Rafale has seen 20 years of operational use – 20 years of combat deployment – and that if it turns out there was indeed a loss, it would be the first combat loss of this warplane.' The Indian government has not commented on international media reports suggesting that an Indian aircraft may have been shot down or crashed during the strikes carried out on the night of May 6-7, when Indian forces targeted nine suspected terror bases in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Official statements have only acknowledged that losses are an inevitable part of warfare. At a media briefing on May 8, foreign secretary Vikram Misri said that official information will be shared when the time is right. On May 11, a day after fighting ended between India and Pakistan, Director General of Air Operations Air Marshal A.K. Bharti responded to a question about possible losses by stating, 'We are in a combat scenario and losses are a part of it. The question is, have we achieved our objective? The answer is a thumping yes. As for details, at this time I would not like to comment on that as we are still in combat and (do not want to) give advantage to (the) adversary. All our pilots are back home'.
Scoop
22-05-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Pakistan & China Down 6 Indian Warplanes
The loudest cheers of victory in the brief India-Pakistan war are congratulating the Pakistani pilots who flew Chinese-built jets firing impressive PL-15 missiles, purportedly enabling them to shoot down six of India's French and Russian warplanes. China is sharing Pakistan's military success. Since the mid-20th century China has been arming, investing in, and helping to construct Pakistan which is a crucial nation in Beijing's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and a non-NATO ally of the U.S. Pakistan is China's only overland access to the Arabian Sea which opens onto the Indian Ocean and the Middle East's vital petroleum shipping lanes. "The confirmed kill of a sixth Indian Air Force jet, a Mirage 2000 near Pampore on the night of May 6-7, once again demonstrates the superior combat performance of the Pakistan Air Force and the unwavering resolve of our armed forces to defend the motherland at any cost,' Pakistani Prime Minister Sharif said on May 16 while visiting a PAF base. Pakistan claimed the six downed Indian aircraft included three Rafales armed with European-built air-to-air Meteor missiles, a French Mirage 2000 jet, one Russian-supplied SU-30MKI, and one Russian MiG-29, plus a "loitering" Israeli-supplied Heron surveillance drone and dozens of "killer drones" built by Israel. India avoided releasing details about the toll on its planes. "When questioned on the status of the three downed Rafales, IAF [Indian Air Force] senior commander Air Marshal A.K. Bharti deflected with, 'We are in a wartime scenario, losses are part of the battle' -- a remark seen by many analysts as an implicit confirmation," Malaysia-based Defense Security Asia reported. "To regional military observers, the vagueness of Bharti's response only reinforces the credibility of Pakistan's narrative surrounding the shootdowns," it said. Meanwhile the PAF satirized "India's nine billion dollar dream!" as New Delhi's waste of money after recent military purchases. Mocking India's international embarrassment and purported losses, the PAF posted online a "PAF mess breakfast these days" which showed a photograph of the cantonment restaurant's new handwritten "Air Defense Officers Mess" menu. The PAF's two-course meal featured only French toast and Russian salad. Pakistan's U.S.-built F-16s and other aircraft supported the Chinese JF-17s and J-10s against India, Pakistan's Air Vice Marshal Aurangzeb Ahmed said. Pakistan's Army Chief Asim Munir, describing Kashmir, vowed in April: "Our stance is very clear, it was our jugular vein, it will be our jugular vein." Compared to the growing military entwining of Beijing and Islamabad, the U.S. and Pakistan have had much more extensive defense and security links for decades. Those military links include mutual support during Washington's failed 20-year-long war in Afghanistan, and its earlier disastrously counter-productive support for Afghanistan's hardline Islamist "holy warrior" mujahideen during the Soviet Union's 10-year occupation. Pakistan's secretive relations with Afghanistan's Taliban along their disputed British colonial-imposed Durand Line border, soured dialogue with the U.S. over the years. Islamabad's battle in the sky against New Delhi however appears to have attracted fresh U.S. support. "When India hit back with precision and restraint, it wasn't Pakistan that reversed the tide of battle. It was Washington," wrote New Delhi-based opinion columnist Brahma Chellaney on The Hill's op-ed page. "The Trump administration stepped in at a pivotal moment, using coercive leverage to compel India to cease its operation prematurely. "In doing so, Trump not only spared Pakistan the consequences of its actions, but also damaged the foundation of U.S.-India strategic trust," Mr. Chellaney said. 'Pakistan was never a technical ally of the United States. I mean there was no treaty of alliance with Pakistan," White House National Security Spokesperson John Kirby said in January. Pakistan's non-NATO ally status includes priority military partnership but unlike NATO or Five Eyes, the U.S. and Pakistan are not committed to defending each other or sharing intelligence. Pakistan's robust retaliation against India's bombardments during their four-day battle surprised many after Islamist insurgents killed 26 Indian civilians on April 22 in Pahalgam, a playful, idyllic, forested Himalayan tourist town in Indian-controlled Kashmir state. Pakistan denied supporting the Islamists' slaughter of civilians. Both sides claimed dozens of civilians perished in the ensuing battles. India said it vaporized Islamist fighters and their secretive gathering sites inside Pakistan. Various Muslim rebel groups -- some based in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan and others inside India's Muslim-majority Kashmir -- want either autonomy for Indian-held Kashmir, reunification with Pakistani-held Kashmir, or independence for a united Kashmir. Despite being unable or unwilling to provide evidence that Islambad arranged the killings, Hindu-majority India unleashed its military assault against Pakistan. India later issued some tough rhetoric after a ceasefire took hold. "India will only engage with Pakistan on two issues, terrorism and the return of Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir, ruling out any possibility of normal diplomatic dialogue," announced Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, an aggressive, authoritarian Hindu nationalist. China's role in bloodying India's Air Force during their attacks dates back to 2022 when Pakistan's Air Force received its first six J-10 fighter jets, built by Chengdu Aircraft Corp., and dubbed them "dragons from the East." Wang Yanan, editor-in-chief of China-based Aerospace Knowledge magazine said at the time: "The J-10CE is an export variant of the J-10C, one of the best light-duty, multirole combat planes in the world, and also one of the [Chinese] People's Liberation Army Air Force's most powerful pieces of hardware. "The plane is able to fire missiles from beyond visual range. Together with its long flight range, the jet will substantially extend the PAF's [Pakistan Air Force's] operational radius, and give it more time to handle suspected intrusions. "Moreover, the J-10CE can carry out precision strikes against land targets, offering its user more options when planning military operations," Mr. Wang said. After a tenuous ceasefire began with India, the air-to-air PL-15 missiles' performance and the Pakistani pilots' maneuverability gained China international publicity and heightened perceptions of Chinese ingenuity and military prowess. "The PL-15 is a big problem. It is something that the U.S. military pays a lot of attention to," a defense industry executive told Reuters. "The United States is developing the AIM-260 Joint Advanced Tactical Missile via Lockheed Martin partly in response to the PL-15 and its beyond-visual-range performance -- part of a broader reset of Western priorities toward China," Reuters reported. Increased Chinese weapons sales to Islamabad and other envious capitals may soon result. "In its first battlefield test against Western arms, Chinese weapons mostly hit the mark, sparking interest in some military circles and alarm in some capitals," France 24 reported. China sells its biggest proportion of weapons to Pakistan, according to Sweden's Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. In turn, Islamabad buys most of its weapons from Beijing. Other top arms dealers to Pakistan include Turkey, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Ukraine. International weapons industry chatter expects China's J-10CE jetfighter will attract Egyptian, Iranian, and Saudi buyers now that the aircraft has been proven in battle. China had been selling less quality jet fighters mostly to impoverished Bangladesh, Zambia, Sudan, and North Korea. A China-friendly Pakistan pleases Beijing because it can stack the country's military, intelligence agencies, and public against their joint former wartime enemy -- India. All three nations have nuclear weapons. "Tremendous amounts of diplomatic efforts, including by China, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, helped broker the truce," government-controlled China Daily reported. "Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi had telephone conversations respectively with Indian National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, and Pakistani Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar on May 10." "Given the important role China plays in the region, particularly its close relations with Pakistan -- which quickly gained the upper hand in the conflict after India's first wave of attacks -- it is fair to say Beijing played a key role in helping to calm the situation," China Daily reported. Elsewhere in Pakistan, Chinese BRI personnel are being killed by a separate force, on the ground, comprised of minority ethnic Baloch and Islamist guerrillas who Gen. Munir is unable to contain. A smoldering insurgency for independence led by a Balochistan Liberation Army launches hit-and-run assaults against Chinese engineers and other personnel in Balochistan province's rugged, stony desert which borders southeast Iran and southeast Afghanistan. Resource-rich but undeveloped, Balochistan is Pakistan's biggest province, comprising about 45 percent of the country including Quetta, its provincial capital. Almost 100 Chinese personnel sent to Pakistan to work in Balochistan and elsewhere on $70 billion BRI projects have been killed by insurgents during the past several years, amid complaints that China is muscling in on the province to profit from, and exploit, locals. Further north near the legendary Khyber Pass, the Islamist insurgents Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan and Islamic State Khorasan have also been blamed for anti-Chinese assaults. The BRI project is creating a China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) by upgrading infrastructure along a 1,800-mile (3,000-km) route linking southwest China with Balochistan's hammerhead-shaped peninsula and port of Gwadar on the Arabian Sea, close to the Persian Gulf. When Marco Polo traveled from Venice to Beijing in the 13th Century, he journeyed via a Silk Road. Supporters hail the CPEC as "a new Silk Road" reinvigorating various ancient Silk Roads which interconnected overland trade routes including links from Kashgar, China's southwest city in Xinjiang province, to the Arabian Sea on Pakistan's south coast. The corridor would enable goods to be transported to and from China on a streamlined Gwadar-Kashgar highway, connecting onward to all other Chinese cities. Chinese engineers are also enlarging Gwadar's deep-water port, operated by the China Overseas Port Holding Co., to handle Chinese ships transporting petroleum from the Persian Gulf to China. That Arabian Sea route would be much shorter than current shipping lanes which depart the Middle East and route south around India, and then through the Malacca Strait which is monitored by U.S.-backed Singapore. Chinese ships then head north via the disputed waters of the South China Sea to reach China's ports. Gwadar and CPEC would cut those lengthy sea routes, bypass the Malacca Strait, and enable unloading of cargo at Gwadar for overland vehicle transport north to Xinjiang. Gwadar also benefits from its close proximity to Karachi, a major port, capital of Sindh province and Pakistan's financial, industrial, and cultural center with Arabian Sea beaches. The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) sent more than 300 special operations, army aviation, and logistic support troops from its Western Theater Command in November 2024 to a three-week Pakistan-China Joint Exercise on Pakistani territory. Beijing has its reasons to support a friend against New Delhi. China won its brief war against India in 1962, leaving both nations occupying territory claimed by the other. Islamabad and New Delhi however fought four wars after being clumsily split apart by departing British colonialists when Pakistan and India gained independence in 1947. Neither side won their 1947-1948 battle over the partition of Kashmir which ended with a United Nations-mandated ceasefire and an internationally recognized Line of Control which forms their current border. Their 1965 war ended in a stalemate after Kashmir again fueled anger on both sides. The then-Soviet Union brokered a Tashkent Agreement which did not change India's hold on two-thirds of eastern Kashmir and Pakistan's control over the remains of western Kashmir. New Delhi defeated Islamabad in a 1971 war which turned then-East Pakistan into independent Bangladesh and truncated the former West Pakistan into the Islamic republic's current size. India beat Pakistan again in their 1999 Kargil war amid Kashmir's steep Himalayan glaciers, forcing Pakistani soldiers and insurgents to retreat from Kashmir. Richard S. Ehrlich is a Bangkok-based American foreign correspondent reporting from Asia since 1978, and winner of Columbia University's Foreign Correspondents' Award. Excerpts from his two new nonfiction books, "Rituals. Killers. Wars. & Sex. -- Tibet, India, Nepal, Laos, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka & New York" and "Apocalyptic Tribes, Smugglers & Freaks" are available at
Economic Times
18-05-2025
- Business
- Economic Times
After Indian missile blitz, Pakistan weighs shifting Army HQ from Chaklala to Islamabad: Reports
Pakistan is weighing a relocation of its Army General Headquarters (GHQ) from Chaklala, Rawalpindi, to Islamabad after Indian precision strikes hit the Nur Khan airbase on May 10. Satellite imagery confirmed structural damage, raising alarms within Pakistan's military. The Nur Khan base—adjacent to GHQ—houses critical air force assets and nuclear command systems. Sources suggest the move is intended to reduce vulnerability, but Indian officials view it as a sign of strategic weakness amid an escalating standoff between the two nuclear neighbours. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Satellite images confirm damage at critical base Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads General Munir moved to bunker, VIP security tightened Strategic shockwaves: More than a tactical strike Indian officials: GHQ move a sign of desperation Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Pakistan is reportedly considering relocating its Army General Headquarters (GHQ) from Chaklala in Rawalpindi to Islamabad. This decision follows Indian Air Force strikes on the Nur Khan airbase on 10 May, which caused visible structural damage. Intelligence sources confirmed the plan and linked it directly to the rising security concerns surrounding the existing GHQ Khan airbase, situated just 10 kilometres from Islamabad, is a strategic military site. It sits beside Pakistan's GHQ and is responsible for housing vital transport aircraft, surveillance systems, and refuelling Indian Air Force precision strikes on Nur Khan Airbase in Pakistan's Rawalpindi on May 10, Pakistan is now considering relocating its Army General Headquarters (GHQ) from Chaklala, Rawalpindi, to Islamabad. Army Chief residence also to be moved accordingly, tweeted OSINT visuals from MIZAZVISION, a Chinese firm, and India's Kawa Space, showed serious damage to the base. Images captured broken fuel trucks, a collapsed warehouse roof, and debris strewn near the main told News18, 'The deep penetration of Indian drones in Rawalpindi came a major shock. To avoid concentrating leadership and assets in one vulnerable location, the army is thinking of shifting Chinese-supplied HQ-9 and LY-80 systems."Air Marshal A.K. Bharti also presented "before and after" imagery during a press briefing, clearly depicting the impact at Nur Khan airfield. The base had been neutralised in a way that, as sources describe, "severed critical links between the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) leadership and its operational units."Following the strikes, reports confirmed that Pakistan Army Chief General Asim Munir was moved to a fortified bunker within GHQ in the early hours of Saturday. This movement came amidst concerns about further Indian strikes. Sources say the potential new location for GHQ could be in Balochistan or Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, areas offering natural defences like mountainous GHQ's current location in Rawalpindi is highly populated and lacks such geographical protection. "The Pakistan army thinks the Indian side has signalled by sending drones near the stadium. This raised alarms about gaps in radar coverage and electronic warfare capabilities. MIZAZVISION and Kawa Space confirmed damage to the infrastructure, including fuel depots and drone hangars," sources Nur Khan base has long been a critical asset for Pakistan. It includes Saab Erieye surveillance planes, IL-78 refuelling aircraft, and C-130 transporters. It also houses PAF College Chaklala and supports drone warfare close proximity to Pakistan's Strategic Plans Division—the body responsible for securing an estimated 170 or more nuclear warheads—adds to the strategic sensitivity. Indian missiles, including BrahMos, HAMMER, and SCALP, struck 11 Pakistani bases in what was reported to be a larger operation than the earlier Operation told News18 that the attack on Nur Khan marked a decisive point in the ongoing confrontation between the two within the Indian government see the possible relocation of Pakistan's military headquarters as a sign of pressure. "Relocating GHQ's command-and-control systems would take years and billions of dollars and is going to be a challenge for a debt-ridden economy," they added, "Drone attacks revealed weaknesses in overlapping radar coverage, especially near the capital. The inability to protect GHQ and Nur Khan undermines Pakistan's narrative of military parity with India."As the conflict evolves, Pakistan's military establishment is now confronting hard questions about its vulnerability and readiness. The GHQ, once seen as a symbol of secure command, now appears now, no final decision has been announced, but the growing calls to move headquarters underline a fundamental shift in Pakistan's defensive calculations. The government remains tight-lipped, even as sources confirm that senior leadership is weighing options with urgency.
The Print
17-05-2025
- Politics
- The Print
Op Sindoor: Inside story of what led Pakistan DGMO to make frantic calls for ‘ceasefire'
'India sent out a clear message that no matter where, India can carry out pinpointed conventional strikes anywhere in Pakistan. Pakistan learnt that if needed, India can launch a barrage of missiles and not just the numbers that were used this time. The messaging was very clear to the Pakistanis,' a source in the Indian defence and security establishment told ThePrint. But what really changed in these 72 hours? New Delhi: Pakistan, which 'brusquely turned down' the request of Indian DGMO Lt Gen Rajiv Ghai on 7 May 'with an intimation that a severe response was inevitable and, in the offing,' was desperately reaching out to him on 10 May to ensure a ceasefire, ThePrint has learnt. ThePrint has also reliably learnt that the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) lost at least a couple of aircraft between 8 and 10 May. Director General of Air Operations Air Marshal A.K. Bharti had publicly said that Pakistani aircraft were hit and technical analysis is being done, following which the armed forces would share more details. Asked if the Indian Air Force (IAF) shot down Pakistani aircraft, he had said 'Their planes were prevented from entering inside our border…definitely, we have downed a few planes…definitely, there are losses on their side which we have inflicted.' He added that the exact numbers are with the IAF, but it is still analysing technical details and will come out with a report soon. The IAF has also said that details of its own losses will be made public in due course. However, all pilots have been accounted for ThePrint is withholding information garnered so far of the onslaught by India and the damage caused to Pakistan since the operation is still ongoing and will wait for IAF to release the details formally. However, even as the IAF finalises its report based on technical and visual evidence, ThePrint has learnt that the strikes were much deeper and wider than what has been claimed by both sides officially. Sources said that India does not want Ops Sindoor to be about claims and counter claims and hence is very careful about the information it is putting out in public. This is directly opposite to the tactics of the Pakistan military which claimed a lot without any evidence. Pakistan even showcased forged satellite images to show damage on the Indian side but got called out by international experts. The IAF, it is learnt, does not wish to state anything which might be questioned due to lack of immediate tangible proof like what happened in the aftermath of the Balakot strikes when doubts were raised on the extent of damage inflicted. For instance, even during the strike on terror camps in Pakistan and PoK on 7 May, India used missiles like the Crystal Maze which relays back video till the second it strikes, as was visible in one of the videos released by the Indian defence ministry. Almost all strikes of 7 May were covered by high-resolution reconnaissance unmanned aerial vehicles and post damage satellite pictures. For all strikes post 7 May, India has claimed only those videos of which were shot by the public and shared on social media, or for which clear satellite pictures are available. There are some more strikes that Pakistan has obviously not claimed and neither has India. Talking about the operations, sources also said that the much talked-about Chinese air-to-air missile PL-15, could not score a single hit. The IAF, on the other hand, used a host of aircraft and air defence systems since 7 May with major setbacks inflicted to PAF from 8 May onwards. The initial part of Operation Sindoor focussed on nine terror camps which were taken out by the IAF and the Army in pinpointed strikes with major casualties inflicted on the terror infrastructure. From 8 May onwards, the strikes focussed on showing real raw power of the IAF to the Pakistani defence establishment, sources said. A plethora of missiles, loitering munitions were used by the IAF to strike back at the Pakistani military. It is learnt that several Chinese-supplied HQ-9B long-range air defence systems and HQ-16 medium-range air defence systems were taken out by Harpy and Harop loitering munitions—in use with the IAF for years even before the word 'drones' caught the fancy of the world in the wake of the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh. The Government of India had formally said last Friday that the Indian military 'bypassed and jammed Pakistan's China-supplied air defence systems', borne by the fact that loitering munitions travelled deep inside Pakistan to strike at places close to what Pakistan Army considers as its fiefdom. Missiles fired by the IAF include the BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles, which Pakistan claims were fired from air (IAF has both air and ground versions), SCALP long-range air-to-ground missiles, Hammer air-to-ground missiles, Rampage air-to-ground missiles and Spice 2000 among others. The Indian medium-range surface-to-air missile system (MRSAM also known as Barak 8) and the indigenous Akash too saw action, and so did the S-400. 'It was a combined shock and awe operation using long-range missiles, air defence missiles, loitering munitions and strikes at specific sites that caused wide range damage to Pakistani military forces that forced them to seek ceasefire on the fourth day itself,' said one source. Maximum damage caused to Pakistan Air Force assets on the ground was by way of missile strikes on its primary logistics hub, the Nur Khan base in Rawalpindi, and the Bholari air base. PAF Air Marshal Masood Akhtar (Retd) on a Pakistani news channel said he had information that a Saab Erieye, an Airborne Early Warning and Control System (AEW&C), was destroyed when India struck the hangar at Bholari. It is reliably learnt that the actual loss may be higher than what Pakistan is showcasing, both officially and unofficially. Pakistan operates 9 Saab Erieye and two IL 78 mid-air refuellers. Incidentally, Pakistan has also put out names of five PAF personnel it said were killed in the strike on Bholari air base. Sources said it was on the morning of 10 December, after India carried out hits on PAF bases in Chaklala, Rafiqui, Rahim Yar Khan, Sargodha, Bhulari, and Jacobabad, that Pakistan's DGMO made frantic calls to his Indian counterpart, wanting a ceasefire. 'On 7 May when our DGMO wanted to talk, they shrugged it off vowing retaliation. On 10 May, they reached out desperately. Clearly shows that the message was overwhelmingly delivered to Pakistan,' a source said. Pakistan PM Shahbaz Sharif, addressing an event Friday, said that 'At around 2.30 am on 10 May, General Syed Asim Munir called me on a secure line and informed me that India's ballistic missiles have hit Nur Khan Airbase and other areas'. Incidentally, it was after that Pakistan was desperately seeking a ceasefire. As Air Marshal Bharti said earlier, 'Did we achieve our military objective? 'A thumping yes.' (Edited by Amrtansh Arora) Also Read: Operation Sindoor is a springboard in India's new confidence in Make in India weapons
The Print
17-05-2025
- Politics
- The Print
Pakistan has a 7-year terror itch. Here's a two-minus-one-front idea to cure it
That higher purpose is to prevent wars. The stronger the nation, the stronger the army it needs. Not to conquer territory or bully others, but to keep out distractions from its sovereign spaces. In one word: deterrence. Is it to fight wars? Only morons and some teenagers with testosterone overload can say that. Self-defence? That's for small nations. A great nation arms itself for a higher purpose. A question then follows: have we achieved deterrence vis-à-vis Pakistan? Pahalgam attack showed starkly that we lacked it. Did we achieve it when time was called after the skirmishes? There is much celebration of revenge, especially on social media, which conducted its own private war with the Pakistanis and where cessation of hostilities is yet to be called. It is understandable if after the Pahalgam outrage, our debate was overtaken by anger. All sides, it seemed, were baying for revenge. Sovereign nations cannot reduce themselves to mere revenge. They need more. Deterrence, we said early on. Add to it a punitive ability. That is also the essence of the 'bhay bin hoye na preet' (nobody loves you until they fear you) line from Ramcharitmanas that Air Marshal A.K. Bharti quoted at the tri-service briefing. Pakistani response to the initial Indian strikes on terror bases showed that deterrence was not yet in place. The punitive power was underlined on the morning of 10 May, with humiliating targeting of the PAF's most vaunted bases, air defences and missile batteries. This was a formidable punitive package. And whatever keyboard warriors and prime time gladiators might say, at top levels, the government messaging wasn't 'revenge' but deterrence: every terror act will henceforth be an act of war, our response will be quick and disproportionate, so cease and desist. Also Read: What is Asim Munir thinking? The facts and history, however, do not convince us that an Indian deterrence against use of terror as state policy has been established. We need to assess what India has achieved by continuously upping the kinetic response level since 2016. Uri, Pulwama-Balakote in 2019 and Pahalgam-Operation Sindoor in 2025. We should, in fact, begin earlier, with the Parliament attack on 13 December, 2001. That was the beginning of the Pakistani Army/ISI proxies, inaptly described as non-state actors, creating warlike crises. India countered it with full military mobilisation. It brought India relative peace till 26/11, 2008. A deterrent with a seven-year use-by date. That India caught Ajmal Amir Kasab alive and produced phone recordings, American citizens were killed and Jews specifically targeted shamed Pakistan and brought global opprobrium. Another eight years of patchy peace. The next round then came with Pathankot and Uri in 2016. The response was surgical strikes. It gave Pakistan the escape route, or what is now called off-ramp, to say that nothing happened. And Pulwama in 2019 drew PAF's response, after the Balakot Jaish-e-Mohammed seminary raid. Yet, the point of visible and undeniable Indian military response was made. But Pakistan also got a POW to flaunt. See the pattern. Pakistan and its proxies are prone to a severe, and predictable seven-year itch. You can check out the dates again. Will this near-war, India's strongest military response so far, buy India another seven years of deterrence? India can do better. Soon enough, the ISI and its proxies will again be here. They dream of a jihad with jets, tanks and 'hopefully' (for them), nukes. It's their fantasy and 'destiny'. A war with India is inevitable, it is 'written', so why not now? Why leave it for when the power gap becomes wider? Two sides of the same coin need looking at: what will they do in these 5-7 years of respite and will we prepare to fight back, or deter? This is how they will see it: strengthen ourselves in critical areas, game India's response when the 'next time' comes. Deny India its planned, predictable response. And how does India respond? We keep upping the risk level, just to buy some more time? It is like constantly running around the same circle, or continuously hopping in and out of the same square one. This is not how an aspiring big power and a bountiful economy plans security for its future generations. It can't leave them prisoners to this same seven-year itch. Also Read: Pakistan ISI is killing Hindus for 45 years. To turn India into a nation at war with itself That's why, after this is over, look generations ahead. Spend more on defence, taking it up to 2.5 percent of your rising GDP in the next three years. This year's 1.9 percent of GDP is even lower, hold your breath, than under Jawaharlal Nehru in the year before the 1962 war. Every 0.10 percent increase will give you another about Rs 35,000 crore to spend today. Invest this additional money in whatever will build critical abilities to punish and deter the next time, without leaving Pakistan any scope to retaliate. Potential to block Malacca Strait can wait. In any case, we must watch whether the Quad outlives Donald Trump. The central point is, we can't always keep ruing our two-front situation and spreading ourselves thin. Focus all fresh, additional spending on just one front for five years. The IAF must get more and even longer range stand-off weapons, fill up its number-plated squadrons. The target has to be to switch more than half its fighter forces into genuine beyond-visual-range (BVR) capability. Swadeshi or imported doesn't matter. India can't wait, because the bad guys won't. If long-range artillery is to be an instrument of punishment, stop buying a hundred pieces at a time like kids at Hamleys. Buy a thousand. When the Pakistanis fire 10 guns across the LOC, you fire 200. The fear of massed, long-range artillery is a frightening deterrent. India can afford it. And it isn't even escalatory, because it will only be in response to the gravest provocation. If you do this right, this one front would cease to matter. That will be one way out of our two-front situation, or triangulation between Pakistan and China. The other option, which our successive prime ministers have been searching for more than 50 years post Simla Accord, of resolving our differences with one of the two adversaries has resulted in frustration of this crippling strategic burden. The Chinese see no reason to make permanent peace with us because Pakistan is their cheap instrument to keep us off balance. Pakistan has increasingly been taken over by 'its written in our destiny' walas. India has to change the game with additional defence spending singularly focused on making the Pakistan 'front' inconsequential. It will also impose a cost on Pakistan if they want to compete. Remember also, that in the India-Pakistan power balance, the only deterrence that's relevant is conventional. By the time we talk nuclear, we are all vapourised anyway. It is unlikely the Americans will give Pakistan anything new. The Chinese and Turks will, but unlike the US, they don't give gifts. Where will Pakistan find that money in a stalled economy with a fast-growing large population? India does not hanker for any Pakistani territory. It just needs to de-triangulate itself. That's the cost India must impose on Pakistan. Not for one year, but for the next 25. Or this will be a perpetual roadblock to Viksit Bharat. A big economy with faith in its future needs defence that isn't just impregnable, but deters at least one of its two adversaries. So far, the Modi government has choreographed this well. Next time, however, a new playbook will be needed. Because, be sure, there will be a next time. The lesson of Operation Sindoor is to promise ourselves that 'that' next time will never come. Also Read: Trick or retreat: There's a grand deception behind Indian military shortfalls, and in this column
