Latest news with #Chellaney
Time of India
7 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
India won the war against Pakistan but lost the narrative: Brahma Chellaney
Airstrikes hit targets, avoided escalation India moved too slowly on global messaging Live Events US took credit, India delayed rebuttal Symbolism failed to translate into diplomacy Diplomatic outreach after the fact Warning from the past (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel India may have achieved a tactical victory during the recent four-day conflict with Pakistan, but it missed the chance to control the international narrative, said geostrategist Brahma Chellaney in an interaction with India Today. The military operation, launched in response to a terror attack in Pahalgam , dealt a heavy blow to Pakistan's air defence infrastructure without leading to a full-scale war. However, India's slow diplomatic response weakened its strategic position globally, Chellaney launched Operation Sindoor in the early hours of May 7, targeting nine terror camps in Pakistan. The operation was in retaliation to the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam. According to Chellaney, the Indian Air Force conducted precise strikes on key Pakistani airbases, including Nur Khan and Bholari, exposing weaknesses in Chinese-supplied defence response, Pakistan attempted to strike Indian military sites on May 8, 9, and 10. India retaliated by hitting several key Pakistani military assets such as radar sites, air defence systems, and command the evening of May 10, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said both countries agreed to an immediate halt to all military actions across land, air, and military success, Chellaney criticised India for failing to shape the international conversation. "India's sluggish response time [in setting the global narrative] has cost it diplomatic capital," he explained, "India won the battle but lost the narrative. Indian strikes achieved the objective of imposing costs without triggering an all-out war. But India failed to translate its short-term victory into achieving the larger goal of advancing the overall struggle against a rogue neighbour that exports terrorism."Chellaney said India took two days to counter US President Donald Trump's claim that he brokered the ceasefire. "By then, the world had come to believe that the US mediated an end to hostilities," he said. "To shape international opinion, we must act swiftly with timely statements and rebuttals to counter disinformation."He added, "In keeping with India's bureaucratic culture, India often responds too slowly, allowing others to define the narrative first."Chellaney highlighted the symbolism used in Operation Sindoor, where Indian women avenged the death of 26 soldiers. But he said it lacked follow-up in terms of global outreach. "The irony is this, India framed Operation Sindoor in powerful symbolism as Indian women avenging the murder of 26 husbands. But that powerful symbolism was not backed up by a proactive public diplomacy campaign."He said India is now trying to recover ground through diplomatic efforts but noted that much of the global perception has already formed. "What can delegations of MPs do now?" he seven all-party delegations led by Shashi Tharoor (Congress), Ravi Shankar Prasad (BJP), Sanjay Kumar Jha (JDU), Baijayant Panda (BJP), Kanimozhi (DMK), Supriya Sule (NCP), and Shrikant Shinde (Shiv Sena) are visiting several countries. Their objective is to explain the background and objectives of Operation Sindoor and counter Pakistan's narrative on expressed concern over India repeating past mistakes. "The military movement was in India's favour. Pakistan's air defences proved to be much weaker than Pakistan had expected. They were sending so many drones and missiles into India but not effectively. India, on the other hand, sent a limited number of missiles and drones and was able to hit its targets."He earlier remarked that India had "snatched defeat from the jaws of victory" following the ceasefire understanding announced on May 10.
India Today
28-05-2025
- Politics
- India Today
India won Op Sindoor fight but slow to set global narrative: Analyst Brahma Chellaney
India may have emerged militarily superior in the recent four-day conflict with Pakistan, but it moved too slowly when it came to setting the all-important international narrative, noted geostrategist Brahma Chellaney airstrikes achieved their objective of crippling major Pakistani airbases without provoking an all-out war, Chellaney analysed, while warning that a failure to shape global perception could undermine India's long-term strategic goals. "India's sluggish response time [in setting the global narrative] has cost it diplomatic capital," Chellaney me be frank. India won the battle but lost the narrative. Indian strikes achieved the objective of imposing costs without triggering an all-out war. But India failed to translate its short-term victory into achieving the larger goal of advancing the overall struggle against a rogue neighbour that exports terrorism," he told India Today TV. According to Chellaney, India's airstrikes on key Pakistani airbases like Nur Khan and Bholari not only avoided confirmed retaliation but also exposed the vulnerabilities of the Chinese weapons platforms used by Pakistan. Despite this, he said, "Losing the international narrative holds significance. It signifies failing to influence broader international perception and understanding of the core issue - Pakistan's cross-border terrorism."India launched Operation Sindoor with precision strikes on nine terror camps in the early hours of May 7, retaliating to the April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, killing 100 terrorists. In the days that followed - May 8, 9 and 10 - Pakistan attempted strikes on Indian military installations. India, however, hit back hard, delivering substantial damage to several critical Pakistani military assets, including airbases, radar sites, air defence systems and command the evening of May 10, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri announced that both countries had agreed to an immediate halt to all military actions, across land, air and points to two major reasons for India's faltering on the global front. He said that successive Indian governments have focused too narrowly on shaping domestic opinion while "ceding the international narrative by default".He added, "Operation Sindoor is merely the latest example. Sending delegations of MPs abroad was the equivalent of seeking to close the stable door after the horse had bolted.""India's sluggish response time has cost it diplomatic capital. In keeping with India's bureaucratic culture, India often responds too slowly, allowing others to define the narrative first," he cited specific missteps, including a delayed response to US President Donald Trump's boast that he brokered the ceasefire. "India took two full days to respond. By then, the world had come to believe that the US mediated an end to hostilities," he said. "To shape international opinion, we must act swiftly with timely statements and rebuttals to counter disinformation."In a particularly sharp critique, Chellaney said, "The irony is this, India framed Operation Sindoor in powerful symbolism as Indian women avenging the murder of 26 husbands. But that powerful symbolism was not backed up by a proactive public diplomacy campaign."advertisementThe veteran expert believes that India is now scrambling to repair the damage through diplomatic offensives but that the international narrative has already hardened. "What can delegations of MPs do now?" he seven all-party delegations led by Shashi Tharoor (Congress), Ravi Shankar Prasad (BJP), Sanjay Kumar Jha (JDU), Baijayant Panda (BJP), Kanimozhi (DMK), Supriya Sule (NCP) and Shrikant Shinde (Shiv Sena) are in several countries to brief the governments on Operation Sindoor and India's fight against Pakistan-sponsored Chellaney said India "snatched defeat from the jaws of victory," while reacting to the unexpected ceasefire understanding announced between India and Pakistan on May 10. Voicing disappointment over the development, the veteran expert said India failed to learn from history and is merely repeating past strategic mistakes."The military movement was in India's favour. Pakistan's air defences proved to be much weaker than Pakistan had expected. They were sending so many drones and missiles into India but not effectively. India, on the other hand, sent a limited number of missiles and drones and was able to hit its targets," Chellaney told India Today Watch IN THIS STORY#India-Pakistan#Operation Sindoor#Jammu and Kashmir
India Today
10-05-2025
- Politics
- India Today
India snatched defeat from jaws of victory: Top geostrategist on ceasefire with Pak
India "snatched defeat from the jaws of victory," said noted geostrategist Brahma Chellaney, reacting to the unexpected ceasefire announced between India and Pakistan on Saturday. Just hours earlier, fears of a full-blown war loomed large as Pakistani troops moved closer to the border and India remained on high alert. But by evening, a surprising calm had set voicing disappointment over the development, said India has failed to learn from history and is merely repeating past strategic military movement was in India's favour. Pakistan's air defences proved to be much weaker than Pak had expected could see that from the rival drones. They were sending so many drones and missiles into India but not effectively. India, on the other hand, sent a limited number of missiles and drones and was able to hit its targets," Chellaney said. He questioned the rationale behind India's decision to de-escalate despite holding a clear upper hand militarily."It underlines India's long political position of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory," he said, wondering why India decided to de-escalate. "Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory has become a repeating pattern. That is why India continues to repeat history. We never learn from history. So, history repeats itself," he compared the current situation to past instances where, in his view, India surrendered military or diplomatic leverage without gaining lasting strategic benefit."In 1972, we gave away our war gains onto the negotiating tables without securing anything in return from Pakistan. 2021, we vacated the strategic Kailash heights, forfeiting our only bargaining chip in negotiations, and then we agreed to Chinese-designed buffer zones in Ladakh areas and now Operation Sindoor," Chellaney said."Operating Sindoor had such a powerful symbolism of India's women avenging the murders of 26 husbands and yet today the way we ended this operation after Pakistan even fired a missile at Delhi leaves many questions unanswered," he said.'History will not look kindly upon India's decision today,' Chellaney added, calling the conclusion of Operation Sindoor a strategic and symbolic misstep that raises more questions than remarks come after India and Pakistan announced that they have agreed to a ceasefire after two days of strikes and counterstrikes. Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said Pakistan reached out to India, and the two countries negotiated directly and agreed to a ceasefire, the government said on Saturday, confirming the surprise truce after days of military escalation and heightened tensions between the Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) of Pakistan called the DGMO of India at 15.30 hours (3.30 pm) this afternoon. It was agreed between them that both sides would cease all firing and military action on land, in the air, and at sea with effect from 1700 hours (5 pm)," he announcement of the ceasefire came as a big surprise as it was only this morning that the Foreign Secretary, in a briefing, said that Pakistan was moving its troops to border areas and the Indian Armed Forces were on alert. The statement sparked fears of a further escalation from Pakistan's side, whose Defence Minister repeatedly made statements in the media confirming that a war was knocking on the doors.
The Guardian
25-04-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
The domestic pressures shaping India's response to Kashmir attacks
India's furious response to the terrorist massacre of 26 men in a popular travel destination is being shaped by public rage at the deadliest civilian attack in Kashmir in a quarter-century. The brutality of the assault in one of Muslim-majority Kashmir's marquee tourist spots – and its national resonance – leaves Prime Minister Narendra Modi needing to signal strength, but without triggering uncontrolled escalation between nuclear-armed India and Pakistan, analysts say. 'The outpouring of anger has been widespread,' said Brahma Chellaney, a veteran Indian commentator. 'The victims came from all over India, from at least 15 different states. Modi is trying to assuage national anger, which has been intense.' The attackers reportedly made their victims reveal their religion by reciting the Kalma, the Islamic declaration of faith. Those who could not do so were shot dead. The brazen assault in a tranquil meadow in Pahalgam, where families were picnicking, shattered Kashmir's relative calm and struck at the heart of its tourist revival. In 2019, Modi's Hindu-nationalist government revoked Kashmir's semi-autonomous status and split the territory into two federally ruled zones. The government also allowed non-locals to buy land. An ensuing security clampdown reduced terrorist activity, and tourism surged: a record 3.5 million people visited the Kashmir Valley in 2024. Modi framed Kashmir's 'normalisation' as a political triumph, though simmering local discontent remained amid heavy militarisation. Chellaney said: 'This kind of massacre is deeply embarrassing for any government, and doubly so for the Modi government, which projects itself as strong on national security.' The government must now weigh a response that balances domestic fury with strategic restraint. India and Pakistan have fought three wars – two over Kashmir – and have repeatedly come close to the brink. Underscoring the danger, Pakistan's defence minister, Khawaja Asif, said on Friday there was risk of 'all-out war' if India opted for a forceful military response. Chellaney said: 'Modi has made strong statements in the past. But he's a man who is reluctant to do kinetic action. He might hold back again, seeking instead to ease public anger through actions that stop short of full-scale military retaliation.' Michael Kugelman, a Washington-based analyst, said that while there was 'much anger and tough rhetoric', the government's 'actual response is likely to be careful and deliberate'. He said the government would 'want to ensure any such action is well-planned and effective'. The memory of the 2019 Pulwama attack, in which 40 Indian paramilitary personnel were killed in a suicide bombing claimed by Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed, looms large. The episode led to India launching the Balakot airstrikes deep inside Pakistan – its first such incursion since the 1971 war. While hailed domestically as a bold move, critics disputed the effectiveness of the strikes. Veteran analyst C Raja Mohan wrote in the Indian Express: 'There are many imponderables Modi must deal with, including the significant capabilities of the Pakistan army. But given the horrific nature of the attack and the outrage that has convulsed the nation… the PM may have no option but to explore some major risks.' India believes an obscure group calling itself the Resistance Front, which claimed responsibility for the attack, is an offshoot of the Pakistan-based Islamist group Lashkar-e-Taiba, which was behind the deadly 2008 Mumbai attacks. Pakistan denies any involvement, but India insists it has 'clear evidence of cross-border complicity' and has named two of the terrorists as Pakistani nationals. Modi has vowed to 'pursue the attackers and their handlers to the ends of the Earth' and 'reduce to dust whatever little land these terrorists have'. Kugelman said: 'It's crucial to separate rhetoric from intent in this emotionally charged moment.' Chellaney concurs, noting that 'Modi may have a reputation for strength, but in actual practice over 11 years, he has been averse to utilising the military for any cross-border mission'. That reluctance, however, is now being tested – not just by a shaken domestic audience and anger on social media, but by unusually vocal public grief in the Kashmir Valley itself. 'There have been candlelit processions. It really is unprecedented – the anger in Kashmir,' Chellaney said. Kashmiris have flooded into the streets, waving placards saying: 'United in Grief.' Kugelman, meanwhile, says that India's symbolic moves carry weight. India has suspended the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty – a rare symbol of bilateral cooperation that had survived previous wars. Pakistan retaliated by suspending the 1972 Simla Agreement, the basis for border management and dispute resolution. That may not be enough to assuage Indian public revulsion at the attack. 'The global landscape – from Gaza to Ukraine – has made previously sacrosanct territorial arrangements seem less permanent. That context may yet embolden a tougher line from Delhi, but for now, Modi is walking a tightrope between nationalist expectations and strategic prudence,' Mohan said.
