Operation Sindoor: A Comprehensive Review of India’s 2025 Military Strikes

On May 7, 2025, India launched Operation Sindoor, a series of targeted missile strikes against nine sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Described as a response to a deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Indian-administered Kashmir, on April 22, 2025, the operation marked a significant escalation in India-Pakistan tensions. Named with cultural resonance, Operation Sindoor stirred national pride, international debate, and regional instability. This review explores the operation’s background, execution, consequences, and broader geopolitical and strategic implications, offering a critical perspective on its significance.

Background and Context

Operation Sindoor was India’s military retaliation for a terrorist attack in Pahalgam, a picturesque town in Indian-administered Kashmir, where 26 men, including several newlyweds, were killed by The Resistance Front (TRF), an armed group seeking Kashmiri independence. India alleged that TRF was an offshoot of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a claim Pakistan denied, calling for a neutral investigation into the incident. The attack, occurring just two weeks prior, intensified India’s resolve to counter cross-border terrorism, a longstanding issue in the region.

The operation’s name, “Sindoor,” carries deep cultural symbolism in India. Sindoor, the red vermilion powder worn by married Hindu women, was chosen—reportedly by Prime Minister Narendra Modi—to evoke the grief of widows left behind after the Pahalgam attack. The Indian Army’s stylized logo, replacing the “O” in Sindoor with a bowl of vermilion, underscored this emotional narrative, framing the operation as an act of justice for bereaved families. This naming choice distinguished Operation Sindoor from previous Indian operations like Vijay or Devi Shakti, which leaned on themes of victory or divine power, and instead emphasized retribution and national resolve.

The strikes targeted sites allegedly linked to terrorist groups, including Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), LeT, and Hizbul Mujahideen (HuM). The operation’s scope was unprecedented, marking the first time since the 1971 India-Pakistan war that India struck targets in Punjab, Pakistan’s most populous province, alongside locations in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. This escalation raised the stakes, given the nuclear capabilities of both nations and their history of conflict.

Execution of Operation Sindoor

Operation Sindoor was executed with precision, involving missile strikes on nine terrorist facilities across six cities: Ahmedpur Sharqia, Muridke, Sialkot, and Shakar Garh in Punjab, and Muzaffarabad and Kotli in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Indian officials, including Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri, emphasized that the strikes were “focused and precise,” targeting only terrorist infrastructure and avoiding civilian, economic, or military sites. Senior military officers, such as Wing Commander Vyomika Singh and Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, were reportedly instrumental in planning and execution.

India claimed to have destroyed key terrorist hubs, including the JeM headquarters in Ahmedpur Sharqia (Markaz Subhanallah), a LeT base in Kotli (Gulpur and Abbas camps), and a Hizbul Mujahideen facility in Bhimber (Barnala camp). Defence Minister Rajnath Singh reported that the operation killed at least 100 individuals, including “hardcore terrorists,” though specific details on the identities of those killed were not publicly disclosed.

Pakistan, however, presented a starkly different account. Lieutenant Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, director general of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), reported that the strikes killed at least 31 civilians, including women and children, and injured dozens more. He claimed that civilian infrastructure, including mosques (Masjid Subhan in Ahmedpur Sharqia and Masjid Abbas in Kotli) and residential areas, was deliberately targeted. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif described the strikes as an “act of war,” asserting that Pakistan’s air defenses were activated and that five Indian jets were downed, a claim India did not confirm.

The operation’s execution triggered immediate retaliation. On the night of May 6–7, 2025, Pakistan initiated heavy artillery shelling along the Line of Control (LoC) and International Border, targeting areas in Jammu and Kashmir, including Poonch, Rajouri, and Kupwara. This shelling killed at least 12 Indian civilians and one soldier, injuring 51 others, and damaged civilian infrastructure, including a gurdwara in Poonch. Pakistan also attempted drone and missile attacks on 15 Indian cities, including Srinagar, Amritsar, and Bhuj, which India neutralized using its Integrated Counter UAS Grid and air defense systems.

Immediate Consequences

The immediate aftermath of Operation Sindoor was marked by heightened tensions and disruption. In India, airports in border cities like Jammu, Srinagar, and Leh suspended operations, and schools in five border districts were closed due to security concerns. Air India and other carriers issued travel advisories, urging passengers to arrive three hours early for enhanced security checks. In Pakistan, Punjab declared a state of emergency, with hospitals and security forces on high alert and schools shuttered.

Both nations engaged in a war of narratives. India framed Operation Sindoor as a decisive blow against terrorism, with political leaders across party lines, including Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren and Meghalaya Chief Minister Conrad K. Sangma, lauding the armed forces’ courage. Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, while defending the operation, faced criticism from some Congress legislators, highlighting domestic political divides over military actions. Social media platforms, particularly X, buzzed with misinformation, including old videos falsely attributed to the operation and exaggerated claims from both sides.

Internationally, reactions were mixed but largely restrained. The United Kingdom urged both nations to show restraint and engage in dialogue, while India briefed five countries, emphasizing its focus on terrorist targets. Pakistan invoked Article 51 of the U.N. Charter, claiming self-defense, but found limited global support. The United States, through President Donald Trump’s statements, was perceived as offering credible calls for a ceasefire, though India’s actions were broadly seen as expected given the Pahalgam attack.

Strategic and Geopolitical Implications

Operation Sindoor marked a shift in India’s military doctrine, combining precision airstrikes with strategic restraint, as noted by West Point expert John Spencer. Unlike India’s 2016 surgical strikes or 2019 Balakot airstrike, which targeted specific militant camps, Operation Sindoor’s scope—striking urban centers in Punjab and multiple sites in Pakistan-administered Kashmir—signaled a bolder approach. This escalation, however, raised questions about deterrence, as The Hindu noted that political consensus on counterterrorism should not stifle debate on the efficacy of such actions.

From a strategic perspective, the operation highlighted India’s growing reliance on indigenous defense capabilities, such as the Integrated Counter UAS Grid and surface-to-air missile systems. Discussions on forums like Bharat Rakshak emphasized the need for India to bolster its air defense, including expediting the delivery of Russia’s S-400 systems and developing indigenous equivalents like Project Kusha. The operation also underscored the Indian Air Force’s need for modernization, with calls for more Rafale jets and the induction of Tejas Mk1A to address squadron shortages.

Geopolitically, Operation Sindoor risked entangling India in a “hyphenated” narrative with Pakistan, a dynamic India has sought to avoid. Posts on X and analyses, such as those by user @ZoyaAliKh, framed the operation as a subject of academic interest, highlighting its geopolitical and historical significance. However, misinformation campaigns on social media, including false claims of coups or exaggerated military successes, complicated the narrative. India’s official silence on certain claims, such as the alleged downing of Rafale jets, allowed speculation to persist, potentially benefiting adversaries like China in the information war.

The operation also had broader implications for India’s relations with China. Forum discussions suggested that India’s Integrated Rocket Force could play a dual role against Pakistan and China, particularly in countering Chinese drone swarms or territorial ambitions in Tibet. This reflects India’s strategic calculus in balancing threats on its western and eastern fronts.

Critical Analysis

Operation Sindoor achieved its immediate objective of targeting terrorist infrastructure, with India claiming significant success in neutralizing threats. However, the operation’s long-term efficacy in curbing cross-border terrorism remains uncertain. As noted by ORF, the “Pakistan problem” is temporarily contained but not permanently addressed. Pakistan’s retaliatory shelling and attempted drone attacks indicate that the operation may have escalated rather than deterred hostilities. The civilian casualties reported by Pakistan, if accurate, could further fuel anti-India sentiment, strengthening militant recruitment.

The operation’s symbolic framing, while powerful domestically, risks polarizing narratives. By invoking the imagery of widowhood, India tapped into emotional resonance but also invited criticism for blending cultural sentiment with military action. This approach contrasts with Pakistan’s use of Islamic references in past operations, highlighting how both nations leverage cultural symbols to rally domestic support.

The information war surrounding Operation Sindoor underscores the challenges of modern conflicts. Misinformation on platforms like X, as reported by The Economic Times, amplified false narratives, complicating public understanding. India’s restrained response to Pakistan’s claims, such as the downing of jets, may reflect a strategy to avoid escalation but risks ceding narrative control.

Conclusion

Operation Sindoor was a bold and symbolically charged response to the Pahalgam attack, showcasing India’s military precision and resolve. It achieved tactical successes but at the cost of civilian lives and heightened regional tensions. The operation’s broader implications—strategic, geopolitical, and informational—highlight the complexities of addressing terrorism in a nuclearized region. While India’s actions were understood by many world capitals, the path to lasting stability requires more than military strikes. As debates continue, both in India and globally, Operation Sindoor serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between retribution, deterrence, and diplomacy in South Asia’s volatile landscape.