Operation Sindoor: ‘One border, three adversaries; was like a live lab for China to test weapons', says Deputy COAS Rahul Singh
Acknowledging the Pakistan-China alliance, the Deputy Chief pointed out that India has 'two adversaries on one border,' where Pakistan was on the front and China was providing all possible support. The Deputy COAS said that Pakistan has 81 per cent Chinese hardware in their military fleet. 'Air Defence and how it panned out during the entire operation was important... This time, our population centres were not quite addressed, but next time, we need to be prepared for that... So few lessons I must flag as far as Operation Sindoor is concerned. Firstly, we had one border and two adversaries, actually three. Pakistan was in the front. China was providing all possible support. In the last five years, 81% of the military hardware with Pakistan is Chinese...' he said.
Emphasising the need for a robust air defence system, the Deputy COAS revealed that Pakistan had 'live updates' on India's important vectors that too, with China's help. He said, 'China can test its weapons against other weapons, so it's like a live lab available to them. Turkey also played an important role in providing the type of support it did; they gave Bayraktar and numerous other drones... When DGMO-level talks were on, Pakistan had the live updates of our important vectors, from China... We need a robust air defence system...'
Lt Gen Rahul R Singh also lauded the Indian Armed Forces for carrying out precision strikes on terror infrastructure. He further emphasised the strategic messaging and integration of technology and human intelligence in target selection and planning.'... There are a few lessons from Operation Sindoor. The strategic messaging by leadership was unambiguous... There is no scope of absorbing the pain the way we did a few years ago... The planning and selection of targets was based on a lot of data that was collected using technology and human intelligence. So a total of 21 targets were identified, out of which nine targets we thought would be prudent to engage... It was only the final day or the final hour that the decision was taken that these nine targets would be engaged,' he said.
He added, 'A considered decision was taken that it will be a tri-services approach to send the right message that we indeed are an integrated force... An important consideration was that we should always be at the top of the escalation ladder. When we reach a military objective, we should try and put a stop to it... War is easy to initiate, but it's very difficult to control. So I would say that was a very masterly stroke that was played to stop the war at an appropriate time.'
'China provided all support to Pakistan'
Lieutenant General Rahul R Singh highlighted the role played by China and Turkey in assisting Pakistan during Operation Sindoor.
Speaking at the 'New Age Military Technologies' organised by FICCI, the Deputy COAS emphasised the need for a robust air defence system to combat the China-Pak tango. 'Air Defence and how it panned out during the entire operation was important... This time, our population centres were not quite addressed, but next time, we need to be prepared for that. We need a robust air defence system, ' he said.
Lt Gen Rahul R Singh also lauded the Indian Armed Forces for carrying out precision strikes on terror infrastructure. He further emphasised the strategic messaging and integration of technology and human intelligence in target selection and planning.'... There are a few lessons from Operation Sindoor. The strategic messaging by leadership was unambiguous... There is no scope of absorbing the pain the way we did a few years ago... The planning and selection of targets was based on a lot of data that was collected using technology and human intelligence. So a total of 21 targets were identified, out of which nine targets we thought would be prudent to engage... It was only the final day or the final hour that the decision was taken that these nine targets would be engaged,' he said.
He added, 'A considered decision was taken that it will be a tri-services approach to send the right message that we indeed are an integrated force... An important consideration was that we should always be at the top of the escalation ladder. When we reach a military objective, we should try and put a stop to it... War is easy to initiate, but it's very difficult to control. So I would say that was a very masterly stroke that was played to stop the war at an appropriate time.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
41 minutes ago
- News18
From Nehru's Blunder to Bharat's Redemption: Standing By Tibet
Last Updated: With the Dalai Lama turning 90, the stakes could not be higher. A manipulated succession would permanently compromise the Tibetan movement and also hurt Bharat's strategic interest A nation's foreign policy is ultimately judged by how well it serves its national interest. History bears testimony that when a country ignores this principle, disaster follows. India's own experience with Jawaharlal Nehru's foreign policy stands as a cautionary tale. Nehru's approach, often idealistic and detached from hard realities, led to a series of strategic blunders — the most glaring being his miscalculation on Tibet and China. However, pursuing national interest does not mean abandoning ethics or dharma. As history also shows, the absence of moral anchors often boomerangs. The amoral opportunism of US foreign policy in the 1970s and 1980s — whether it was opening the doors to Communist China that eventually facilitated China's rise or fuelling fundamentalism in Afghanistan to counter the Soviet Union that ended in the horrors of 9/11 — offers sobering lessons. For Bharat, a civilisational state steeped in dharmic consciousness, foreign policy has always been more than transactional. The Bharatiya outlook traditionally views the world not through the narrow prism of power blocs but through the wider lens of dharma. Nehru's concept of non-alignment stemmed from this civilisational discomfort with power-centric alliances. Unfortunately, while he refused to align with any bloc, he also failed to align with all — a more authentic Bharatiya approach that balances relationships based on dharmic considerations. Bharatiya statecraft has never been naive about the ways of the world. The Mahabharata makes it abundantly clear when it quotes Bhishma as exhorting Yudhishthira: 'If the one who is fighting under deceit, one must fight back using deceit." This understanding should guide a traditionally dharmic state like Bharat in dealing with adharmic states such as Pakistan and communist China (there's a need to differentiate communist China from civilisational China, which was much closer to Bharat in ideas and outlook). Instead, Nehru chose to blind himself to China's expansionist ambitions. His most tragic misstep came when he deliberately looked the other way when Mao's troops invaded Tibet in 1950. The Chinese invasion of Tibet was not just a cataclysmic event for the Tibetans but also a major geostrategic setback for Bharat. While Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel's opposition to Nehru's Tibet policy is well documented, especially his letter to the then prime minister in December 1950, where he exhorted him to be more watchful of China's imperialistic tendencies, Rajendra Prasad too wrote a letter on November 18, 1962, to Sri Prakasa, highlighting the moral failings of the Nehruvian foreign policy. Prasad writes: '…in the matter of Tibet, we acted not only un-chivalrously but even against our own interest in not maintaining the position of a buffer state for it and thus exposing a frontier of about 2,500 miles to the Chinese except for a small strip belonging to Nepal. I have very strong feelings about it. I feel that the blood of Tibet is on our head, and we must do prayashchit, which is already being forced on us. Let us hope that we shall be successful. But the Prime Minister does not like the name of Tibet to be mentioned even now and regards any mention of its liberation as 'manifest nonsense'. No one suggests that we should march our armies into Tibet. But is there anything wrong in wishing well of Tibet and treating it as a sovereign country under the suzerainty of China?" Today, on July 6, 2025, as the Dalai Lama celebrates his 90th birthday, Bharat must introspect. Its prayashchit — penance — for Nehru's Himalayan blunder is not over. Tibet's destiny remains entwined with Bharat's strategic and moral dilemmas. The future of Tibet is now deeply tied to the question of the Dalai Lama's succession — a spiritual event that has acquired profound geopolitical dimensions. Given Beijing's proven record, there is little doubt it will try to orchestrate the succession process to install a pliant figure. The fate of the Panchen Lama — abducted by China after being recognised by the Dalai Lama, replaced by Beijing's own nominee — serves as a chilling precedent. In 1995, when the 14th Dalai Lama identified six-year-old Gedhun Choekyi Nyima as the reincarnation of the 10th Panchen Lama — the second highest spiritual leader in Tibetan Buddhism — the Chinese government responded by abducting the boy and installing its own candidate. Thus, there now exist two Panchen Lamas: one legitimate, yet disappeared; the other, a puppet. The Panchen Lama is traditionally entrusted with the role of helping to identify the next Dalai Lama. By securing this position under its control, Beijing laid the groundwork to someday influence the selection of the Dalai Lama himself. With the Dalai Lama turning 90, the stakes could not be higher. A manipulated succession would permanently compromise the Tibetan movement and also hurt Bharat's strategic interest. Therefore, it is imperative for the 14th Dalai Lama to secure his succession while alive, perhaps even innovating within Tibetan tradition by revealing or training his reincarnation in his lifetime. He has already suggested that the next Dalai Lama could be found outside Tibet — possibly even in India, where he has lived for over six decades. Such a move would not only preserve the sanctity of Tibetan Buddhism but would also deny Beijing the leverage it desperately craves. Moreover, it would allow the Dalai Lama to personally mentor his successor, safeguarding doctrinal integrity. Bharat must stand ready to support this process — not just out of dharmic solidarity with Tibetans, but also because it aligns squarely with its national interest. A free and spiritually vibrant Tibet acts as a moral and strategic bulwark against Chinese expansionism. Supporting Tibetans in securing an untainted succession of the Dalai Lama is, therefore, both Bharat's moral duty as well as its strategic imperative. The succession of the Dalai Lama is far more than a religious ritual. It is a powerful assertion of Tibetan agency against Chinese imperial overreach. For Bharat, this is an opportunity to atone for past errors and to act in a way that is both dharmic and strategically astute. This, truly, would be Bharat's ultimate prayashchit. tags : Dalai Lama Jawaharlal Nehru Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: July 06, 2025, 21:27 IST News opinion Opinion | From Nehru's Blunder to Bharat's Redemption: Standing By Tibet
Indian Express
44 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Chinese President Xi Jinping skips BRICS summit for first time. Here's why it matters
Chinese President Xi Jinping will not attend this year's BRICS summit in Brazil – the first time he has missed the annual meeting since taking power. CNN reports the decision reflects his focus on China's domestic economy and limited expectations for the summit's outcome. Xi Jinping is staying away from the Rio de Janeiro summit to concentrate on managing China's economic challenges. He has instead sent Premier Li Qiang to represent China. Analysts say China is preparing for a major political meeting expected later this year, and Xi may be prioritising domestic planning over international travel. 'BRICS is part of Beijing's effort to avoid being surrounded by US allies,' said Chong Ja Ian, a professor at the National University of Singapore told CNN. But he noted that with President Donald Trump's trade policies weakening US alliances, the pressure on China may have eased. Brian Wong, a professor at the University of Hong Kong, told CNN that sending Li Qiang should not be seen as a downgrade. 'There is much in BRICS+ that fits Xi's foreign policy worldview,' he said. With Xi and Russian President Vladimir Putin not attending in person, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa will be among the high-profile leaders present. Putin will join by video link, as Brazil is a member of the International Criminal Court and would be required to arrest him if he attended physically on a court charge alleging war crimes in Ukraine. Brazil's President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva will host the summit. Indonesia's President Prabowo Subianto is expected to attend after the country officially joined BRICS earlier this year. Delegations from newer members such as Iran, the UAE, Ethiopia, and Egypt are also likely to join, though not all plans have been confirmed. The summit comes as President Trump's temporary freeze on new tariffs is set to expire on 9 July. Several BRICS countries are under pressure to reach trade deals with the US to avoid higher tariffs. The group is also expected to discuss de-dollarisation a move to use national currencies instead of the US dollar for trade. However, the idea of a shared BRICS currency, proposed last year by Lula, is not likely to be discussed seriously. Trump has warned of heavy tariffs on countries that support such a plan. Though China is not pushing for major outcomes this year, Premier Li is expected to focus on strengthening energy cooperation and promoting China's digital currency in trade.
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Lies being spread, no photo of Rahul Gandhi on sanitary pads: Pramod Tiwari
Rajya Sabha MP and senior Congress leader Pramod Tiwari on Sunday said that lies are being spread by pasting Rahul Gandhi's picture on sanitary pads. He said that the fake video posted on social media reflects the poor thinking of the BJP. A controversy erupted in poll-bound Bihar after a photograph of Rahul Gandhi was seen featuring prominently on sanitary pad packets, being distributed under the Congress party's Priyadarshini Udaan Yojana, aimed at raising menstrual hygiene awareness among women in the state. The Congress launched the initiative as part of a larger campaign for women voters in the state. In a special conversation with IANS, the Congress MP Tiwari said, "The government has failed on the safety and health of women, so the Congress distributed sanitary pads with its limited resources. But the BJP is spreading lies on social media by putting a fake photo of Rahul Gandhi on these pads; there was no photo on the pad. Tiwari called it a shameful, disgusting and cheap act, which reflects the mentality of BJP supporters." Cornering the government on the voter list controversy that started before the Bihar Assembly elections, he said that if someone has an Aadhaar card and is residing in an area, then his name should be added to the voter list. But the Election Commission is also rejecting the Aadhaar card, and citizens are being asked for their 'horoscopes'. The Bharatiya Janata Party itself had said in Parliament that the Aadhaar card is proof of Indianness, so why is the same proof not valid now? Tiwari also spoke on the arrest of Nirav Modi's brother, Nehal Modi. He said that when the investigations of CBI and ED were going on, on whose orders were such criminals allowed to flee abroad? Reminding of the old promises, the Congress leader stated that PM Modi had said that Dawood Ibrahim would be brought to India in six months. Now I want to ask, where is Dawood? What happened to terrorists like Masood Azhar, Hafiz Saeed and Dawood Ibrahim? Can the BJP government give any details of the action taken against them? The Congress MP also talked about Operation Sindoor. He said, 'During 'Operation Sindoor' carried out by the Indian Air Force, the Foreign Minister informed Pakistan that we would attack terrorist hideouts. The result was that the attack was only on terrorist hideouts, and all the terrorists moved away from there. The hard work of our brave soldiers did not have the full effect. After all, the government should tell where the terrorists were killed, how many were killed, and what their names are. Where is the list of the terrorists who were killed?' He further said that this is a direct compromise with national security, and the government should decide its accountability.
