Fighting words
Times of India's Edit Page team comprises senior journalists with wide-ranging interests who debate and opine on the news and issues of the day. LESS ... MORE
Losses are inevitable in military ops. India's done the correct thing by acknowledging them
In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies, Churchill said in WWII. Like tennis, where you can lose back-to-back sets and still win the match, war has its ups and downs, and it's good policy not to let the lows affect public morale. America knew it was losing Vietnam but never admitted it, until the 1971 Pentagon Papers leak. It never got a grip on Afghanistan in 20 years, but for the longest time maintained it had.
In contrast, India has been surprisingly candid about its losses in Op Sindoor. While Pakistan claimed it had shot down five IAF jets on May 7 – the night raid that launched Op Sindoor – India neither confirmed nor denied it at the time. But shortly after the May 10 ceasefire, Air Marshal AK Bharti told a press conference, 'We are in a combat scenario and losses are part of combat.' And three weeks on, CDS Gen Anil Chauhan has more or less ended the suspense: 'What I can say is that on May 7, in the initial stages, there were losses.' But not six planes, as Pakistan is now claiming.
This acknowledgment is a measure of India's morale. The country does not need to cover up because Op Sindoor achieved all its objectives. As for making a full disclosure, that can wait till the operation is over – it's only suspended post-ceasefire. Besides, as the CDS said, more than the numbers, what mattered was the reasons for the losses, and a course correction, which India made.
India's official responses may have seemed slow, but they adhered to facts. Dangers of the alternative – unverified claims – were brought home on May 8 when some TV channels abdicated all journalistic responsibility and spread wild untruths. While it might have seemed patriotic to those in front of the cameras, it only increased the military's burden. The CDS said 15% of operational time during Op Sindoor was spent countering fake narratives and disinformation.
Later, the audience's unreasonable expectations, stoked by disinformation, resulted in the vicious trolling of foreign secretary Vikram Misri, who along with Col Sofiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh had been the face of India's factual and measured media response during the hostilities. If Op Sindoor proved one thing, it's that riding the tiger of disinformation is always folly.
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email
This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Wire
2 hours ago
- The Wire
'IAF Lost Fighter Jets to Pak Because of Political Leadership's Constraints': Indian Defence Attache
During a seminar on the India-Pak air battle, Captain (IN) Shiv Kumar conceded, saying 'I do agree we did lose some aircraft.' The Indian embassy in Jakarta has said that the 'presentation conveyed that the Indian Armed Forces serve under civilian political leadership unlike some other countries in our neighbourhood'. An Indian Air Force (IAF) fighter jet practices touchdowns on the Ganga Expressway highway. Photo: PTI New Delhi: The Indian Air Force lost fighter jets to Pakistan on the night of May 7, 2025 during its targeting of Pakistan's terror-linked sites 'only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack the military establishment or their air defenses,' India's defence attache to Indonesia, Captain (Indian Navy) Shiv Kumar, acknowledged at a seminar in Indonesia last month. The seminar on ' Analysis of the Pakistan–India Air Battle and Indonesia's Anticipatory Strategies from the Perspective of Air Power ' was organised on June 10 by Universitas Dirgantara Marsekal Suryadarma in Indonesia. In a 35-minute presentation made at the seminar, Captain (IN) Shiv Kumar conceded that even though he 'may not agree (with an earlier Indonesian speaker's claim) that we lost so many aircraft, but I do agree we did lose some aircraft.' [Watch 3:50:00 onwards] During the initial phase of aerial combat, IAF suffered losses at the hands of the Pakistan military. While Pakistani officials claimed to have shot down as many as six Indian jets, including Rafales, Indian authorities only confirmed the loss of some aircrafts, declining to specify numbers. The Chief of Defence Staff, General Anil Chauhan, later emphasised in Singapore that the real issue was not the number of jets lost, but why they were lost: 'What is important is that–not the jet being down, but why they were being down,' he stated in an interview to Bloomberg. 'After the loss, we changed our tactics and we went for the military installations. So we first achieved suppression of enemy air defences and then that's why all our attacks could easily go through using Brahmos missiles,' the Indian defence attache added. He seemed to be referring to the Indian attack at various Pakistani air bases on May 10, 2025. The Indian defence attaché's view highlights a critical factor: IAF fighter jets were operating under strict political orders from the Modi government not to target Pakistani military installations or air defence systems. This self-imposed limitation by the government was intended to prevent escalation of conflict in a nuclear environment. It was possibly based on the premise that the Pakistan military will not target Indian fighter aircraft flying in the Indian airspace, when India was not hitting any Pakistani military targets. Pakistan refused to impose any such limitations and as claimed by its Deputy Chief, the Pakistan Air Force chief changed the orders from deter to destroy once IAF sent its munition to the Pakistani terror sites. This led to the loss of IAF fighter jets because the political directions had meant that IAF had to carry out their missions while deliberately avoiding the most threatening enemy assets, which are typically prioritised in air campaigns to secure air superiority. Recognising the tactical disadvantage, Indian military leadership quickly adjusted their approach. Within days, the IAF revised its tactics, enabling the missions on May 10, 2025 to use Brahmos and other missiles, which could be fired from a longer distance, to hit Pakistani targets. Meanwhile, the Indian Embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia, released a statement saying Captain Kumar's remarks were taken "out of context". Here's the statement: "We have seen media reports regarding a presentation made by the Defence Attache at a Seminar. His remarks have been quoted out of context and the media reports are a mis-representation of the intention and thrust of the presentation made by the speaker. The presentation conveyed that the Indian Armed Forces serve under civilian political leadership unlike some other countries in our neighbourhood. It was also explained that the objective of Operation Sindoor was to target terrorist infrastructure and the Indian response was non-escalatory." The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
Defence attache says jets lost to Pak due to constraints. Then, a clarification
The Indian Embassy in Indonesia on Sunday said the remarks made by its defence attache at a recent seminar, in which he indicated that the Indian Air Force (IAF) lost jets to Pakistan during Operation Sindoor due to political constraints, were 'taken out of context' and 'misrepresented'.The clarification followed after the Congress latched onto the Navy officer's admission and accused the Modi government of misleading the nation on military losses suffered during a four-day conflict with Pakistan in DEFENCE ATTACHE SAIDDuring a presentation at a seminar in Jakarta on June 10, India's defence attache to Indonesia, Captain (Indian Navy) Shiv Kumar, acknowledged that the IAF lost 'some aircraft' when it struck terror-linked sites under Operation Sindoor. He said the Indian forces had been directed not to target Pakistan's military infrastructure or air defences. 'Only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack the military establishment or their air defences,' he said, explaining why the IAF suffered the loss of fighter Kumar also stated that, after the initial setback, Indian forces adjusted their strategy: 'After the loss, we changed our tactics and we went for the military installations... we first achieved suppression of enemy air defences and then... all our attacks could easily go through using BrahMos missiles.' advertisementEMBASSY SAYS REMARKS MISREPRESENTEDAfter the Navy officer's remarks came to light and stoked controversy back home, the Indian Embassy in Jakarta issued a sternly-worded clarification.'His remarks have been quoted out of context and the media reports are a misrepresentation of the intention and thrust of the presentation made by the speaker,' it said in a post on X. According to the mission, the attache was simply reiterating that Operation Sindoor's aim was to target terrorist infrastructure and the civilian government's orders to the military were to maintain a non-escalatory posture.'The presentation conveyed that the Indian Armed Forces serve under civilian political leadership, unlike some other countries in our neighbourhood,' the embassy added, in a veiled jab at INDICTMENT OF GOVERNMENT: CONGRESSThe Congress was quick to seize on the defence attache's remarks. The party's communications chief Jairam Ramesh demanded transparency.'Why is the PM refusing to preside over an all-party meeting and take the Opposition into confidence? Why has the demand for a special session of Parliament been rejected?" he Congress leader Pawan Khera called the developments 'a direct indictment' of the Modi government and Defence Minister Rajnath up the attack, he said, 'They know they've compromised national security, and they're terrified of what the Congress Party will expose before the people of India.'Khera cited earlier statements from Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan, who had acknowledged losses during the early phases of Operation Sindoor but did not offer specific month, Gen Chauhan told Bloomberg in Singapore that India changed tactics after the loss of aircraft, shifting to deeper strikes and more aggressive suppression of enemy air top military general had also rejected Pakistani claims of having downed six Indian jets, calling them 'absolutely incorrect.'He had asserted that the losses were tactical lessons: 'What is important is not the jet being down, but why they were being down.'- Ends
Hindustan Times
6 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Op Sindoor losses due to restrictions on hitting military targets: Navy officer
NEW DELHI India lost some fighter jets on the opening day of the recent military confrontation with Pakistan due to initial restrictions imposed by the government on striking Pakistani military establishments and the orders were to hit only terror infrastructure in that country, India's defence attache to Indonesia said at a seminar in Jakarta. The navy officer said India changed tack after the initial air losses to completely dominate Pakistan. (AP) His hitherto unreported comments at the June 10 event were in response to claims made by an Indonesian aerospace expert that the Indian Air Force (IAF) lost five fighter jets --- including three Rafales, one MiG-29 and a Sukhoi-30 --- a tactical drone and Pakistan degraded two S-400 launchers during Operation Sindoor, India's direct military response to the April 22 Pahalgam terror strike. 'I may not agree with him that India lost so many aircraft. But I do agree that we did lose some aircraft and that happened only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack the military establishments and their air defences,' Captain Shiv Kumar, a navy officer, said. A navy captain is equivalent to a colonel in the army. He described how India changed tack after the initial air losses to completely dominate Pakistan. 'After the loss, we changed our tactics and went for their military installations. We first achieved suppression of enemy air defences and destruction of enemy air defences (known as SEAD and DEAD in military parlance) and that's why all our attacks could easily go through using surface-to-air missiles and surface-to-surface missiles…On May 8, 9 and 10, there was complete air superiority by India,' he said. A defence ministry spokesperson declined to comment on Kumar's remarks. To be sure, the government has not yet officially responded to statements by senior defence officials on loss of aircraft during the conflict. Kumar's comments came a month after chief of defence staff General Anil Chauhan said in Singapore on May 31 that India lost fighter planes on May 7 due to tactical mistakes that were swiftly rectified before the IAF returned in big numbers and carried out precision strikes deep inside the neighbouring country by punching through its air defences. In his 35-minute presentation, Kumar said the only constraint the government gave to the armed forces was 'not to target anything but terrorist camps'. 'No military installations, no civil installations…Nothing which was not connected to terrorists was to be targeted,' he said at the seminar on Analysis of the Pakistan-India Air Battle and Indonesia's Anticipatory Strategies from the Perspective of Air Power. India launched Operation Sindoor in the early hours of May 7 and struck terror and military installations in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) following the Pahalgam terror strike in which 26 people were shot dead. It triggered a four-day military confrontation with Pakistan involving fighter jets, missiles, drones, long-range weapons and heavy artillery before the two sides reached an understanding on stopping all military action on May 10. India lost three Rafale fighter jets because of 'vulnerabilities exposed due to AWACS (airborne warning and control systems) disconnection,' claimed Tommy Tamtomo, vice-chairman, Indonesia Center for Air Power Studies. 'India lost a lot, but Pakistan also lost a lot. Maybe more than India,' he said at the seminar. Pakistani air losses included six fighter jets, two AWACS aircraft and a military transport plane, Tamtomo said. The Congress party on Sunday questioned why has the government not convened a special session of Parliament on Operation Sindoor. 'First the Chief of Defence Staff makes important revelations in Singapore. Then a senior defence official follows up from Indonesia. But why is the PM refusing to preside over an all-party meeting and take the Opposition into confidence? Why has the demand for a special session of Parliament been rejected,' questioned Congress MP Jairam Ramesh, who is also the party's general secretary in-charge of communications. HT reached out to the BJP for a response but did not get one immediately. The IAF shot down a few high-tech fighter jets of the Pakistan Air Force during Operation Sindoor and it is poring over the technical details to establish the hits, Air Marshal AK Bharti, director general air operations, said at a media briefing on May 11, a day after the two sides reached an understanding on stopping all military action. He had then indicated there were combat losses on the Indian side too but the fighter pilots were back home. 'We are in a combat scenario; losses are a part of combat. The question you must ask is if we have achieved our objective of decimating the terrorist camps. The answer is a thumping yes,' Bharti said at the time. Pakistan's Operation Bunyan-um-Marsoos, which was mounted in response to India's Operation Sindoor, 'folded in eight hours' on May 10 belying Islamabad's ambitious target of bringing India to its knees in 48 hours, Chauhan said on June 3, adding that losses suffered in a military conflict are not as important as the targeted outcome of an operation.
