'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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
26 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Defence attache's IAF loss in Op Sindoor remark sparks row: What happened
The Embassy of India in Jakarta, Indonesia, issued a clarification on Sunday, June 30, regarding comments made by India's Defence Attaché to Indonesia Captain Shiv Kumar on Operation Sindoor that suggested that the alleged losses incurred by the Indian Air Force (IAF) in Pakistan were caused by "political constraints". In a video that surfaced on social media, Captain Kumar purportedly suggested that political leadership, and not air defence capabilities, were responsible for the loss of India's aircraft. Opposition leaders seized on the remarks, accusing the government of concealing crucial details about the operation. Here's what happened. What defence attaché said about aircraft losses in Pakistan On June 10, Captain Kumar addressed a seminar titled 'Analysis of the Pakistan-India Air Battle and Indonesia's Anticipatory Strategies from the Perspective of Air Power' at a university in Jakarta. In a clip that surfaced online on Sunday, June 29, the naval officer can be heard responding to an earlier comment made by a speaker at the same event claiming that India lost "a lot of aircrafts", Kumar said, "I may not agree with him that India lost a lot of aircrafts, but I do agree ee did lose some aircraft and that happened only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack the military establishment or their air defence system.' He further explained, 'But after the loss, we changed our tactics and we went for the military installations. So we first achieved suppression and destruction of enemy air defence and then all our attacks could easily go through using surface-to-air missiles and BrahMos surface-to-surface missiles.' Congress accuses Centre of withholding military details Referencing the comment, Congress General Secretary Jairam Ramesh questioned the government's silence and transparency. '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?' he asked in a post on X . ऑपरेशन सिंदूर पर पहले सिंगापुर में चीफ ऑफ डिफेंस स्टाफ (CDS) ने अहम खुलासे किए। फिर इंडोनेशिया में एक कार्यक्रम के दौरान एक वरिष्ठ रक्षा अधिकारी ने उन बातों को आगे बढ़ाया। लेकिन प्रधानमंत्री सर्वदलीय बैठक की अध्यक्षता करने और विपक्ष को भरोसे में लेने से क्यों इनकार कर रहे हैं?… — Jairam Ramesh (@Jairam_Ramesh) June 29, 2025 Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera also accused the Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government of deliberately withholding information. 'The Modi government has misled the nation from the start – failing to disclose the aircraft losses during Operation Sindoor,' he said. Khera referred to earlier briefings where losses were only indirectly acknowledged, such as when Air Marshal Awadhesh Kumar Bharti described the situation as a 'combat scenario' where losses were expected. The Modi government has misled the nation from the start - failing to disclose the aircraft losses during Operation Sindoor. There were oblique references to losses in air combat on 6/7 May, during a briefing by the DG Air Ops (Air Marshal Awadhesh Kumar Bharti) when he said -… — Pawan Khera ???????? (@Pawankhera) June 29, 2025 'Taken out of context': Indian Embassy responds to controversy Amid the controversy, the Indian Embassy in Jakarta issued a statement on X stating that the officer's remarks were taken out of context. '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,' the statement read. "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 embassy added. 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… — India in Indonesia (@IndianEmbJkt) June 29, 2025 Opposition calls for special Parliament session on Op Sindoor On May 31, Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan confirmed with Bloomberg TV that the IAF had lost fighter jets during Operation Sindoor. While specifics regarding losses have not been disclosed, authorities have repeatedly refuted claims, made by Pakistan, of losing six aircraft.
Hindustan Times
35 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Canada cancels digital services tax to restart US trade negotiations
Canada has canceled its digital services tax aimed at US tech companies in an effort to move trade talks forward with the United States, the finance ministry said in a statement on Sunday. This decision came just days after US President Donald Trump ended the ongoing trade negotiations. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Trump will start the trade talks again to try and make a deal by July 21, 2025, the ministry said.(AFP) In a statement Sunday night, the Canadian government said it was withdrawing the tax in an effort to encourage both countries to return to negotiations. 'To support those negotiations, the Minister of Finance and National Revenue, the Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, announced today that Canada would rescind the Digital Services Tax (DST) in anticipation of a mutually beneficial comprehensive trade arrangement with the United States,' according to the statement. Prime Minister Carney and President Trump will resume negotiations 'Consistent with this action, Prime Minister Carney and President Trump have agreed that parties will resume negotiations with a view towards agreeing on a deal by July 21, 2025.' Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and Trump will start the trade talks again to try and make a deal by July 21, 2025, the ministry said. On Friday, Trump suddenly called off trade discussions with Canada over the tax on US tech firms. He said it was a 'blatant attack' and said he would put a new tariff on Canadian products within the next week. Also Read: 'This is the reality of Canada': Indian woman shares video of massive job fair queues for just 5 positions The digital services tax was 3% of the revenue a company makes from Canadian users over $20 million in a year, and it was supposed to be applied retroactively to 2022. Canada, second-largest trading partner of the US Canada is the second-largest trading partner of the United States, behind Mexico. It is also the biggest buyer of US exports. Last year, Canada bought $349.4 billion in American goods and sold $412.7 billion to the US, based on figures from the US Census Bureau. The tax and trade tension had created concern among officials, but the move to drop the tax could ease talks.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
A new ‘terror pot' that may be kept boiling for now
The 12-day aerial duel between Iran and Israel may have paused, but the region is far from being peaceful. And statements made by the two leaders key to resolving the crisis—US President Donald Trump and Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei—leave little room for hopes of a quick resolution. On Friday, Trump said that if Iran continued with its uranium enrichment programme, America will bomb it again. A day before, Khamenei had vowed that if America attacked Iran again, it should be prepared to face severe punishment. Iran is now hell-bent on pursuing its nuclear plans. Israel had attacked Iran claiming that the latter was close to developing a nuclear bomb and would soon become a permanent threat to its existence. It also said the Khamenei regime was unpopular and, in effect, an organization of terrorists filled with religious hatred. America jumped into this conflict with no moral or strategic rationale. And what did the 12-day conflict achieve? Unconfirmed reports suggest that Iran still has 400kg of enriched uranium, which can be converted into nuclear weapons in a few weeks. As for Khamenei, he's firmly in the saddle and has chosen his successor. Both Iran and Israel have made claims of victory, but nobody knows the real extent of losses on either side. Also read | Testimony to the enduring spirit of Indian democracy Iran's nuclear programme was tightly controlled under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and it was in talks with the US to further strengthen it. In fact, Israel's aerial assault on Iran happened just two days before a scheduled round of talks in the direction. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has repeatedly said that Iran had not yet acquired the capability to build a nuclear bomb. However, it did little to deter Israel and America from acting against Iran. This means something else is at play here. Could it be that Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is becoming increasingly unpopular at home over the military action in Gaza, orchestrated it for a new lease of life from a fresh conflict? Israel goes to polls next year and a new wave of muscular nationalism is needed to distract people from Gaza's exhausting campaign. It seems Netanyahu has succeeded in this for now. Part of the blame lies with Iran, too. After the Islamic Revolution, it had installed a clock that it said shows a countdown to the end of Israel. Who would tolerate such senseless hatred? Also read | A nation falling for the lure of majoritarianism The conflict has again laid bare America's deceit. In the 1980s, Iran and Iraq were locked in a long, bloody border conflict that lasted years. America and its Western allies then sided with Iraq and armed it to the teeth. Vaults of destructive weapons were opened for Saddam Hussein until he delivered on bleeding Iran. What America did to Iraq in the first and second Gulf Wars later is known to all. Before attacking Iraq for the second time, the US conducted a witch hunt claiming Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but After removing Saddam, international inspectors and the media found it to be a grand lie. The same kind of disinformation may be playing out in the case of Iran today. Will this stop Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons? Certainly not. Tehran has now threatened to quit the NPT and has publicly vowed to continue with its nuclear programme. It seems the US and Israel are dealing with a hydra-headed monster. If military operations against Iran resume, chances are that other Gulf countries would get sucked into the conflict. Iran's attack on American bases in Qatar and Iraq on Monday night were seen as an attack not just on America but also on the sovereignty of those countries. Qatar even vowed revenge. Also read | Firm and focused leadership keeps India on course Another important aspect is the attitude China and Russia have adopted towards this crisis. They overtly protested against the aggression, and covertly worked towards a ceasefire. A day before Trump announced the ceasefire, Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi had been in Moscow. He had a long chat with his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov, and met President Vladimir Putin. It would be better if China, Russia and the US kept the situation in control. But fresh statements by Khamenei and Trump are making global leaders and the population apprehensive. It's certain that after Gaza and Ukraine, Iran is the latest 'terror pot" that may be kept boiling for some time now. Shashi Shekhar is editor-in-chief, Hindustan. Views are personal.
