Did Political Constraints Cause IAF Losses in Operation Sindoor?
After a statement by General Anil Chauhan, Chief of Defence Staff, in Singapore on June 1 that the Indian Air Force (IAF) lost some aircraft in the battle with Pakistan, another armed forces officer has mentioned the loss of aircraft and claimed that this was because of the 'constraints' imposed by the political leadership. This has created enough heat in the country, to the extent that the establishment was forced to issue a clarification, claiming that the officer was misquoted.
Captain Shiv Kumar, Defence Attache in Indonesia, said that the IAF lost jets in the early phase of Operation Sindoor as a result of restrictions imposed by the political leadership. He was making a presentation of the success of Operation Sindoor as part of a worldwide outreach by India, at the Universitas Dirgantara Marsekal Suryadarma, on June 10.
The video of this presentation, intriguingly, became public knowledge more than a fortnight later, June 29. The event was titled, 'Analysis of the Pakistan-India Air Battle and Indonesia's anticipatory strategies from the perspective of air power'.
Also Read | Compellence, not deterrence, is the way forward
In the video, Captain Kumar is clearly heard saying: 'We did lose some aircraft and that happened only because of the constraint given by the political leadership not to attack their military establishment or their air defences.' He was responding to a submission by an earlier speaker that India lost a 'lot of' aircraft. Capt Kumar starts his rebuttal saying: 'I may not agree with him that we lost so many aircraft but I do agree that we did lose some aircraft.'
He adds: 'After the losses, we changed tactics and we went for their military installations. So, we first achieved suppression of enemy air defence and destruction of enemy air defence and then that's why all our attacks could easily go through using surface-to-air missiles, BrahMos, surface-to-surface missiles.'
On the sidelines of the Singapore Shangri-La Dialogue security forum, General Anil Cahuhan told Bloomberg TV: 'What I can say is, on 7th [May 7] in the initial stages, there were losses, but the numbers—that's not important. What was important is why did these losses occur. So, we rectified that and then went back on 7th, 8th, and 10th—and on 10th in large numbers to hit air bases in Pakistan. [We] penetrated all their air defences with impunity. We carried out precision strikes.'
This issue has since blown over with the Central government refusing to answer questions over the loss of aircraft. In fact, the CDS was viciously targeted on social media by right-wing trolls aligned with the ruling BJP, just as Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri was, earlier, for evading a question on loss of IAF fighter planes.
Political constraints
But the second issue is far more important because Captain Kumar refers to the 'political constraint'. Prime Minister Narendra Modi had repeatedly said that the armed forces had been given full operational freedom to respond to the Pahalgam attacks. This assertion by Captain Kumar runs contrary to the Prime Minister's statement.
Captain Kumar's assertion is in line with the Press Information Bureau press release of May 7, time stamped 1.44 am, which said: 'Our actions have been focused, measured and non-escalatory in nature. No Pakistan military facilities have been targeted. India has demonstrated considerable restraint in selection of targets and method of execution.'
But the fact that this was a political quagmire was not lost on the establishment. The Indian Mission in Indonesia put out a statement the same day the video went viral, June 29. This was posted on the social media platform X at 7.02 pm: 'His [The Defence Attache's] 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 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.'
Also Read | Operation Sindoor blurred the lines between security and showbiz
Describing the political decision as a tactical error, Sanjeev Gupta, former secretary in the Union Home Ministry, said that if there was a conscious decision at the political level not to attack Pakistan's air force establishments on day 1 of Operation Sindoor, there was no harm in admitting it. 'The idea might have been just to focus on terror camps and end it there. In strategic matters, tactical errors can take place. A military attache shouldn't be left to make a startling revelation in an Indonesian university.'
Pravin Sawhney, a former Army officer and writer, said on his YouTube channel, Force Magazine: 'Shiv Kumar has revealed the reason which no one knew so far...whenever an air force is in a battle, the first target is the air defence because the most immediate danger stems from air defence. We call it SEAD—suppression of enemy air defence. If this [air defence] is not taken out you will suffer losses.'
Congress spokesperson Pawan Khera said that this was a 'direct indictment of the Modi government'. He added: 'No wonder they are ducking our demand for a special session of Parliament...they know they have compromised national security, and they have terrified of what the Congress party will expose before the people of India.'
In a post on X.com, the party said: 'There are several unanswered questions related to the untimely ceasefire – especially when India actually had an upper hand in the escalation.' It demanded that the Prime Minister answer these questions, including why an all-party meeting was not being convened under the PM's leadership and why a special session of Parliament was not convened.
The officer's matter-of-fact statement in Indonesia means that more doubts will crop up over the conduct of Operation Sindoor. The opposition is questioning the timing of the ceasefire and wants to know exactly what the US had asked India to do when the country had the upper hand.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Hania Aamir, Shahid Afridi among Pakistani stars blocked again after social media ‘glitch' in India
Pakistani celebrities once again disappeared from Indian social media feeds after their accounts were briefly unblocked due to what officials are calling a 'technical glitch.' Instagram and X profiles of big names like Hania Aamir, Mahira Khan, Fawad Khan, and Shahid Afridi became briefly visible to Indian users on Wednesday, sparking confusion and speculation. However, by Thursday morning, the ban was back in place. A pop-up on Instagram now reads: 'Account not available in India. This is because we complied with a legal request to restrict this content.' What happened during the 'tech glitch'? On July 2, Indian users suddenly found they could access Instagram and YouTube content from multiple Pakistani stars and entertainment channels. These included the Instagram profiles of Saba Qamar, Ahad Raza Mir, Yumna Zaidi, and Danish Taimoor, along with YouTube channels like Hum TV, ARY Digital, and Har Pal Geo. This visibility lasted only a few hours. Why were the Pakistani accounts banned? The ban on Pakistani media accounts came after India's Operation Sindoor, which targeted terror bases across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). The military strike was a response to the Pahalgam terror attack in April, where 25 people were killed, including 24 Indian tourists. After the operation, several Pakistani artists made public statements criticising India's actions. This led to widespread backlash on Indian social media. Thereafter, the government directed OTT platforms and digital intermediaries to remove Pakistani content under the IT Rules 2021. AICWA demands a permanent ban The All Indian Cine Workers Association (AICWA) strongly opposed the brief reappearance of Pakistani profiles. In an open letter to Prime Minister Modi, AICWA called it an insult to India's martyrs. Their demands included: A total digital blackout of all Pakistani content A permanent ban on collaborations involving Pakistani artists A cultural disconnect as tribute to the armed forces AICWA pointed to attacks like Pulwama, Uri, and 26/11 to justify their stance, calling Pakistan a 'terrorist nation.' What happens now? For now, Pakistani profiles are once again hidden from Indian audiences. But the sudden glitch has raised fresh questions around how these bans are enforced and whether more permanent safeguards need to be in place.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
PM Modi's Quad strategy: Using the Indo-Pacific platform to corner Pakistan
The Modi government's efforts to highlight Pakistan's state sponsorship of terrorism at the Quad meet is laudable. Now the ball is in the West's court to recognise this aspect and stop backing Islamabad in its own interest read more This week when the Quad foreign ministers met in Washington DC, the world was grappling with multiple conflicts. Among the usual concerns over China's continued belligerence in the South China Sea, what stood out was the Pahalgam terror attack where the ministers not only issued a strong condemnation of the attack that claimed lives of 26 Indians in April this year but also emphasised the need for zero tolerance for terrorism, calling for swift justice against the perpetrators, organisers and financiers of such acts. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The joint statement issued at the end of the meet renewed the member countries' commitment to counterterrorism cooperation. It also highlighted how Quad would strive to remain one of the leading platforms for dealing with the challenge of terrorism in the Indo-Pacific. For other Quad countries, terrorism in the region may not be that big a nuisance but India continues to remain one of the biggest victims of terrorism emanating from Pakistani soil. It was quite a sight to behold when External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar lashed out at Pakistan for being a state sponsor of terrorism at the meet, while his counterparts from the United States, Japan and Australia stood firmly behind on the stage in rapt attention. Jaishankar minced no words when he iterated that India's Operation Sindoor has conveyed with great clarity to the world that the country will act against 'the perpetrators, the supporters, the financiers and the enablers' where it has the 'right to defend' itself against all acts of terrorism. Additionally, while inaugurating an exhibition to highlight the human cost of terrorism at the UN headquarters in New York during his US tour, Jaishankar again sent a loud message that India would not let the terrorists go unpunished, and there would be no scope for nuclear blackmail or treatment of terrorists as mere proxies. The stand that India took during the Quad foreign ministers' meet is part of a larger diplomatic strategy of the Modi government to leverage the forum to highlight its own security concerns with regards to terror emanating from Pakistan. Quad which remains one of the foremost platforms to address geopolitical challenges arising from China's aggressive rise and its manifestation in the maritime domain needs to recognise the fact that for any effective and meaningful security cooperation to tackle China, it is necessary to address its use of Pakistan and its terror complex to weaken India, a key Quad country. The terror industry that is operating from Rawalpindi HQ has the blessings and the backing from Beijing where China is leaving no stone unturned to use Pakistan to balance India in the region. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD China Feeding Off Pakistan's Terror Factories In recent years, China's tacit support to Pakistan's terror industry has become a serious issue of concern for India. If during the cold war, Pakistan had leased its territory to the West by setting up radicalisation camps to offset Soviet influence in the region, today it is willingly doing the bidding for Beijing's strategic goals. This was wide on display during Operation Sindoor when Pakistan first orchestrated the Pahalgam terror attack to challenge the narrative of normalcy in Kashmir and then used key military technology provided by the Chinese to defend itself. China's support to such rampant terror activities in Kashmir is part of its own toolkit to keep India destabilised, a key reason why it also took a strong position on repeal of Article 370 and went on to assert that its claims in Ladakh remain unchanged. What is also necessary to note is China's overt support to terrorists in the region. In the last few years, China has vetoed India's attempts to designate terrorists backed by Pakistan as 'global terrorists' at the UN. We can't forget how China has repeatedly shielded Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad terrorists at the UNSC who have carried out serious terror attacks against India. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In fact, India's attempts to seek sanctions against The Resistance Front, a Lashkar offshoot and the mastermind organisation behind Pahalgam attack have also hit a road-block at the UNSC due to the usual Chinese designs. Ironically, China itself has become a victim of the radicalisation in Pakistan where many Chinese nationals have also lost their lives while executing the CPEC project. Yet China continues to firmly back Pakistan's strategy of being a state-sponsor of terrorism against India. Getting Around West's Hypocrisy The fact that China is the foremost backer of Pakistan and its terror industry is not lost on anyone. After all, the nuclear blackmail card that Pakistan often plays on the world, the very moment India starts retaliating to its terror activities, is itself a gift from China to Pakistan. China not only supplied key nuclear technology and enriched Uranium to Pakistan during the cold war but it also continues to back its nuclear program till today by supplying nuclear reactors with dual-use technology. There are frequent reports of Pakistan seeking to extract a handsome price for the Gwadar port access to China which along with other ports has made China a key part of the security calculus in the Indian Ocean region. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD While China has deeply embedded itself in the maritime domain of the Indian Ocean region using Pakistan as strategic footboard, the West is still behaving like an ostrich by not recognising how the Pakistan-China axis is a threat to its own security in the long-run. This is because the anti-India terror factories that operate from the Pakistani soil are firmly backed by Beijing. The cost of dealing with this challenge for India, a key Quad partner is very high in both logistics and financial terms. The precious energy that India can spend in countering China's rise and thus ease off some pressure from other Quad partners' back is spent on dealing with a rogue state like Pakistan. It is not only unfortunate but deeply troubling that the same West. especially the United States. which sings the peans of solidarity against China at forums like Quad, does not shy away from still keeping its old ties with Pakistan alive. This was on display even during Operation Sindoor when Trump not only equated India, a victim of terrorism with its perpetrator Pakistan but also sought to use trade as a ploy to get India to tolerate terror attacks planned against it by Pakistan. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD On one hand, the United States expects support from India to counter China, its systemic rival and on the other hand it still backs Pakistan and expects India to not take the terrorism challenge seriously. The Modi government's efforts to highlight Pakistan's state sponsorship of terrorism at the Quad meet is laudable. One may say that it is a good step towards drawing attention to how Pakistan is nothing but a proxy for China itself in keeping India along with other Quad countries on tenterhooks. Now the ball is in the West's court to recognise this aspect and stop backing Pakistan in its own interest. The author is a New Delhi-based commentator on geopolitics and foreign policy. She holds a PhD from the Department of International Relations, South Asian University. She tweets @TrulyMonica. The views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
After Asim Munir, Pakistan air force chief visits US; meets top military, political leaders
Pakistan's chief of the air staff Zaheer Ahmad Babar Sidhu is visiting the United States, days after its army chief, field marshal Asim Munir, was by US President for lunch at the White House. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now In a statement, the (PAF) said Sidhu would further enhance bilateral defence cooperation between the two countries. 'This high-level visit is a strategic milestone in the Pakistan-US defence partnership. It will play a significant role in addressing key regional and global security issues as well as building institutional ties,' the statement read. This is the first United States visit in over a decade by a serving chief of Pakistan's air force, it highlighted. According to the PAF, Sidhu held important meetings with America's top military and political leadership, and reiterated his country's commitment to "further strengthening the existing relations" between their air forces . During the detailed discussions, they also agreed to establish high-level military relations in the future. The meetings highlighted Pakistan's "constructive role" in promoting regional stability, its commitment to its ongoing counter-terrorism efforts, and perspective on the evolving geopolitical landscape of south and central Asia, the statement noted. Sidhu also went to the Capitol Hill, where he met prominent members of the US Congress, including Mike Turner, Rich McCormick, and Bill Heizenga. Last month, top general Michael "Erik" Kurilla had the Asian nation as a "phenomenal partner" in counter-terrorism. Islamabad has also Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize for brokering the India-Pakistan ceasefire - he has repeatedly claimed to have brokered the ceasefire. India has consistently denied that Trump played any role, and that negotiations were held only between the two neighbours.
