The pre-dawn strikes against terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir may have pierced the silence of the neighbouring skies, but they illuminated a long-awaited beacon of justice for the crores of Indians who saw terror unfold in their own land. 'Operation Sindoor,' a carefully executed series of precision strikes on nine key terrorist camps, marks a key moment in India’s unwavering resolve against the forces of terror that have repeatedly sought to destabilize our nation. This was not an act of aggression, but a necessary and proportionate response to a barbaric act of communal violence that demanded accountability.
The heinous attack in Pahalgam, which claimed the lives of 26 innocent individuals, was a stark reminder of the depravity of our adversaries. The deliberate targeting and selective killing of non-Muslim tourists was a chilling display of communal hatred.
For the families of those who perished, and for the nation that mourned with them, the strikes delivered a measure of justice, a tangible response to the overwhelming grief and outrage. The blood spilt in Pahalgam cried out for retribution, and 'Operation Sindoor,' a name imbued with symbolism of commitment, has answered that call.
The government of India’s primary responsibility is the safety and security of its citizens. In the face of unprovoked and brutal attacks, inaction is not an option. The decision to launch 'Operation Sindoor' was to demonstrate that India would not tolerate terrorism against its people.
The messaging conveyed by India's measured strikes is unequivocal. Firstly, it underscores that the era of passive endurance is over. India will proactively defend itself against terrorism. Secondly, 'Operation Sindoor' is a tribute to the victims of the Pahalgam attack, a solemn promise to the widows and families that their loss will not be in vain. The poignant image of two senior women officers, Wing Commander Vyomika Singh and Colonel Sophia Qureshi, jointly briefing the media on the operation, further amplified this message, symbolizing strength, resolve, and the inclusive nature of India’s defence.
While some international reactions have been predictable, urging de-escalation and dialogue, the inherent danger lies in these calls for restraint being interpreted as a justification for Pakistan’s continued support of terrorism. The “middle path” diplomacy, while aiming to prevent escalation, risks overlooking the fundamental issue of the operation of terrorist infrastructure on Pakistani soil.
While we appreciate nuanced responses, the silence on holding Pakistan accountable for harbouring and training these groups is deafening. The notable exception of Israel, which unequivocally supported India's right to self-defence, highlights the importance of a clear and principled stance against terrorism.
Concerns remain regarding Pakistan's potential for retaliation, as indicated by their government. India must stay on high alert and vigilant against any attempts to strike back. Pakistan's history of using non-state actors and its stubborn refusal to dismantle terrorist bases necessitate unwavering vigilance. The success of 'Operation Sindoor' has rekindled hope in the government's resolve to fight terrorism. Through this it has demonstrated that decisive action against terrorism is possible and necessary. The strikes, following a series of measures against Pakistan including pausing water treaties and cutting ties, offer a renewed sense of purpose in that fight, a fight that was beginning to feel bogged down in diplomatic inertia. 'Operation Sindoor' is a testament to India's resolve, a strike for justice that has sent a powerful message to terrorists and their sponsors.
