Op Sindoor
Senior Indian journalist and founding editor of The Wire, Siddharth Varadarajan, has sharply criticized Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s strategy during Operation Sindoor, claiming it was based on a series of incorrect assumptions that led to unintended and undesirable consequences.
In an insightful analysis posted on X (formerly Twitter), Varadarajan dissected the operation’s outcomes and its implications for India, Pakistan, and international relations, particularly the Kashmir dispute.
Varadarajan noted that while the Modi government attempted to spin the results of the operation in its favor, the reality presented a different picture. According to Varadarajan, the consequences of Modi’s approach were predictable and ultimately unfavorable, as the operation unintentionally led to the re-internationalization of the Kashmir issue.
He emphasized that Pakistan’s actions during the operation, including its request for U.S. mediation for a ceasefire, have underscored how the conflict in Kashmir has once again become a subject of international concern.
A key point of contention in Varadarajan’s analysis was the Indian government’s refusal to acknowledge the military losses sustained during Operation Sindoor. While the government maintained that “all our pilots are back home,” Varadarajan pointed out that this statement did not equate to the claim that “all our planes are back home.”
The Indian Air Force (IAF) refrained from giving specifics on the losses, and Varadarajan suggested that this omission lent credence to Pakistan’s claims that it had downed multiple Indian aircraft.
He argued that the reluctance to acknowledge these losses stemmed from the Modi government’s political motives, as it feared that admitting these losses would alter public perceptions and undermine the operation’s perceived success.
Varadarajan also highlighted the discontent among Modi’s right-wing supporters, some of whom believed that the prime minister lacked the resolve to pursue a full military solution against Pakistan.
Despite this criticism, Varadarajan argued that Modi had always understood that no military solution was possible. His decision to take aggressive action, including the “Balakot x9” strategy, was driven more by political calculations than a realistic assessment of the situation. The resulting escalation and fallout from the operation proved Modi’s approach to be misguided.
The journalist contrasted India’s rigid stance with the more nuanced, multifaceted approach typically employed by most countries in managing adversarial relations.
While countries generally rely on a mix of diplomatic, economic, and military tools, Modi’s strategy, according to Varadarajan, was based on flawed assumptions and lacked the flexibility needed to effectively navigate complex geopolitical challenges.
Ultimately, Varadarajan concluded that the outcome of Operation Sindoor was unlikely to deter Pakistan from its stance, and the operation’s results have opened up further questions about India’s approach to dealing with its neighbor.
He underscored that the Kashmir issue remains deeply rooted in unresolved United Nations resolutions from 1948, which continue to call for a plebiscite to allow the Kashmiri people to determine their own future. The failure to address this long-standing issue, Varadarajan suggested, would only prolong the tension and conflict between the two nations.
