Battle of Truth

A YEAR after the four-day military confrontation between India and Pakistan, it is time for introspection to develop a better understanding of what led India to commit this blatant act of aggression and to draw lessons that can be applied to handling future crises of this sort. First, let’s figure out why India attacked several non-military sites in Pakistan on May 7, killing 31 civilians. Prima facie, it wanted to avenge the April 22 terrorist attack on tourists in Pahalgam in Indian-occupied Kashmir. In a knee-jerk reaction, India blamed Pakistan. The latter condemned the incident and called for an impartial investigation. India expected the world to accept its allegations against Pakistan, with no questions asked. But to its surprise, not one country endorsed its allegations. For over two decades since 9/11, India has sold a flawed narrative to the world that Pakistan was the epicentre of terrorism. That lie now stood exposed. Another plausible reason for the May 7 aggression, codenamed Operation Sindoor, was to establish a new normal that India could use force against Pakistan unilaterally and pre-emptively if it suspected a Pakistani link to terrorism in India. Little did it know that Pakistan was well prepared to beat back its aggression and defend itself. Responding swiftly, the Pakistan Air Force brought down seven Indian aircraft, including the pricey Rafale, which were flying beyond visual range. Instead of backing off, India sent in armed drones to destroy Pakistan’s air defences and radar installations and later its missiles struck three Pakistani bases. When it became evident that neither international law nor diplomatic efforts would check India’s aggression, Pakistan struck back on May 10, now observed as Youm-i-Marka-i-Haq (Day of the Battle of Truth). Pakistan’s network-based, integrated, and multi-domain counter attack, employing missiles, drones, electronic warfare and cyberattacks, was so emphatic that India ended up asking the US to help secure