Following a 22 April terrorist attack in the picturesque resort of Pahalgam in the Kashmir Valley, in North India, in which 28 Hindu Indian tourists were mercilessly gunned down, a military conflict between India and Pakistan escalated into a significant standoff. Both nations engaged in airstrikes, drone attacks, and artillery exchanges.
The terrorist attack was claimed by The Resistance Front, an offshoot of Lashkar-e-Taiba. It was later retracted as the implications of survivor testimonies of terrorists identifying Hindu males by asking to recite the kalima and pulling down their pants to check for circumcision became evident. Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), a Pakistan-based militant organisation founded in 1986, has long been a significant actor in the volatile dynamics of South Asian geopolitics, particularly in the context of the India-Pakistan conflict over Kashmir. India accused Pakistan of supporting the militants, leading to heightened tensions.
Indo-Pakistan Conflict: Escalation in Early May 2025
On May 7, 2025, the Indian Air Force launched airstrikes on Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu & Kashmir, targeting “terrorist infrastructure” of groups like Lashkar-e-Tayyiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed, in retaliation for the April massacre. The strikes hit nine sites in Pakistan’s Punjab province and PoJK, with satellite imagery showing damage, including a mosque on fire in Muridke. Pakistan reported 31 deaths and 57 injuries, while India reported 12 civilian deaths and 57 injuries from Pakistani shelling.
Hafiz Muhammad Saeed, the co-founder and emir of LeT, suffered the loss of 14 members of his family, as per reports. Pakistani Army personnel and key police officials of the Punjab province were seen attending the funeral prayers of the slain terrorists along with Hafiz Abdul Rauf, a Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorist, in Muridke, near Lahore. Civil officials and members of the banned Jamaat-ud-Dawah (JuD), founded by Hafiz Saeed, were also present.
Pakistan responded with retaliatory strikes, spreading propaganda to have shot down five Indian Air Force jets, including three Rafale jets, in the fog of war through misinformation. The four-day conflict saw intense aerial engagements, with 125 fighter jets involved in a “dog fight” and missile exchanges over 160 km, with efforts to minimise civilian casualties.
On May 10, 2025, a ceasefire was announced, effective from 5:00 PM IST, following Pakistan DGMO’s call to his Indian counterpart, with both nations reaching an agreement to “cease” hostilities. However, the truce showed signs of collapsing within hours, with Pakistan firing drones on the cities of Srinagar, Akhnoor, Baramulla, Jodhpur, Amritsar and Jammu. Indian officials reported continued shelling on the LoC as well, while Pakistan denied any breaches.
Three lessons for Indians from the 2025 war with Pakistan
A. The Stellar Performance of India’s Indigenous Defence Industry
Over recent decades, India’s military capabilities across air, land, and sea domains have seen remarkable growth, particularly in comparison to regional neighbours like Pakistan. This progress is underpinned by a strategic emphasis on indigenous manufacturing, reducing dependence on imports and fostering a self-reliant defence ecosystem. The country’s defence production has surged, with figures indicating a production value of ₹1.27 lakh crore in FY 2023-24, a 174% increase from ₹46,429 crore in 2014-15, driven by initiatives like ‘Make in India’.
This growth is supported by a robust domestic manufacturing base, with 65% of defence equipment now produced locally, up from being 65-70% import-dependent previously. India’s commitment to indigenous manufacturing is evident in the development and battle-testing of advanced armament systems. During Operation Sindoor in May 2025, India deployed a range of advanced indigenous and imported weapon systems to target terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
Key Weapon Systems Utilised
1. Air-Launched Munitions:
SCALP (Storm Shadow) Cruise Missiles: Deployed from Rafale jets, these long-range missiles were used to strike high-value targets deep within enemy territory. HAMMER Precision-Guided Munitions: Also launched from Rafale aircraft, these bombs provided flexibility in engaging various target types with high accuracy.
2. Surface-to-Surface Missiles:
BrahMos Supersonic Cruise Missiles: Confirmed by Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, these missiles were employed for their speed and precision in neutralising enemy positions.
3. Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVS):
SkyStriker Loitering Munitions: These suicide drones, developed through Indo-Israeli collaboration, were utilised for their ability to hover and strike targets with precision. Nagastra-1 Loitering Munitions: An indigenous system, these drones provided real-time intelligence and strike capabilities against mobile and fortified targets.
4. Air Defence Systems
S-400 Triumf: This advanced air defence system was deployed to protect Indian airspace from potential retaliatory strikes.
Akash Surface-to-Air Missiles: An indigenous system, Akash missiles were part of the layered air defence strategy during the operation.
Implications for India’s Defence Industry
The successful execution of Operation Sindoor underscores India’s capability to conduct precise and effective military operations using a blend of indigenous and imported technologies. The deployment of homegrown systems like the BrahMos missile and Akash air defence system highlights the progress of India’s defence manufacturing sector. These developments not only enhance national security but also position India as a potential exporter of advanced military technology, contributing to the global defence market and supporting the vision of self-reliance in defence production.
B. India needs to sharpen Information Warfare strategies
India is currently lagging in the global information war waged by Islamist forces that operate with sophisticated strategies, ranging from coordinated social media campaigns to state-backed funding mechanisms that distort international perceptions of India. These actors, often supported by countries like Qatar, Turkey, and Pakistan, have successfully weaponised platforms by leveraging issues like Kashmir to mislead global audiences and sway sentiment. On the ground, their financial support fuels extremist outfits and leftist organisations in India, which have been linked to violent unrest and communal disruption.
Despite India’s decisive strategic and military victories, especially this May, with a clear moral high ground, its voice was drowned out in the digital arena. Rational observers may know the truth, but without an assertive presence in the narrative space, that truth rarely gains traction. To come out on top in this ongoing narrative warfare, India must invest in a robust, coordinated information strategy.
India must treat the narrative domain as a core component of national security. To win this war of perception, the country must operate as strategically in the digital sphere as it does in conventional warfare, with an information warfare budget and vision to match its defence priorities. Only then can India assert control over its own story on the world stage.
C. High Time for Crackdown on the “0.5 front”
This moment presents a crucial opportunity for India to take decisive action on what is often referred to as the “0.5 front”—the internal security and ideological war that runs parallel to conventional military threats. The firm measures implemented during the recent near-war situation—a calibrated and strategic response to terrorism—must not be seen as temporary. Instead, they should be institutionalised and expanded to fortify the nation from within.
This involves fast-tracking key legislative and administrative actions such as the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), National Register of Citizens (NRC), Uniform Civil Code (UCC), and the long-pending nationwide population census. Stronger mechanisms for identifying, deporting, and extraditing illegal infiltrators and foreign-funded subversive elements are equally essential.
The internal front also requires a robust counter to ideological subversion and anti-national propaganda, whether it comes from radicalised cells, extremist fronts, or digital influencers playing to hostile narratives. Fortifying India must include securing the digital domain, where narrative manipulation and psychological warfare are rampant.
We can no longer afford unchecked freedoms that allow individuals aligned with adversarial forces—whether Chinese, Pakistani (ISI), or Islamist—to exploit free speech for clicks, likes, and to dominate discourse under the guise of secularism or dissent. Winning the 0.5 front means building national resilience: through legal reform, digital surveillance, cultural assertion, and zero tolerance toward internal saboteurs. This is not about curbing rights but about securing the republic from those who wish to destabilise it from within.
Conclusion
The British, in their bid to appease the Muslim League and maintain control, laid the foundations of a terror-driven state, not as a solution, but as a strategic obstacle to India’s rise. This legacy endures, and even if the Pakistani civil society rises in pursuit of democracy and coexistence, the nature of Islamism remains unchanged: it adapts, cloaks itself in democratic rhetoric, and entrenches itself over time.
From Egypt and Iran to Turkey and Malaysia, history has shown that surface reforms often mask deeper authoritarian or theocratic ambitions. India must face this reality alone. There are no lasting allies—only transient partnerships shaped by diplomacy and geopolitics. The sooner our next generation of policymakers, diplomats, and leaders internalises this truth, the stronger and more secure our civilisation will be.
