War is the realm of uncertainty,” wrote the renowned Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz. “Three quarters of the factors on which action in war is based are wrapped in a fog of greater or lesser uncertainty.” He could well have been writing about Operation Sindoor. A year after India struck nine terror targets in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, that fog has only been compounded by the predominance of artificial intelligence, the impact of social media and elements of misinformation, disinformation and wrong information.
India’s assertion that “Sindoor is still continuing” reflect this unresolved state, mirrored by Pakistan’s framing of its response under “Bunyanun Marsoos”. Neither side appears to treat the episode as concluded; instead, it has evolved into a reference point for future conflict. For the wider world, the 88-hour confrontation served as a reminder that South Asia remains a nuclear flashpoint.
Operation Sindoor saw the first-ever use of cruise and long-range missiles between the two neighbours, alongside a full-scale drone war. Pakistan deployed drones ranging from basic models to the sophisticated Turkish YIHA kamikaze and the Asisguard Songar combat drones. India responded effectively with Israeli-made Harpy and Harop drones operated by the Army, while the Navy’s MARCOS commandos operated Palm 120 and AI-enabled Palm 400 kamikaze drones—proof of theaterisation in action.
The operation began on the night of May 6–7, 2025.
For Colonel Koshank Lamba, commanding officer of the 302 Medium Regiment, the moment was unlike any he had faced before. Deployed near the Line of Control after days of rapid mobilisation, he was tasked with executing a strike where timing and accuracy were critical. Before the clock struck 0100 hours, Lamba must have paused for a moment of reflection. His orders were unambiguous: strike the adversary where it mattered most, and strike hard. At the appointed moment, Lamba fired the first M982Excalibur precision-guided shell from the American-made M777 ultra-light howitzer. The first shell struck Muzaffarabad at 1:12am. The Army’s targets included two locations in Muzaffarabad, two in Kotli and three in Sialkot.
Meanwhile, in the skies above, Squadron Leader Rizwan Malik, flying a twin-seater Sukhoi Su-30MKI as deputy mission leader, led formations along terrain-hugging, low-altitude routes to designated launch positions. From there, they released their payloads. The arsenal was formidable: the French SCALP/Storm Shadow, Israeli Crystal Maze and Rampage—both high-precision, deep-strike missiles, and the supersonic BrahMos cruise missile. The Air Force had two principal targets: one in Muridke and the other in Bahawalpur, both long identified as hubs of terrorist activity.
The seven Army targets and the two IAF targets had been selected from a larger pool of 21 sites studied in detail by the Indian security establishment. Of the nine chosen, five were linked to the Jaish-e-Mohammed, three to the Lashkar-e-Taiba and one to the Hizbul Mujahideen.
The strikes marking the opening phase of Operation Sindoor were executed in 28 minutes. At 1:44am, the Press Information Bureau issued a statement: “A little while ago, the Indian Armed Forces launched ‘Operation Sindoor’, hitting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir from where terrorist attacks against India have been planned and directed.”
Yet, reports soon emerged that the IAF had lost a number of aircraft. Pakistan claimed that it had downed Indian fighters using Chinese-made PL-15 beyond-visual-range missiles fired from long distances. To be fair to the IAF, Pakistan had been forewarned and was fully prepared. The element of surprise, so often decisive in warfare, was largely absent.
While specific numbers were not officially disclosed, senior military leaders acknowledged that losses had occurred during the opening phase. As Air Marshal A.K. Bharti later noted, losses are an inherent part of combat operations. Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan also indicated that the initial stages had been challenging.
Several factors contributed to these early difficulties. India had deliberately restricted its targets to non-military infrastructure, leaving Pakistani military assets untouched. This provided Pakistan with greater operational freedom to respond. In addition, the element of surprise appears to have been limited, reducing the effectiveness of the initial strike package.
What followed, however, marked a striking turnaround. When Pakistan retaliated with drone swarms and conventionally armed short-range ballistic missiles such as the Fatah-I and Fatah-II, the conflict expanded into a broader military engagement. Within 48 hours, Rafales, Sukhoi-30 MKIs and Mirage 2000s, supported by British-origin Banshee decoy drones, hit 12 military sites, exposing significant vulnerabilities in Pakistan’s air defence systems. As Chauhan later noted: “We rectified tactics and then went back on the 7th, 8th and 10th in large numbers to hit air bases deep inside Pakistan, penetrated all their air defences with impunity, carried out precision strikes.”
At 0200 hours on May 10, a BrahMos missile launched from a Sukhoi fighter struck the Nur Khan airbase at Chaklala, near Islamabad. A C-130 military transport aircraft, hangars, the air traffic control system and command and control facilities were destroyed. Within minutes, Indian missiles and Harop and Harpy drones inflicted heavy damage on airbases and military installations in Sargodha, Murid, Sukkur, Chunian, Pasrur, Jacobabad, Bholari, Rahim Yar Khan, Arifwala and Nayachor.
At sea, the indigenous aircraft carrier INS Vikrant operated in the Arabian Sea near Pakistani waters, its MiG-29 fighters on high alert, ready to respond to any escalation along Pakistan’s southern and coastal regions. The Navy adopted a forward posture, deploying around 36 warships, including submarines such as the nuclear-powered INS Arihant and Scorpene-class boats. Destroyers, including the BrahMos-armed INS Kolkata, positioned themselves within striking range of Karachi. The deployment had three objectives: to impose a naval blockade and confine Pakistani naval assets to harbour, to provide robust air defence against potential threats from the Makran coast and to maintain continuous surveillance.
One of the most notable features of Operation Sindoor was the degree of coordination between the three services. The Army, the Navy and the Air Force operated in close synchrony, suggesting progress towards integrated theatre-level operations. This jointness, long emphasised in military reforms, appeared to find practical expression during the conflict.
There was also a broader structural reality underpinning the confrontation. Both India and Pakistan relied heavily on imported military platforms and systems. India’s inventory included equipment sourced from multiple countries, while Pakistan’s arsenal reflected a mix of Chinese, western and other technologies. The conflict thus underscored the globalised nature of contemporary warfare, where supply chains and partnerships shape capabilities as much as domestic production.
For Pakistan, the conflict has triggered significant changes at the operational, tactical and doctrinal levels. Islamabad has used its new-found opening with the United States during Sindoor to position itself as a mediator in the ongoing US–Iran tensions. This “peace broker” role also serves a practical economic purpose, helping justify continued external financing for a fragile economy. Deepening its engagement with the Middle East, Pakistan has signed a Strategic Mutual Defence Agreement (SDMA) with Saudi Arabia, under which an attack on either country is treated as an attack on both.
A few months after Sindoor, Pakistan passed the 27th Constitutional Amendment, creating the post of Chief of Defence Forces (CDF) and formally entrenching the army’s primacy. The CDF will also head the Strategic Plans Division, effectively placing the nuclear arsenal under direct army control. Islamabad has also established an Army Rocket Force Command (ARFC), modelled on China’s PLA Rocket Force. This move reflects lessons from Sindoor, where Pakistan struggled to deploy long-range missile capabilities effectively. The “dual-use” nature of these missiles—capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear warheads—meant that any deployment risked triggering global alarm over possible escalation. The ARFC signals a doctrinal shift towards conventional missile use below the nuclear threshold, expanding space for conventional conflict while lowering nuclear risks.
The ARFC is expected to bring under its command short- to medium-range conventional missile systems, including those based on the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System. This would likely include the Fatah-1 (with a range of around 140km) and the Fatah-2. There are indications that the ARFC may be structured around the existing artillery divisions of the Pakistan Army. At present, there are two such divisions: the Gujranwala-headquartered 2 Artillery Division and the 21 Artillery Division based in Pano Aqil, near Hyderabad.
Pakistan has also raised a dedicated drone force under army control to coordinate unmanned operations. In January, it conducted a high-intensity exercise in Khairpur Tamewali involving drones, electronic warfare systems and advanced surveillance assets. Sindoor may also have influenced Washington’s decision to approve a $686 million package to upgrade Pakistan’s F-16 fleet, extending service life to 2040, alongside the induction of Chinese-origin Z-10ME attack helicopters.
In another strategic outreach, Pakistan has deployed its 25th Mechanised Division—also known as the Karachi-based ‘Charging Bull Division’, comprising roughly 10,000 troops—along the Saudi Arabia–Yemen border, in line with the provisions of the SMDA signed with Saudi Arabia. This move follows the reported deployment of around 18 Pakistani fighter aircraft, jointly developed with China, in Saudi Arabia.
There are also reports that, since September 2025, the Pakistan army has been involved in relocating terror infrastructure to more secure locations in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. This comes amid indications of efforts to facilitate closer coordination between Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Islamic State Khorasan Province. Such developments could signal an intent to redeploy these assets against Baloch insurgents and the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan.
For India, Operation Sindoor underscored the urgency of ‘atmanirbharta’ in defence production and exposed capability gaps, particularly in a two-front war scenario. New Delhi closed 2025–26 with capital procurement clearances exceeding Rs3.84 lakh crore and contracts worth Rs1.82 lakh crore. Planned acquisitions include 114 Rafale fighters, additional P-8I aircraft, Rafale Marine jets and advanced surveillance systems.
The Army has raised specialised units such as Bhairav and Shaktibaan battalions, signalling a shift towards agile, mission-oriented structures. Precision-strike capabilities have expanded through loitering munitions, kamikaze drones and laser-guided systems. Enhanced surveillance through tethered drones and a strengthened air defence grid reflect a broader move towards speed, precision and survivability.
The long-term significance of Operation Sindoor lies in the transformation it has set in motion. With the nature of conflict continuing to evolve, officials say India’s focus will remain on building capabilities that enhance speed, precision and survivability—factors increasingly seen as decisive in modern warfare.