ISLAMABAD: The recent revelations by India’s Army Chief General UpendraDwivedi have reignited intense debate over whether Pakistan and India stoodon the precipice of nuclear confrontation during the brief but fiercemilitary clash in May 2025, known as Operation Sindoor. Triggered by adeadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam that claimed 26 civilian lives, theoperation saw India launch precision strikes on alleged terrorinfrastructure inside Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Thisfour-day escalation from May 7 to 10 raised global alarms about potentialnuclear escalation between the two nuclear-armed neighbours, yet the Indianmilitary leadership now asserts that nuclear threats remained confined topolitical rhetoric rather than operational discussions.
The conflict began with India’s missile and air strikes targeting ninesites linked to groups such as Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba. Indianofficials described the action as a calibrated response to cross-borderterrorism, emphasising precision to avoid broader military or civiliantargets. Pakistan responded with retaliatory measures, leading to exchangesof artillery, drones, and further strikes that reportedly damaged keyairbases on both sides. The rapid intensity of the engagement, involvingadvanced standoff weapons and joint operations, underscored the fragilityof stability in South Asia, where even limited conventional actions carrythe risk of spiralling beyond control.
General Upendra Dwivedi, in a recent press briefing, provided detailedinsights into the operation, stating that it lasted precisely 88 hours frominitiation to de-escalation. He highlighted the initial 22-minute strikethat disrupted adversary decision-making cycles, followed by coordinatedefforts across the three services. The Army Chief emphasised that Indiasuccessfully destroyed seven of the nine targeted sites, demonstratingtri-service synergy under clear political directives. These details reveala highly planned campaign aimed at dismantling terror networks withoutterritorial ambitions, yet the shadow of nuclear capabilities loomed largethroughout the crisis.
A key aspect of the revelations concerns the absence of nuclear discussionsduring military communications. General Dwivedi explicitly noted that notalks on nuclear warfare took place between the Directors General ofMilitary Operations of India and Pakistan. He attributed any nuclearrhetoric, dismissing it as non-operational. This assertion challengesearlier perceptions of brinkmanship, suggesting that both sides managed tokeep the conflict within conventional boundaries despite mutual nuclearpostures.
The operation has been described by Indian sources as establishing a newnormal in counter-terrorism doctrine, where no distinction is made betweenterrorists and their alleged state sponsors. Prime Minister Narendra Modiarticulated this shift, emphasising assured retaliation to attacks onIndian soil. The campaign expanded the space for conventional operationsbelow the nuclear threshold, with India’s no-first-use policy and targetedstrikes contributing to controlled escalation. Analysts note that thisapproach punctured long-standing nuclear rhetoric, allowing India toconduct decisive actions without immediate fear of atomic response.
Pakistan, however, viewed the strikes as provocative, leading to aretaliatory operation that inflicted losses on Indian positions. The briefconflict ended through international mediation, reportedly involving theUnited States, highlighting the role of external powers in preventing widercatastrophe. Post-conflict assessments indicate that both nations drewsignificant lessons on multidomain warfare, including the use of drones,precision munitions, and real-time intelligence. The Indian Army Chiefconfirmed that Operation Sindoor remains ongoing as a standing postureagainst potential future threats, warning that any misadventure would faceresolute response.
Read Top Stories
General Dwivedi stressed India’s readiness for ground operations hadPakistan escalated further during the 88-hour window. This preparednessreflects enhanced mobilisation and strategic clarity, altering previousassumptions about rapid escalation to nuclear levels. The conflict thusserved as a test of deterrence stability in a nuclearised environment.
These disclosures come amid ongoing regional tensions, including disputesover Kashmir and water resources. The Indian Army Chief’s commentsreinforce a narrative of restraint and precision on India’s part, whilecritics argue such operations risk miscalculation in a volatile region.International observers continue to monitor developments closely, given thecatastrophic potential of any future escalation between these nuclearpowers.
Brinkmanship, General Upendra Dwivedi
ogimageimage-name
