Part Three
India’s Military Adventure
Against the backdrop of its expanding strategic partnerships with the United States and other Western powers, India’s growing defence capabilities, and its increasing international stature as a counterweight to China in the Indo-Pacific, the Modi government appeared to conclude that the regional strategic environment was favourable for adopting a more assertive military posture towards Pakistan.
Simultaneously confronted with internal political challenges, economic pressures and an intensifying terrorist campaign along its western frontier, Pakistan was widely perceived in New Delhi as being strategically overstretched. The terrorist attack at Pahalgam on 22 April 2025 became the immediate catalyst for the crisis. India promptly blamed Pakistan-based militant groups, mobilised diplomatic support, and generated intense public pressure for military retaliation.
Pakistan denied any involvement, rejected the allegations as premature, and called for an impartial international investigation. Nevertheless, bilateral tensions rapidly escalated, bringing the two nuclear-armed neighbours to the brink of a full-scale war.
India’s Military Adventure And Pakistan’s Robust Response
On the night of 6–7 May, India launched air strikes against multiple targets inside Pakistan, asserting that they were directed against terrorist infrastructure. The Indian air strikes hit mosques, madrassas and civilian areas, resulting in civilian casualties.
The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) responded immediately, intercepting the attacking formations and, according to Pakistan’s official account, and confirmed by the world reporters, inflicting significant losses on the Indian Air Force (IAF) while preserving its own operational capability.
This early aerial engagement, in which the IAF lost four Rafael stealth jets and four other high-profile jets (SU-30, Mirage 2000, and MiG-29), fundamentally altered the military balance and deprived India of the initiative it had expected to achieve through air power. PAF achieved air superiority and maintained it throughout the war. President Donald Trump repeatedly asserted that India’s eight Rafales had been shot down.
Subsequent Israeli drone incursions on 8 May and Brahmo missile strikes on 9 May also failed to produce the intended strategic effect. The Indian Navy aircraft carrier Vikrant attempted to enter Pakistan’s exclusive economic zone. Still, he beat a hasty retreat after seeing the Pakistan Navy fully alert and ready to fire at the approaching carrier.
While Pakistan’s air defence network intercepted the majority of the incoming Israeli drones (90 in number), the Brahmo surface-to-surface missile attacks on military installations were interpreted in Islamabad as a significant escalation that crossed Pakistan’s declared threshold of strategic restraint. Consequently, the Pakistan Armed Forces launched Operation Bunyan al-Marsus under the overall supervision of Chief of Army Staff General Asim Munir in the early morning of 10 May.
The operation combined precision air strikes, long-range fires, and coordinated ground actions against selected military objectives, with Pakistan neutralising India’s 15 air bases, destroying two batteries of S-400, an ammunition storehouse of Brahmos, and thus gaining complete strategic initiative within a short period. As the conflict intensified and the risks of further escalation between the two nuclear-armed states became increasingly evident, intensive diplomatic efforts gathered momentum.
A ceasefire was eventually brokered through international mediation, bringing the hostilities to an end before they could expand into a prolonged conventional war under a nuclear overhang. Although Modi denied requesting several Arab States and Washington to arrange a ceasefire, Trump confirmed that he was approached, and he mediated a ceasefire on May 10.
Regardless of the differing narratives advanced by the two sides, the crisis underscored the grave dangers of military confrontation in South Asia and reaffirmed that, in the nuclear age, sustained dialogue and crisis-management mechanisms remain indispensable to regional peace and stability.
Outcome of Operation Maarka Haq
Strategic Summary of Kinetic Strikes Confirmed Targets Eliminated on May 10, 2025
▪️Beas: BrahMos missile depot destroyed.
▪️Udhampur: S-400 air defence systems obliterated.
▪️ Pathankot Airbase rendered inoperative; Airfield demolished.
▪️ Logistics HQ blasted.
▪️Jalandhar: Sustained precision strikes on airbase & Infrastructure critically damaged.
▪️Nagrota (Northern Command): BrahMos launch site neutralized & Operational command disrupted.
▪️Akhnoor: Brigade HQ destroyed.
▪️Uri: Supply depot flattened.
▪️Srinagar: HQ of Northern Command & Airbase made dysfunctional.
▪️Chandigarh: Weapons depot neutralized; communications disrupted.
▪️Suratgarh: Airfield destroyed.
▪️Multiple Sites (Nagrota, Jammu, Baramulla): Command and logistics nodes eliminated.
▪️ Sirsa airbase annihilated.
▪️ Military Intelligence Headquarters at Rajouri was destroyed.
Air Combat Hostile Air Assets Neutralised
Rafale Jet Engagements on night 6/7 May 2025: 4 jets downed over Sialkot, Lahore & Kashmir sectors – confirmed visual feed received. Four other jets (SU-30, Mirage 2000, and MiG 29) were shot down. 90+ Israeli-made drones neutralised on 8 May. PAF didn’t lose a single jet, and all the airbases remained functional. No loss to any military installation.
Pakistan’s Drone Strikes Deep Penetration Operations on 10 May without any loss
▪️ Jammu & Kashmir: Samba, Jammu, Uri, Nowgam, Poonch, Rajouri, Baramulla, Avantipura, Nagrota.
▪️ Punjab, Rajasthan & Border Areas
Pathankot, Pokhran, Amritsar, Ferozepur, Fazilka, Lalgarh, Jatta, Jaisalmer, Barmer, Bhuj, Kuarbet, Lakhi Nalla, Hoor Maniya.
▪️ Hisar, Haryana Missile interception
near Delhi NCR.
Cyber Warfare Strategic Infrastructure Disruption
Energy Grid
▪️ 10 SCADA networks disabled
▪️ 70% of the Northern grid is offline
▪️ Urban power & wind systems shut down
Transport & Utilities
▪️ Indian Railways’ digital network destroyed
▪️ Delhi Gas and Kashmir Electric are disabled
Digital Penetration
▪️ 507 high-value devices wiped out.
▪️ 150 databases exfiltrated.
▪️ 15 email servers compromised.
▪️ 13 key government sites defaced or deleted.
*High-Value Breaches Included:
▪️ UIDAI (Aadhar), Indian Air Force networks.
▪️ Maharashtra Election Commission.
▪️ Paytm Data.
▪️ Mumbai International Airport.
▪️ Over 2,500 surveillance systems infiltrated.
Defaced Entities
▪️ BJP (Madhya Pradesh), MTNL, HAL, BEML.
▪️ BSF internal files, AINTSSA, CRIAI.
▪️ 110+ corporate sites and 3 national media outlets.
A UK-based strategic research firm has reportedly acknowledged Pakistan’s decisive military dominance during Maarka-e-Haq, highlighting:
- Destruction of multiple Indian aircraft, including four Rafales.
- Minimal Pakistani losses – zero combat aircraft lost.
- Indian drones were neutralized by Pakistan’s air defence systems.
- Satellite imagery backs the assessment.
- Indian losses estimated at $45–$51 billion.
India’s Dilemma
After the humiliation India suffered as a result of the misadventure of Operation Sindoor, it no longer dares to launch a direct attack. India appears to have concluded that neither the forcible acquisition of Kashmir nor the military defeat of Pakistan is achievable through conventional warfare.
Having failed to attain its objectives through Operation Sindoor and unable to escalate towards a “Sindoor-2” scenario, New Delhi is increasingly relying on indirect and hybrid warfare strategies aimed at destabilizing Pakistan from within.
One dimension of this strategy is the misuse of Afghan territory to facilitate cross-border terrorism and proxy warfare in insurgency-prone Pakistan’s provinces of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and Balochistan. Instead, it has opened two alternative fronts, the first of which is terrorism through paid proxies making use of the Afghan soil.
This war is not confined only to Fitna al-Hind and Fitna al-Khawarij. Emirati proxies are also fully active in this conflict.
Israel has, through India and Afghanistan, effectively reached Pakistan’s borders. There is resentment over Pakistan’s growing closeness with Iran. There is also frustration over Israel’s growing diplomatic isolation in the world, and India’s humiliation on 9 May.
Above all, there is discomfort over the progress of CPEC and Gwadar; the probability of Chabahar and Gwadar ports complementing each other, and the stalled Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline getting commissioned. The issue, much like the idea of “Greater Israel,” is that of “Greater Balochistan.” Every proxy force has its eyes fixed on Balochistan. Balochistan urgently demands the attention of the country’s leadership.
The enemy is not one—it is many
Larry Johnson, a former CIA researcher and intelligence analyst who now appears on American media as a commentator, has made the startling claim that the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and Israel have maintained intelligence cooperation for the past 46 years.
If this is true, it would mean that the BLA is now directly receiving Israeli assistance while targeting ordinary Baloch civilians.
These enemies have always become active whenever Pakistan’s national interests have advanced or whenever global opinion has begun to tilt in Pakistan’s favour.
Since the BLA has altered its strategy and launched attacks in new ways, the State must also adapt its own strategy. Most importantly, the State must treat this issue with the seriousness it deserves. Preventing suicide bombings is extremely difficult. The roots of the enemy must be cut off, and the branches will wither on their own.
Of late, Afghanistan is making extensive use of drones in the two conflict zones of KP and Baluchistan. Both India and Israel are not only providing two types of armed drones, but have also built factories at Bagram and Jalalabad for the production of drones.
The sponsors and facilitators of terrorism against Pakistan are no secret. Some are those who, after suffering defeat in direct warfare, have turned to terrorism. Others cannot digest the success of Gwadar. As long as these facilitators exist, no number of operations or military strikes will eliminate the TTP or the BLA, because these organisations are supplying young recruits for terrorism.
Some are targeting the opportunities created by CPEC, while others are unhappy with Pakistan’s role during the Iran–United States confrontation, believing that Pakistan prevented what they describe as a Zionist plan to ignite an Arab-Iranian war.
There are many names involved. Some are exposed, while others remain behind the curtain. As Pakistan gains greater respect within the international community, the pain and frustration of its adversaries continue to grow. However, just as these enemies failed in the past, God willing, they will fail again. Just as Tehreek-e-Labbaik was dealt with, it is hoped that the foreign-paid proxies would be eliminated and their political cover-ups, BYC, PTM, will also be dismantled.
Pakistan’s Enemies
There are only two countries in the world that officially maintain positions against Pakistan’s territorial integrity and openly aspire to parts of its land: India and Afghanistan. The fundamental positions of both countries pose a threat to Pakistan’s geographical integrity, and the basis of their recent cooperation is their shared hostility towards Pakistan.
India is Pakistan’s arch-enemy. Afghanistan, however, is our brotherly Islamic neighbour, and Pakistan has traditionally wished it well. This is why some people find it difficult to understand the situation. Yet, surprisingly, these two countries share one common characteristic that needs to be understood: hostility towards Pakistan.
This is neither temporary nor circumstantial. There is historical evidence to support this claim.
India believes that the creation of Pakistan divided “Mother India.” Afghanistan believes that Pakistan’s creation divided Afghan territory. India lays claim to parts of Pakistan’s territory, and whether the government is led by Congress or the BJP, that claim remains unchanged.
Likewise, Afghanistan also claims parts of Pakistan’s territory, and whether the government is headed by King Zahir Shah, Hamid Karzai, or the Taliban, that claim has remained consistent.
Indo-Afghan-Israel -UAE Axis
Israel and the UAE have, in varying ways, aligned with the Indo-Afghan nexus in developments that Pakistan perceives as detrimental to its security and strategic interests.
From Pakistan’s perspective, Israel views the country as an ideological challenge, while the UAE has expressed concerns over the growing significance of Gwadar Port, which it sees as a potential competitor to its regional commercial and maritime interests.
Indo-US-Israel Nexus
The United States’ longstanding strategic alignment with Israel and India is well known.
Since the early 1990s, the three countries have steadily expanded their strategic cooperation. According to many analysts in Pakistan, this convergence has sought to constrain Pakistan’s strategic capabilities, including its nuclear deterrent, and to impede the progress of the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).
Although President Donald Trump appeared to adopt a more favourable tone towards Pakistan following the four-day India–Pakistan conflict, while publicly criticising India, Pakistan should continue to exercise strategic caution and formulate its policies with prudence, keeping in view the fluid and evolving nature of regional and global politics.
To be concluded
The author, Brigadier (Retd) Asif Haroon Raja, SI (M), is a war veteran. He is Command and Staff Course and War Course qualified, holds an MSc in War Studies, and served as Defence Attaché in Egypt and Sudan, as well as Dean of the Corps of Military Attachés in Cairo. He is a defence, security, and geopolitical analyst, columnist, featured columnist of IntelDrop magazine, Washington, author of five books, former Chairman of Thinkers Forum Pakistan, Patron-in-Chief of Centre for Development Studies Think Tank, Director of Meesakh Research Centre; he regularly appears on media platforms.
