Operation Sindoor: India’s Righteous Retaliation Meets Cautious Western Response

  Alok Lahad   

Senior Journalist and News Analyst. Research Scholar and Hispanist. Writes on Indian & European Affairs and Geopolitics   from Barcelona, Spain. 

Barcelona,May 7, 2025 – In a bold and decisive move, India launched Operation Sindoor on the night of May 6-7, 2025, obliterating nine terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoK). The operation, a direct response to the heinous Pahalgam terror attack that claimed 26 lives, including a Nepali citizen, reaffirmed India’s unyielding resolve to crush terrorism at its roots. As the Indian Armed Forces executed precision strikes with unparalleled coordination, the world watched, with the United States and European powers issuing measured responses that acknowledge India’s right to self-defense but betray a hesitancy rooted in geopolitical caution. This article examines the Western reaction, the broader pattern of Muslim terrorist attacks, and why India’s retribution is both justified and a warning to Pakistan of catastrophic consequences should tensions escalate.

Operation Sindoor: A Strike Against Terror

The Pahalgam attack, orchestrated by Pakistan-based terrorists, was a brutal reminder of the scourge India has faced for decades. Operation Sindoor saw the Indian Army, Air Force, and Navy unite in a historic operation, targeting terrorist hideouts with pinpoint accuracy. Defence Minister Rajnath Singh hailed the strikes as “justice served,” emphasizing that no Pakistani military targets were hit, underscoring India’s restraint. Yet, Pakistan’s predictable response—artillery shelling along the Line of Control and cries of “aggression”—sought to paint itself as the victim, a tactic all too familiar in the playbook of states harboring Muslim terrorists.

US Response: Sympathy Tinged with Caution

The United States, a key ally in India’s fight against terrorism, expressed a nuanced stance. President Donald Trump called the escalation “a shame” and hoped for a swift resolution, while Secretary of State Marco Rubio affirmed engagement with both nations to promote peace. The US implicitly recognized India’s right to retaliate against terrorism, a position consistent with its own counterterrorism policies. However, its call for de-escalation reflects a fear of nuclear brinkmanship, given Pakistan’s arsenal. American media, such as CNN, labeled the strikes a “major escalation” but acknowledged India’s targeting of terrorist infrastructure, balancing Pakistan’s claims of civilian harm with India’s narrative of precision.

From India’s perspective, the US response is encouraging but falls short of unequivocal support. Washington’s diplomatic tightrope, driven by its strategic interests in South Asia, fails to fully honor the moral clarity of India’s actions. The Pahalgam victims demand justice, and India’s surgical strikes were a proportionate response to Pakistan’s complicity in terrorism.

European Leaders: Restraint Over Resolve

European reactions, led by France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK, mirror the US’s cautious approach. French Foreign Minister Barrot explicitly acknowledged India’s right to defend itself but urged restraint, a sentiment likely shared by Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK, though none issued specific statements. The European Union, represented by its broader diplomatic framework, aligns with the UN’s call for “maximum military restraint,” as voiced by Secretary-General António Guterres. Israel, notably, stood out as a staunch supporter, with Ambassador Reuven Azar declaring on X that “terrorists should know there’s no place to hide.”

India views this European reticence with frustration. France’s acknowledgment is a step forward, but the silence from Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK—nations with strong ties to India—suggests a reluctance to confront Pakistan’s role as a terrorist haven. Europe’s obsession with de-escalation risks emboldening Pakistan, whose nuclear saber-rattling shields its sponsorship of groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed.

European Press: Amplifying Pakistan’s Victim Card

European media coverage, notably from Euronews and Reuters, has been balanced but problematic from an Indian lens. Euronews detailed India’s strikes as a response to Pahalgam but gave prominence to Pakistan’s claims of eight deaths, including a child, and damage to a mosque in Bahawalpur. Reuters highlighted a mosque hit in Muzaffarabad, amplifying unverified Pakistani narratives. Social media posts on X criticized outlets like Le Figaro for allegedly equating India’s democratic resolve with Pakistan’s terrorist complicity, while a Dutch radio station in Belgium was accused of spreading fake news about Pakistan downing Indian jets.

This coverage reflects a broader trend: European media’s humanitarian focus often elevates Pakistan’s victimhood narrative, overshadowing the initial terrorist act. Indian commentators argue this equates a sovereign nation’s legitimate response with a state that harbors UN-designated terrorists, diluting the moral weight of India’s actions.

The Pattern of Muslim Terrorist Attacks

The Pahalgam attack and Pakistan’s subsequent posturing fit a recurring pattern seen in conflicts involving Muslim terrorist groups. From Hamas’s attacks on Israeli civilians to Pakistan-based groups targeting India, the cycle is clear: terrorists strike innocent citizens, provoking a military response, only for the perpetrators or their sponsors to claim civilian targeting. In Gaza, Hamas embeds among civilians, then decries Israeli strikes on hospitals and schools. In Pakistan, terrorist camps in PoK operate near populated areas, enabling claims of civilian harm, as seen with the Muzaffarabad building damage post-Sindoor.

This tactic is deliberate, leveraging global sympathy to deflect responsibility. Pakistan’s cries of “aggression” and unverified reports of mosque strikes mirror Hamas’s strategy, aiming to shift focus from terrorism to the responder’s actions. Indian officials, including Wing Commander Vyomika Singh, have debunked such claims, asserting that Operation Sindoor targeted only terrorist infrastructure. Yet, the global media’s amplification of Pakistan’s narrative risks muddying the waters, a pattern India must counter with robust diplomacy.

India’s Right to Retribution

India’s response to the Pahalgam attack was not merely justified—it was a moral imperative. The brutal deaths of 26 innocents, including a foreign national, demanded swift justice. Operation Sindoor demonstrated India’s military prowess and restraint, avoiding Pakistani military targets to prevent broader conflict. Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s grant of “complete operational freedom” to the armed forces reflects the nation’s resolve to protect its citizens, a stance echoed by locals in Jammu and Kashmir chanting “Indian Army Zindabad” and “Bharat Mata ki Jai.”

The West’s cautious response, while understandable given nuclear risks, underestimates the existential threat terrorism poses to India. Pakistan’s complicity, from hosting terrorist groups to its ceasefire violations post-Sindoor, warrants global condemnation, not equivocation. India’s strikes were a warning: terrorism will not be tolerated, and Pakistan must dismantle its terror infrastructure or face dire consequences.

The Stakes: Pakistan’s Fragile Future

Should Pakistan escalate this conflict, the consequences could be catastrophic. India’s military superiority, demonstrated by Operation Sindoor’s precision, dwarfs Pakistan’s capabilities. A miscalculation could fracture Pakistan’s already fragile state, potentially splitting it into four regions—Punjab, Sindh, Balochistan, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa—amid internal ethnic tensions and economic woes. Alternatively, sustained conflict could reduce Pakistan to rubble, as India’s advanced arsenal and strategic resolve overwhelm its defenses.

Pakistan’s nuclear posturing is a desperate shield, but it cannot mask its role as a terrorist sanctuary. The international community, particularly the US and Europe, must recognize that appeasing Pakistan risks emboldening terrorism. India’s fight is not just for its own security but for global stability, as unchecked terrorism threatens democracies worldwide.

Operation Sindoor was a righteous act of retribution, delivering justice for the Pahalgam victims and signaling India’s zero-tolerance for terrorism. The US and European leaders, while acknowledging India’s right to self-defense, have prioritized de-escalation, a stance that risks diluting the urgency of dismantling Pakistan’s terror network. European media, by amplifying Pakistan’s victimhood, inadvertently perpetuate a pattern where Muslim terrorists strike, provoke retaliation, then cry foul. India stands firm in its moral and strategic clarity: the brutal deaths at the hands of Pakistan-based terrorists demand vengeance, and if Pakistan escalates, it risks disintegration or devastation. The world must stand with India, or bear the cost of a terrorist-enabled rogue state.