On May 7, 2025, South Asia witnessed its most volatile moment in over half a decade when India launched precision air and missile strikes inside Pakistan. The operation, officially dubbed Operation Sindoor, marked a major military response to the April 22 Pahalgam massacre, in which 26 Indian tourists were killed in a coordinated terrorist assault.
The Indian government blamed Pakistan-based terror outfits Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) for the attack, claiming they were aided by Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI. While the Pakistani government denied any connection, India asserted that it had “credible intelligence” and the “right to self-defense under Article 51 of the UN Charter.”
The Spark: April 22 Pahalgam Massacre
Pahalgam, known for its serene rivers and Himalayan beauty, turned into a site of bloodshed on April 22. A group of armed militants attacked two tourist buses, firing indiscriminately. The gunmen escaped into dense forest, and investigations linked them to training camps allegedly operating in Pakistan-administered Kashmir.
This wasn’t an isolated attack—it echoed the 2019 Pulwama bombing and the 2008 Mumbai siege, both of which triggered India’s aggressive postures in the past. But the scale and nature of Operation Sindoor indicated a shift from symbolic retaliation to targeted preemptive elimination.
Inside Operation Sindoor
According to India’s Ministry of Defence, nine targets were hit during the operation, including seminary campuses, training centers, logistics hubs, and safe houses across Bahawalpur, Muzaffarabad, Muridke, and Kotli. India used a combination of Rafale jets, Heron drones, and BrahMos cruise missiles.
Notably, Indian intelligence used satellite imaging, AI-driven threat detection, and SIGINT (signals intelligence) to track high-value targets. Officials claim that the use of precision-guided munitions ensured minimal collateral damage, although Pakistan disputes this.
Key Targets Hit
- Bahawalpur Seminary: Allegedly a JeM stronghold, the seminary housed key leadership figures and weapons caches. Indian reports suggest it was being used to indoctrinate and dispatch suicide attackers.
- Muridke Headquarters: Long associated with LeT, this site was targeted with cruise missiles that reportedly destroyed command structures and killed at least 8 personnel.
- Kotli Safe House: A logistics hub used for infiltration support across the Line of Control (LoC), according to Indian defense briefings.
The Human Cost
Pakistan’s Foreign Office accused India of violating international law and called the attacks “unprovoked aggression.” They confirmed 31 civilian deaths, including 11 children and 6 women, and injuries to at least 57. India, however, maintains that “terror infrastructure was targeted, not civilians.”
Hospitals in Lahore, Rawalpindi, and Muzaffarabad were overwhelmed. Pakistani rescue teams faced difficulty accessing some impact zones due to ongoing military operations and concerns over secondary explosions.
Retaliation and Cross-Border Escalation
In the aftermath of the strikes, Pakistan activated its “Quaid Doctrine”—a rapid mobilization strategy involving air patrols, artillery activation, and alert status for key battalions along the LoC.
That night, Pakistani forces retaliated with rocket and artillery fire across several sectors: Uri, Poonch, Rajouri, and Tangdhar. India reported 15 civilian casualties and 43 injuries, while Pakistani media claimed Indian shelling resulted in 12 deaths and the destruction of several homes.
Downed Aircraft and UAVs
In one of the more dramatic moments, Pakistan claimed to have downed five Indian fighter jets and one drone. India confirmed the loss of one Sukhoi-30MKI, which was brought down over LoC airspace, possibly by a Pakistani JF-17 Thunder jet.
Pakistan’s Ministry of Defence released footage of the wreckage, although Indian sources claim it was digitally manipulated. Independent verification remains pending.
Diplomatic Dominoes
Within hours of the strikes, embassies in New Delhi, Islamabad, and Beijing were on high alert. India expelled three Pakistani diplomats, while Pakistan retaliated by shutting down consular services and halting visa issuance to Indian nationals.
India also suspended the Indus Waters Treaty, a significant move considering the treaty had survived past wars and skirmishes. New Delhi argued that it could not “cooperate on shared water resources with a state that harbors terrorism.”
In response, Pakistan suspended the Simla Agreement, which governs bilateral peace and LoC engagement protocols.
Global Response
- United States: Urged “maximum restraint” and dispatched Secretary of State Linda Thomas-Greenfield to both capitals for mediation.
- Russia: Offered to host peace talks in Sochi, while warning that “further escalation may destabilize Eurasia.”
- China: Took a cautious stance, calling for dialogue while increasing patrols along its own contested border with India.
- Israel: Publicly supported India’s actions, calling them “an assertion of sovereignty and national security,” and offered intelligence-sharing support.
- United Nations: Secretary-General António Guterres expressed “grave concern,” and the UN Security Council held an emergency session, though no consensus resolution was reached.
Civilian Life and Chaos
Beyond the frontlines, the strikes paralyzed everyday life.
- In India, over 430 domestic and international flights were canceled. Railways in Punjab and Jammu suspended services. Schools in border districts were shut down, and underground bunkers were activated in villages along the LoC.
- In Pakistan, Karachi and Lahore airports were closed. Punjab and Sindh provinces declared public holidays and enforced curfews in some urban zones.
- The Indian stock market initially dipped 3.2%, but recovered after assurances from the Prime Minister’s Office. Pakistan’s Karachi Stock Exchange, however, saw a sustained drop of 9.5%, triggering circuit breakers.
Economic Fallout
The conflict came at a vulnerable time for Pakistan, which is managing a $131 billion debt burden, with only $10 billion in forex reserves. The ongoing IMF program, which had just disbursed a $1.5 billion tranche, may now be jeopardized due to instability.
India too faced economic setbacks. Tourism in Kashmir saw mass cancellations. Agricultural supply chains were disrupted in Punjab and Himachal Pradesh, especially due to border closures and transport halts.
Foreign investors in both countries grew wary. Fitch and Moody’s warned of potential credit downgrades if the conflict continued into the second quarter.
Media Wars and the Battle for Narrative
In the 2025 India-Pakistan crisis, the battlefield extended far beyond the Line of Control — into homes, phones, and screens worldwide. A parallel war of narratives erupted across television networks, social media platforms, and state-backed digital infrastructure, as both countries sought to shape global opinion and rally domestic support.
1. State-Controlled Narratives
Indian mainstream media, especially channels like Republic TV, Times Now, and Zee News, framed the strikes as a righteous and precise act of national defense. Prime-time coverage emphasized Indian Air Force precision, the elimination of “terror hubs”, and the “surgical” nature of Operation Sindoor. Newscasters frequently used military jargon and patriotic music, echoing previous war-time messaging seen during the 2019 Balakot airstrikes.
In contrast, Pakistani media outlets such as ARY News, Geo TV, and PTV portrayed the strikes as “naked aggression.” Dramatic visuals of damaged buildings, wounded civilians, and grieving families were broadcast continuously, often accompanied by slogans like “Defenders of Faith” and “Innocence Bombed.” News anchors accused India of targeting religious institutions and claimed the attacks were timed to distract from India’s internal issues.
Both governments exercised editorial control over national broadcasters, limiting dissenting or nuanced reporting.
2. Social Media as a Weapon
Social platforms like X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube became primary theaters for digital conflict. Hashtags such as #IndiaStrikesBack, #OperationSindoor, #PakRetaliates, and #FalseFlagPahalgam trended in both countries, often accompanied by images and videos with questionable authenticity.
Key examples of misinformation:
- Doctored Videos: A widely circulated video supposedly showing Indian missiles hitting a JeM training camp in Bahawalpur was later revealed to be from a 2017 Syrian airstrike.
- AI-Generated Content: Indian digital watchdogs flagged a deepfake video showing Prime Minister Narendra Modi allegedly threatening nuclear retaliation. Pakistani agencies denied producing it, but the source remains unknown.
- Fake Casualty Figures: Multiple pro-Pakistan accounts claimed over 500 Indian soldiers had died in retaliatory strikes. This was debunked by independent analysts, but the claims went viral before corrections could spread.
- Spoofed Emergency Alerts: On May 8, several residents in Jammu and Kashmir reported receiving SMS alerts warning of nuclear escalation. Investigations revealed these messages were spoofed using vulnerabilities in mobile telecom networks, possibly through a cyber operation originating outside India or Pakistan.
3. Bot Networks and Troll Armies
Both countries are known to operate state-affiliated digital influence operations. During the crisis, thousands of bot accounts were activated to amplify nationalistic content, drown out opposing views, and harass dissenters.
- Indian researchers identified a surge in pro-war memes and viral tweets, many of which originated from recently created accounts using automated posting schedules.
- Pakistan’s cyber units, notably the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) digital wing, pushed content through pseudo-journalist pages and religious networks to frame the strikes as “war crimes.”
- Pro-Khalistan and Kashmir separatist groups also exploited the moment, spreading anti-India messaging and demanding global intervention.
4. Journalists in the Crossfire
Independent reporters in both countries faced immense pressure. Indian journalists who questioned the strikes or expressed concern for civilian casualties were branded as “anti-national” or “Pakistani sympathizers.” In Pakistan, journalists who asked for verification of government casualty claims were detained or silenced by military intelligence.
International media, including BBC, Al Jazeera, and The Guardian, tried to offer balanced coverage but were accused by both sides of bias, depending on their editorial framing. Several global correspondents were denied access to conflict zones, limiting on-ground reporting and increasing reliance on government handouts or satellite imagery.
5. Platform Responses and Failures
Tech platforms scrambled to moderate content:
- Meta (owner of Facebook and Instagram) reported removing over 23,000 posts from both countries within 48 hours for hate speech, incitement, or misinformation.
- X (Twitter) flagged hundreds of posts with “state-affiliated media” tags, especially those spreading graphic or unverified content.
- YouTube demonetized or blocked videos that depicted violence without context, but critics say enforcement was uneven.
Despite these efforts, platforms were ill-prepared for the speed and scale of content manipulation, and many falsehoods persisted long enough to shape perceptions.
6. Psychological Impact and Public Reaction
The information overload led to widespread anxiety and confusion among civilians. In Indian metros like Delhi and Mumbai, rumors of blackouts, missile attacks, and conscription led to panic buying of essentials. In Pakistan, rumors about Indian spy satellites targeting mosques prompted mosque-goers to avoid large congregations.
The confusion wasn’t limited to the masses. Even political figures and celebrities retweeted unverified content, adding to the chaos. Fact-checking websites like Alt News (India) and Soch FactCheck (Pakistan) were overwhelmed with requests.
Nuclear Concerns
With both countries armed with nuclear weapons, fears of miscalculation have grown. While officials from both sides insisted that “nuclear posture remains stable,” the lack of hotlines or direct deconfliction measures prompted concerns.
The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) warned that South Asia remains the “most dangerous nuclear flashpoint” globally. Calls for international intervention have grown louder.
What Happens Next?
At the time of writing, the situation remains tense but controlled. Ceasefire talks have been brokered by the UAE and the US, with delegations from both countries agreeing to a temporary de-escalation protocol along the LoC.
Yet, the deeper issue of cross-border terrorism, proxy warfare, and deep mistrust remains unresolved. Analysts warn that without long-term political and diplomatic engagement, another cycle of violence is inevitable.
Final Thoughts
Operation Sindoor may go down as a defining moment in modern Indo-Pak relations. Whether it serves as a deterrent or a prelude to deeper conflict depends on the actions of both governments in the coming days.
The international community must not only push for de-escalation but invest in sustained dialogue, economic cooperation, and people-to-people ties that can overcome decades of hostility. The stakes—regional peace, economic stability, and countless civilian lives—are simply too high to ignore.
Images attribution: Wikipedia.
More from The Daily Mesh: