The Pahalgam terror attack on April 22 by Pakistan-backed groups, and India’s response through Operation Sindoor on May 7, have reshaped regional security.
The Pahalgam terror attack on April 22 by Pakistan-backed groups, and India’s response through Operation Sindoor on May 7, have reshaped regional security. Though the operation was a tactical success, its long-term impact on terrorism is unclear. Current debates mostly focus on foreign policy and external military force, ignoring the internal growth of terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir. The real goal should be securing Kashmir, not just defeating Pakistan.
1. Pakistan’s Responsibility & Internal Dynamics
2. Achievements of Security Forces
3. Effectiveness of Deterrence
4. Current Status of Local Terrorism
5. Security Gaps & Local Support
Parameter | Important reasons |
---|---|
Public Reaction | Bipartisan and spontaneous support from locals after Pahalgam massacre was unprecedented. |
Strategic Opportunity | This support offers a rare window to build trust and stability, not to be wasted. |
Counterproductive Measures | Actions like house demolitions and mass arrests risk alienating the population. |
Externalisation of Terrorism | Military responses (e.g., Operation Sindoor) are important but can shift focus away from local issues. |
Expert Concerns | Post-Operation Sindoor analysis shows a trend of oversimplifying terrorism, focusing only on externals. |
Root Causes | Real challenge lies in addressing both Pakistan's sponsorship and internal grievances in J&K. |
Operation Sindoor showcases India’s rising strength in kinetic non-contact warfare, but it must be paired with non-kinetic strategies for a stronger deterrent against Pakistan. The key is to focus on a multidimensional approach centered on the people as the core. Combining sustained political engagement, economic growth, social integration, and security measures forms a complete strategy. True deterrence requires this comprehensive approach supported by national resolve.
Basavaraju’s killing could weaken the Maoists and create an opportunity for peace.
The recent killing of Namballa Keshav Rao, also known as Basavaraju, who was the general secretary of the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist), is a significant blow to the Maoist insurgency in Chhattisgarh. Basavaraju's leadership represented a shift towards a more militaristic strategy for the Maoists, but his death indicates a decline in the group's armed campaign capabilities. This decline is attributed to increased security measures and a reduction in support from local tribal communities.
Killing of General Secretary Namballa Keshav Rao, alias Basavaraju, the general secretary of the outlawed Communist Party of India (Maoist), was killed in security operations in Chhattisgarh on Wednesday. This is considered the biggest setback for the Maoists since the 2010 death of Cherukuri Rajkumar, then spokesperson of CPI (Maoist), in a security operation.
Basavaraju’s death underscores the diminishing strength of the Maoist insurgency, yet ongoing violence continues to impact tribal communities. To break the cycle, the government should prioritize peace talks and political engagement over solely militaristic approaches. Encouraging dialogue could help resolve longstanding conflicts and address tribal grievances, fostering lasting peace and stability in affected regions.
38 videos|5258 docs|1111 tests
|
1. What was Operation Sindoor and what were its objectives? | ![]() |
2. How did Operation Sindoor impact India's counter-terrorism strategy? | ![]() |
3. What lessons were learned from the execution of Operation Sindoor? | ![]() |
4. How did the public react to Operation Sindoor? | ![]() |
5. What are the potential challenges faced in counter-terrorism efforts post-Operation Sindoor? | ![]() |