Operation Sindoor Debate Leaves Ceasefire Question Unanswered

Spread love

Despite PM Modi’s strong defence in Lok Sabha, Opposition and analysts continue to question the logic behind halting military action after India gained tactical upper hand

By TRH Political Desk

NEW DELHI, July 30, 2025 — A marathon debate in the Lok Sabha on Operation Sindoor may have seen strong speeches from both the Prime Minister and the Defence Minister, but it failed to address a core question raised repeatedly by critics: Why did India agree to an abrupt ceasefire with Pakistan when it had seemingly gained the upper hand?

In his reply, Prime Minister Narendra Modi asserted that “no country asked India to stop Operation Sindoor.” The comment was widely seen as a rebuttal to Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi, who had challenged the Prime Minister to directly refute US President Donald Trump’s claim that he had “mediated a ceasefire with trade offers” between India and Pakistan. Trump has made this claim publicly at least 29 times.

Opposition leaders, including Gandhi, demanded to know why India halted military operations just as its armed forces were gaining momentum, especially after heavy damage was inflicted on Pakistan’s terror infrastructure and military assets.

Analyst Calls Ceasefire ‘Strategic Misstep’

Geopolitical analyst Brahma Chellaney weighed in with a sharply worded critique on X (formerly Twitter), stating that the decision to cease hostilities was “strategically puzzling.” “What India’s CDS (Chief of Defence Staff) termed a ‘tactical mistake’—the initial loss of some warplanes—was due to political leadership directing the Air Force to strike terrorist camps without first neutralizing enemy air defences through SEAD and DEAD operations,” wrote Chellaney.

He contrasted this with the 2019 Balakot airstrike, which was executed with the element of surprise. “This time, India had effectively signaled its intent for 15 days before launching Operation Sindoor (May 7–10).”

Chellaney pointed out that when the Indian Air Force finally neutralized Pakistan’s air defences on the final day, no subsequent Indian strikes were launched—only a ceasefire followed.

“Strategically, that made little sense: you don’t neutralize enemy air defences merely to demonstrate capability. You do it to open the path to strategic goals,” he added.

He concluded by asking what many in policy circles are now wondering: “Why did India abruptly halt its campaign just when it had gained the upper hand?”

Defence Minister Says Objective Was Limited

Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, in his speech during the debate, insisted that Operation Sindoor had a limited, well-defined objective: to eliminate terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK).

He said India struck nine high-value targets on the first night of the operation and achieved its military aims. “Our armed forces were given complete freedom to act. The objective was to destroy terrorist hubs, not to wage a war or seize territory,” Singh said.

However, this has done little to satisfy strategic analysts and opposition leaders who continue to question the abruptness of the ceasefire, the lack of clarity on follow-up objectives, and the silence on Trump’s mediation claims.