MILITARY OPERATION BY BHARAT: THE NEED, NECESSITY & WAY AHEAD

WITH PERSISTENT THREATS ON THE RISE, DECISIVE MILITARY ACTION IS NO LONGER A CHOICE BUT A STRATEGIC NECESSITY

- Col Dev Anand Lohamaror

In a dramatic and resolute statement following the heinous Pahalgam Terror attack on 22 Apr 25 in Pahalgam, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, aligning with the public mood, declared that the response to the perpetrators and their supporters would be “left entirely to the Defence Services to execute.”

This unprecedented pronouncement, made in the public domain. carefully calibrated military operation may no longer be a matter of debate, but a strategic imperative — necessary to safeguard national sovereignty, preserve peace, and uphold the rule of law.

A DOCTRINE OF DELEGATION - PM'S STATEMENT

This is not the first time Bharat has responded militarily to terror provocations. The 2016 surgical strikes following the Uri attack and the 2019 Balakot airstrikes after the Pulwama bombing were both state-sanctioned military responses. However, in both cases, the PM and the Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) retained operational command and strategic oversight. This latest statement suggests a significant doctrinal shift, delegating the timing and nature of retaliation directly to the armed forces.

WAR ROOM FRAMEWORK

The Ministry of Defence, under the Cabinet Committee on Security, provides the political directive for military operations.

While operational autonomy may be granted during tactical missions, strategic decisionsespecially those involving trans-border strikes or use of force against non-state actorshave always been politically sanctioned. During the 1999 Kargil conflict, the CCS remained in control of military planning. The 2016 and 2019 strikes were publicly justified as necessary acts of preemptive self-defence, but were executed under close Politico-civilian guidance.

MOUNTING THREATS, SHIFTING RED LINES