The launch of Operation Sindoor in the early hours of 7 May 2025 marked a watershed in the evolution of India’s counter-terror policy. Unlike the emotionally charged retaliatory strikes of the past, this was a precisely targeted, intelligence-driven, and doctrinally coherent operation, rooted not in vengeance but in calibrated statecraft. By striking multiple terror infrastructures across Pakistan-administered Kashmir in response to the April 22 Pahalgam attack, India not only reinforced its red lines but also articulated a new lexicon of sovereignty and deterrence in the face of persistent cross-border terrorism. At the heart of this operation lies a fundamental recalibration: the transition from a reactive, diplomatically encumbered posture to a proactive, legally-informed strategic doctrine. The Indian state, long trapped between normative restraint and strategic vulnerability, appears to have now embraced what might be called a principle of responsible disruption. This principle holds that in an environment where non-state actors operate with impunity under the protective umbrella of hostile regimes, conventional deterrence becomes ineffectual unless supplemented by controlled, precise, and time-bound kinetic action. Operation Sindoor was calibrated to signal precisely this shift. It was limited in duration (23 minutes), narrow in scope (nine non-civilian targets), and proportionate in intention (counter-terror, not anti-state). By avoiding civilian or military infrastructure, India sought to deny Pakistan the legitimacy of a symmetrical response, while simultaneously demonstrating the reach and credibility of its precision-strike capabilities. The use of loitering munitions, satellite-guided targeting, and indigenous drone systems also reflected an increasingly autonomous defence ecosystem capable of conducting strategic operations without over-reliance on foreign platforms. In terms of legality, India’s justification draws credence from Article 51 of the UN Charter, which enshrines the right of self-defence in the event of an armed attack. The jurisprudence surrounding this article, especially post-9/11, has evolved to accommodate pre-emptive and anticipatory self-defence against non-state actors in cross-border sanctuaries. While grey zones remain in international law regarding the violation of territorial sovereignty, India’s articulation — reinforced by public evidence, international briefings, and the avoidance of civilian harm — appears to have been met with tacit acceptance, if not open endorsement, from key global actors. The unusually broad international support — from the United States and France to Saudi Arabia and the UAE — indicates a growing normative shift: that sovereignty cannot be an alibi for impunity when terror is knowingly harbored. Domestically, the political implications are both immediate and layered. In an election year, the operation inevitably entered the political discourse, with the ruling establishment framing it as evidence of decisive leadership and credible deterrence. However, beyond partisan gain, Operation Sindoor has contributed to an institutional redefinition of civil-military synergy, with intelligence, operational command, and executive decision-making functioning in visible coordination. The absence of leakage, the preparedness for retaliatory scenarios, and the robustness of internal defence drills point to a maturing national security doctrine that is less performative and more procedural. Critics, however, remain cautious. The escalation risks inherent in striking targets across a nuclear-armed frontier are undeniable. Moreover, questions persist around long-term efficacy: Can precision strikes alone dismantle entrenched terror networks? Does kinetic retaliation address the ideological and financial supply chains of terrorism? These are valid concerns. But the point of such operations is not finality — it is deterrence, disruption, and denial. They are part of a broader ecosystem of counter-terrorism that must include diplomatic isolation, financial surveillance, cyber countermeasures, and grassroots de-radicalization. In conclusion, Operation Sindoor reflects a paradigmatic shift in India’s approach to cross-border terrorism — one that combines constitutional restraint with strategic assertiveness. It neither romanticizes war nor shies away from hard power. Instead, it seeks to craft a doctrine of proportionate sovereignty: firm enough to restore deterrence, restrained enough to avoid escalation, and precise enough to retain legal legitimacy. In a world where non-state violence challenges the very foundations of statehood, such operations may well become the grammar of 21st-century defence policy.

Prime Minister Modi’s Landmark Visit Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Kuwait on December 21-22 marks a historic moment in India’s West Asia strategy. This is the first visit by an Indian Prime Minister to Kuwait since Indira Gandhi’s trip in 1981, ending a 43-year gap. Postponed earlier due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the visit is an opportunity to strengthen ties and redefine relations with Kuwait, a key member of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and a significant player in the Middle East. Why Kuwait Matters for India Geopolitical Importance: Kuwait holds a pivotal position in the Gulf, bordered by Iraq and Saudi Arabia, and hosts critical American military bases. Its neutral stance and role as a mediator in regional conflicts make it a valuable partner for fostering Middle East stability. For India, closer ties with Kuwait can enhance its influence in the Gulf region and complement its partnerships with Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Energy & Economic Ties: Kuwait, with the fourth-largest sovereign wealth fund globally ($924 billion), is a major oil supplier to India, meeting about 3% of its crude oil needs. However, the relationship has the potential to go beyond energy. Collaborations in renewable energy, infrastructure, and trade can take economic ties to the next level. Addressing Challenges Indian Diaspora: With around one million Indians in Kuwait forming the largest expatriate group, labor rights remain a concern. Addressing issues like exploitation and poor living conditions requires diplomatic efforts to ensure worker protection. Learning from Others: Philippines: Successfully negotiated labor agreements to safeguard its workers. Japan: Integrated energy and technology partnerships with Gulf nations. India can adopt similar strategies to balance economic interests with humanitarian goals. Opportunities for Growth Economic Collaboration: Kuwait’s ‘Vision 2035’ aims to diversify its economy beyond oil. India can contribute through: Infrastructure development. Establishing IITs, IIMs, and modern healthcare facilities. Collaborations in renewable energy through initiatives like the International Solar Alliance. Defense & Space: Modernizing Kuwait’s military infrastructure offers a chance for India to expand defense exports and training. Space technology partnerships, including satellite launches, can further deepen ties. A New Era of Cooperation Prime Minister Modi’s visit is poised to open a golden chapter in India-Kuwait relations. By addressing labor challenges, fostering economic partnerships, and exploring emerging areas like renewable energy and defense, the two nations can build a dynamic and sustainable relationship. This visit signals a shared commitment to mutual growth and regional stability, ushering in a future of enhanced collaboration.