India Strikes, Congress Doubts

Between May 7 and 10, India was tested — not just by Pakistani terror proxies, but by political cynicism at home. Operation Sindoor wasn’t a border skirmish. It was India’s firm, coordinated, tri-service response to the most audacious escalation of drone, terror, and airspace violations in recent memory. Yet, as our soldiers fought back with resolve, the Congress Party defaulted to its familiar playbook: doubt the strikes, distract the public, and downplay our armed forces.

Let’s be clear — what unfolded this past week was not “managed restraint” or foreign-brokered peace. It was Indian deterrence on Indian terms. The Army, Navy, and Air Force didn’t wait for permission or validation from Washington or the UN. They acted under national command — neutralising drones over four cities, targeting terror hubs, hitting strategic Pakistani airbases, and cornering enemy naval assets.

And still, the Congress narrative has the audacity to return to its tired lie: that Donald Trump “brokered a ceasefire” between India and Pakistan, suggesting that peace was outsourced, and strength was borrowed.

Let’s bury that myth now. Trump didn’t negotiate peace; he merely tweeted amidst the ongoing Operation Sindoor. In fact, it was the Pakistani DGMO who called up the Indian DGMO, requesting an understanding to pause military activity. This understanding was mutually agreed upon at 3:35 PM — hours before Trump’s evening tweet. The facts are crystal clear: the decision to dial down came through military channels, not diplomatic pressur

This isn’t a Trump story. This is an India story. It’s about a nation that now responds to terrorism not with platitudes, but with precision. A nation whose armed forces no longer operate with one hand tied behind their backs. And a government that lets its military speak with action — not apologies.

Vice Admiral A.N. Pramod put it bluntly: within 96 hours of the Pahalgam terror attack, India had a full naval deterrence in place. The IAF, under Air Marshal A.K. Bharti, neutralised multiple drone raids with zero civilian casualties. Lt Gen Rajiv Ghai declared that over 100 terrorists — including high-value targets — were eliminated. That’s not optics. That’s capability.

And yet, Rahul Gandhi and others in Congress remained stuck in a loop — calling for “restraint,” raising questions about “timing,” and warning of “political motives.” They did the same after Uri, after Balakot, and they’re doing it again now.

Why? Because they cannot bring themselves to credit a government they loathe. And in the process, they discredit the men and women in uniform who carry out these operations.

Here’s the inconvenient truth: if this escalation had happened under UPA, we would likely be hearing measured condemnations, not military action. There would be talk of dossiers, not drone kills. There would be moral lectures, not surgical strikes.

Today, India has a different doctrine. It doesn’t absorb hits. It retaliates — proportionately, precisely, and unapologetically. Operation Sindoor wasn’t an exception. It was the continuation of a post-Uri doctrine that this government has consistently followed. When the Indian Parliament was attacked in 2001, no military response followed. When Mumbai burned in 2008, Pakistan paid no real price. That changed in 2016. And that doctrine holds in 2025.

Let Congress spin its web. Let it credit Trump, doubt the Army, and play its tired old script. The country sees through it. Because when India strikes back, Congress strikes doubt.

But this time, the stakes are too high for ambiguity. In an age of hybrid war, deterrence must be demonstrated, not declared. And that’s exactly what Operation Sindoor has done — not with borrowed bravado, but with Indian steel.