For years, India responded to militant attacks with diplomatic restraint. After the 26/11 Mumbai attacks in 2008, India blamed Lashkar-e-Taiba and presented substantial evidence, but refrained from military retaliation. That attack killed over 160 people. Recently, accused terrorist Tahawwur Rana was extradited from the United States to India.
But things are different now.
Following the April 22 attack in Kashmir that killed 26 people, India directly blamed Pakistan. On May 7, it launched a military strike inside Pakistan, prompting a retaliatory response.
In an interview with BBC Hindi, Professor Happymon Jacob from Jawaharlal Nehru University’s School of International Relations said, “Operation Sindoor marks a fundamental shift in India’s response strategy.”
He noted that India had refrained from military retaliation after major incidents like the 2001 Parliament attack or the 2008 Mumbai attacks, fearing Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. However, that changed in 2016 with the surgical strikes after Uri, and again in 2019 with the Balakot airstrikes following the Pulwama attack.
Jacob said, “India’s new doctrine appears to be: if Pakistan enables terrorism, India will respond with conventional military force.”
He also pointed out that India has now openly acknowledged its strike—disclosing when, where, and how it acted—unlike in the past. The focus is no longer on appealing to global forums but on direct action.
He added, “This is a strong message—if Pakistan harbors terrorists, India will strike within Pakistani territory.” The Resistance Front, a proxy of Lashkar-e-Taiba, claimed responsibility for the April attack. Lashkar’s headquarters is located in Muridke, Pakistan.
Jacob concluded by saying, “India, like the U.S. or Israel, is no longer waiting for international support. It is asserting its right to self-defense through direct action.”
