By: Zaheeruddin Babar
Undoubtedly, the success of Operation Bunyān um- Mursuṣ will be remembered not only in the context of Pakistan-India conflicts but also in the annals of modern military history. For instance, after Indian attacks on Pakistani airbases, our forces retaliated with such a barrage of Fatah-1 missiles that the enemy had no opportunity to recover.
Pakistani missiles swiftly destroyed Indian airbases and oil fields at Adampur, Udhampur, Bathinda, Mamun, Suratgarh, Jammu, Akhnoor, Barnala, and Sirsa—demonstrating superior skill and technology.
According to security officials, these bases were targeted because India had used them to strike Pakistani civilian areas and mosques. Meanwhile, the JF-Thunder aircrafts destroyed Indian defense systems worth $1.5 billion using hypersonic missiles. Pakistan also targeted the Indian intelligence training center in Rajouri and disrupted the enemy’s satellite system.
Indian military spokespersons admitted before the media that Pakistan carried out “incursions” at 26 locations. Indian officials also had to concede that Pakistan used high-speed missiles to achieve its objectives. Additionally, Pakistan effectively silenced India’s artillery on the Line of Control.
These were the underlying reasons why India was forced to urgently appeal to the U.S. President to mediate a ceasefire and help New Delhi out of the crisis. It is on record that Pakistan had consistently warned India that continued aggression would be met with a strong and decisive response. India’s humiliation was evident when its forces collapsed within hours before Pakistan’s security forces.
Pakistan not only accepted President Trump’s offer for mediation but also ensured its immediate implementation. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif expressed gratitude to the United States, Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, China, Qatar, Iran, the UAE, and all other countries that maintained communication during the crisis and worked to prevent a full-scale conflict between the two nations.
It is encouraging that the international community, including the U.S., acknowledged the legitimacy of Pakistan’s stance. For example, Pakistan repeatedly proposed the formation of a neutral international investigative commission to determine the elements responsible for the Pulwama attack—so the truth could come to light.
However, the Modi government did not even consider responding to this reasonable diplomatic and legal proposal. Instead, it adopted a policy of “teaching Pakistan a lesson,” which backfired and resulted in disgrace both domestically and internationally.
Now that Pakistan has accepted American mediation, there is hope that President Trump will play a constructive role not only for peace in South Asia but for global stability. The U.S. President has already suggested that talks between Pakistan and India be held in a neutral country.
One perspective is that the Indian Prime Minister took a positive step by requesting a ceasefire. As the famous saying goes, “Starting a war may be within a country’s power, but ending it is not.” The events have proven that by attacking Pakistan, Narendra Modi put his political future at great risk. Today, opposition leader Rahul Gandhi is not only demanding a joint session of parliament but is also repeatedly asking the BJP government to clarify under what conditions the ceasefire with Pakistan was agreed upon—and what was gained or lost.
On the surface, it appears the BJP government underestimated Pakistan’s military capabilities. Nevertheless, India’s request for a ceasefire should not be condemned. It must be understood that war never brings development or progress to any nation. The neighboring country Afghanistan is a stark example.
Despite the U.S. withdrawal, most Afghans still lack access to basic necessities. The Taliban, who now rule, are unwilling to grant equal rights to women in education and employment. The seriousness of the situation is evident in the fact that in today’s interconnected world, hardly any country has recognized the Taliban regime. From a specific viewpoint, the Taliban are a product of war.
It would not be incorrect to say that had the Soviet Union not invaded Kabul in the past, Afghanistan today might have been far more peaceful and developed.
Against this backdrop, the current government deserves credit. By refraining from initiating war, Shehbaz Sharif has proven himself—both domestically and internationally—as a leader who prefers dialogue over conflict.
