Operation Sindoor: The Reason Behind the Indian Army’s Strikes on 9 Locations in Pakistan

The Operation Sindoor strikes in early May 2025 dramatically raised India–Pakistan tensions. In response to a brutal cross-border terrorism attack – the April 22, 2025 Pahalgam tourist massacre – India launched a calibrated strike against militant infrastructure. In that attack, gunmen from the Pakistan-based group “The Resistance Front” (linked to JeM) killed 26 civilians in Kashmir. New Delhi immediately blamed Islamabad-backed terror networks, sparking a promise of retaliation. Analysts warned that India-Pakistan tensions were at a new high, noting this was “the worst crisis in years” and that the two nuclear-armed neighbors faced serious escalation risks. Indeed, global capitals including Washington and Beijing swiftly urged restraint and de-escalation.

Over the next two weeks India moved to act on those threats. On the night of May 6–7, 2025, the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force executed Operation Sindoor: a series of precision missile and air strikes on nine terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir. The strikes began around 1:44 AM IST, were “focused, measured and non-escalatory” according to Indian officials, and targeted known militant training hubs. As the Indian Embassy in Washington explained, “No Pakistani civilian, economic or military targets have been hit. Only known terror camps were targeted”. Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK) saw five targets hit and Pakistan proper saw four. By hitting the terror infrastructure directly (and avoiding army bases or towns), New Delhi stressed this was a counter-terrorism operation, not an act of war.

Nine Terror Camps Struck under Operation Sindoor

ndia specifically chose nine militant training camps and launch sites run by Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Hizbul Mujahideen (HM) – many hidden inside civilian facilities under Pakistani military protection. Actionable intelligence guided each strike, aiming to dismantle the nexus of cross-border terrorism. The targets included:

• Markaz Subhan Allah (Bahawalpur, Pakistan) – The de facto JeM headquarters and indoctrination hub. Operational since 2015, it houses Masood Azhar and senior leadership, and has been linked to major attacks including the 2019 Pulwama bombing. Masood Azhar has delivered anti-India sermons here.
• Masjid Wa Markaz Taiba (Muridke, Pakistan) – LeT’s largest training complex (often called LeT’s “terror nursery”). Established in 2000 with \$10 million from Osama bin Laden, it offers arms training and religious indoctrination to ~1,000 recruits annually. It famously trained the 2008 Mumbai attackers (Ajmal Kasab, et al) under ISI oversight.
• Sarjal (Tehra Kalan, Pakistan) – A Jaish-operated launch pad disguised as a health center. Only ~6 km from the Line of Control in the Samba sector, Sarjal is used for tunnel infiltration drills and drone-based arms drops. JeM commanders frequently use this site to coordinate strikes in Jammu.
• Mehmoona Joya (Sialkot, Pakistan) – An HM camp inside a government health unit in Bhutta Kotli, Sialkot. It trains cadres in weapons and infiltration for Kashmir, overseen by militant leader Irfan “Irfan Tanda” Khan. Some 20–25 militants operate here at a time.
• Markaz Ahle Hadith, Barnala (PoK) – An LeT staging base on the outskirts of Barnala (Bhimber). It hosts ~100–150 LeT cadres and facilitates infiltration and arms smuggling into Jammu’s Poonch–Rajouri–Reasi sectors. Senior LeT operatives use it as a forward launch site.
• Markaz Abbas (Kotli, PoK) – A Jaish camp led by Qari Zarrar (a wanted militant). This hub, accommodating ~100–125 fighters, plans and launches infiltration missions into Poonch and Rajouri. It supports JeM’s network in PoK under the oversight of senior leader Mufti Rauf Asghar.
• Maskar Raheel Shahid (Kotli, PoK) – A Hizbul Mujahideen (HM) camp, one of HM’s oldest in PoK. It trains 150–200 militants in arms handling, sniping and mountain warfare – skills for cross-border guerrilla operations.
• Shawai Nallah Camp (Muzaffarabad, PoK) – Also called Bait-ul-Mujahideen, this LeT camp lies near Chelabandi Bridge on the Muzaffarabad–Neelum road. Active since the early 2000s, it provides ideological and military instruction to 200–250 recruits. The 2008 Mumbai attackers trained here, and Pakistan Army trainers are known to assist weapons training at this site.
• Syedna Bilal Camp (Muzaffarabad, PoK) – Jaish’s main transit camp opposite Muzaffarabad’s Red Fort. Housing ~50–100 cadres, it’s overseen by Mufti Asghar Khan Kashmiri and used by top militants like Aashiq Nengroo. Notably, Pakistani Army SSG commandos reportedly use Syedna Bilal to train Jaish fighters in jungle warfare.

These facilities were allegedly run or protected by Pakistan’s security agencies. Indian sources note that LeT and JeM camps often receive direct support from Pakistan’s ISI and army (including training, funding and logistics). Several Operation Sindoor targets were either inside or adjacent to cantonment areas or disguised as health clinics, illustrating Islamabad’s covert backing. For example, the Syedna Bilal site in Muzaffarabad is known to host SSG trainers, and Markaz Taiba in Muridke was long funded and overseen by Pakistan’s ISI. By striking these camps, India aimed to sever the militant “nurseries” that churn out fighters to attack Indian soil.

Planning, Execution and De-escalatory Intent

Operation Sindoor was meticulously planned and timed to limit collateral damage. It was launched jointly by the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force using precision-guided missiles and air-delivered ordnance. Indian officials repeatedly emphasized that only terror infrastructure was targeted: no civilian areas, Pakistani military bases or economic sites were struck. A senior Indian defence official explained, “No civilian areas or military facilities were targeted… Each strike was based on confirmed intelligence. This was not an act of war, but a necessary act of national self-defence.”. India’s spokesmen characterized the operation as “focused, measured and non-escalatory” – a “calibrated” response that aimed to deter future terror attacks without plunging the subcontinent into all-out war.

Despite the scale, both military and public communications underscored restraint. The Indian Army tweeted “Justice is served,” but India’s Ministry of External Affairs stressed that the operation was a “measured counter-terror response”. Importantly, channels of communication between the two nuclear neighbors remained open; hotlines were reportedly used even on May 6-7. Operation Sindoor marked India’s most expansive cross-border raid since the 2019 Balakot strikes, reflecting a shift toward precision retaliation and deterrence. Western analysts noted this doctrine emphasizes minimal collateral damage, yet it also risks a dangerous spiral between two armed rivals.

Pakistan’s Response and Claims

Pakistan denounced the strikes in the strongest terms. Its Foreign Ministry called the attacks a “blatant act of war” and vowed retaliation. Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif labeled India’s strikes “cowardly” and declared that “Pakistan has every right to respond forcefully to this act of war”. Pakistan’s military reported civilian casualties: officials told Reuters that 8 civilians were killed and 35 injured in the strikes. State TV footage showed wreckage of buildings and an Ahmedpur East mosque that was struck, prompting rescue efforts for trapped victims.

Pakistani media also claimed to have shot down Indian jets, airing dramatic (but unverified) PTV reports of aircraft crashes. Islamabad’s Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) countered that all Pakistani aircraft were safe and that no Indian planes had crossed into their airspace. Pakistani outlets even alleged a reprisal missile strike on an Indian army brigade headquarters, though New Delhi denied any such counter-attack. Social media buzzed with unconfirmed images – later debunked – of purported jet downings. In reality, India maintained no aircraft losses; some journalists in Kashmir heard sonic booms and saw Indian jets jettison fuel tanks over Jammu-Akhnoor as they returned. Overall, while Pakistan activated air defences and flew some sorties, both sides avoided a wider air battle. Pakistan also responded on the ground: flights were disrupted nationwide (PIA grounded all aircraft) and India later warned of attacks on critical infrastructure (e.g. water projects) in response to any escalation.

Global Reaction: Calls for Restraint

Internationally, governments largely avoided overtly taking sides but urged de-escalation and dialogue. The United States, along with key NATO partners, emphasized that terrorism must be fought, but also that all parties should refrain from actions that could spiral into full-scale war. In previous joint statements, U.S. and Indian leaders had “strongly condemned cross-border terrorism” and urged Pakistan to prevent its territory from being used by militants, reflecting Washington’s support for India’s anti-terror rationale. After Operation Sindoor, U.S. and European officials reportedly stepped up communication with both capitals behind the scenes, calling for calm. China – Pakistan’s closest ally – publicly urged both India and Pakistan to exercise restraint. Beijing’s media noted the recent “India–Pakistan summit” rhetoric at the UN had quickly unraveled, calling the strikes “extremely serious” and warning of destabilizing effects if tensions run unchecked. Notably, TIME Magazine reported that global powers including Washington and Beijing “called for de-escalation” amidst this crisis. The United Nations Security Council scheduled emergency consultations (closed-door meetings) at Pakistan’s request, underscoring international alarm. In sum, the global community reaffirmed zero tolerance for terrorism, but urged dialogue rather than conflict.

Strategic Implications for India–Pakistan Relations

Operation Sindoor marks a significant shift in South Asian security dynamics. By crossing the Line of Control (LoC) in force, India signaled a far more aggressive counter-terror doctrine – one that projects deterrence by retaliation, similar to its Afghan-era militancy policy. This is the largest overt cross-border Indian attack since 2019 and is likely to embolden some Indian policymakers to continue striking high-value militant targets when intelligence permits. However, such actions also deepen mistrust. Pakistan’s reaction – vowing retaliation and rallying popular support – suggests a harder line on Kashmir and terrorism issues. Islamabad may now lean even more on its own Islamist proxies and on China and Turkey for diplomatic cover.

For bilateral ties, prospects remain grim. The immediate effect is a spike in military alert levels on both sides and renewed calls for defense readiness. The crisis highlighted how quickly a single terror incident can reignite decades-old hostilities, underscoring experts’ warnings that India and Pakistan are in their worst crisis in years. Longer term, the strikes could either deter some future attacks or, conversely, provoke clandestine Pakistani support to militants as revenge. Any future dialogue on Kashmir or normalisation is likely to be postponed amid mutual recriminations. In the international arena, India’s decisive military response may earn it sympathy among partners who decry terrorism, but it could also encourage Pakistan to seek new security ties. In sum, Operation Sindoor has raised the stakes: it deterred terror groups for the moment, but it also entrenches a more volatile India–Pakistan standoff for months to come.

Key Points: Operation Sindoor was a precision counter-terrorism strike on Pakistan, intended as a focused, non-escalatory reprisal for the Pahalgam attack. It hit nine terror camps run by LeT, JeM and HM, many with known ISI/SSG involvement. While it achieved military objectives, Pakistan denounced it as an “act of war” and claimed counter-actions. Global players condemned the Pahalgam massacre and called for calm, but the strikes nonetheless mark a new phase of deterrence by force, with significant implications for future India–Pakistan relations.