Sindoor, Strikes, and Silences: Unmasking the Theatre of War and Falsehood

Posted on 25th June, 2025 (GMT 12:10 hrs)

ABSTRACT

The investigative report probes the April 22, 2025, Pahalgam attack and India’s May 7, 2025, Operation Sindoor, questioning lax security, the attackers’ 300-km escape, rapid photo leaks, ignored intelligence, and the attack’s convenient timing amid domestic crises. Echoing the 2018 Pulwama attack, they highlight recurring lapses and politicized narratives that stoke toxic nationalism to deflect governance failures like unemployment, poverty and inflation. Operation Sindoor, a military tri-service strike allegedly killing 80–100 terrorists in Pakistan/PAK, is criticized for its Hindu-centric name, “Sindoor,” which risks alienating India’s diverse population and signaling a Hindutva shift, challenging secular constitutional values secularism. Economic losses reached $3 billion, with unverified jet loss claims clouding transparency issues. The PM’s “24×7 on duty” claim, contradicted by his Pulwama absence, raises accountability concerns. An independent probe is demanded to uncover truth and curb crisis manipulation.

I. A Mock-Up Investigative Article

The Shadows Over Pahalgam: Five Unanswered Questions After the Attack

By: Investigative Desk | Special Report | June 2025

Pahalgam, Kashmir — On a quiet afternoon turned nightmare, gunfire shattered the scenic calm of one of Kashmir’s most visited tourist regions. Yet, beyond the bloodshed and grief, a disturbing trail of unanswered questions has emerged — raising not just doubts, but demands. Demands of truthfulness, demands of questions, demands of justice.

This is not merely about an attack. It is about how, why, and to what end.

1. Security in Absence: Why Was Pahalgam Vulnerable?

Despite being a prominent tourist hub and a known route for the Amarnath Yatra, no substantial security deployment was visible at the time of the attack. Locals claim police presence was “nominal at best.” Was it a last-minute reassignment? Or worse — a conscious blind eye?

In previous years, intelligence agencies have flagged increased chatter during peak seasons. But here, there was no cordon, no alert, no checkpoint. Only silence — until the bullets spoke.

2. A 300-Kilometre Vanishing Act?

The suspected militants reportedly escaped, leaving behind chaos and corpses. But how?

From Pahalgam to the Line of Control (LoC) is a journey of at least 300 kilometers — crossing through Anantnag, Srinagar, Baramulla, Uri, and finally into Muzaffarabad (Pakistan-administered/occupied Kashmir or POK). This corridor is USUALLY dotted with military outposts, drone surveillance, and army convoys.

So, how does a group of assailants melt into the terrain, evading one of the most militarized regions on Earth? Either help from inside — or a gaping operational chasm. How much of it was pre-mediated, intentional…then?

Here’s a visual route map highlighting the approximate path from Pahalgam (attack site) through key transit points to the Line of Control (LoC) at Muzaffarabad.

Route Overview: Pahalgam → Anantnag → Srinagar → Baramulla → Uri → LoC (Muzaffarabad)

Pahalgam
- Mountainous tourist hub deep in Kashmir Valley.
- Road travel begins along well-used district roads into the valley.
Anantnag
- Major administrative and transit town, ~90 km from Pahalgam.
- Connects onward on the NH-44 highway.
- A checkpoint and surveillance zone is expected here.
Srinagar
- Valley capital; ~60 km further north.
- Gateway to Baramulla/Uri via NH‑44/NH‑244.
- Features heavy military and drone presence.
- Any crossing without interception would signify serious intelligence gaps.
Baramulla
- ~55 km from Srinagar.
- Key logistics hub and major checkpoint.
- Toll and security infrastructure in place.
Uri
- ~25 km beyond Baramulla.
- Close to front-line zones and LoC infiltration routes.
- Known for past militant crossings.
- The place for the supposedly simulated “surgical strike” by India in 2016!
LoC near Muzaffarabad
- Final ~50–70 km to the Pakistan-administered side.
- Territorial markers and patrolled sectors.
- Terrain becomes hilly, forested, and rugged—ideal for covert non‑road escape routes.

Terrain & Infiltration Insights

Segment	Terrain	Security Presence
Pahalgam–Srinagar	Mountain valleys & roads	Checkpoints, patrolling
Srinagar–Baramulla–Uri	High traffic routes	Military & police convoys
Uri–LoC (Muzaffarabad)	Forested, rugged terrain	Dotted border patrol sectors

Distance: ~280–310 km total by road.
Time: 8–10 hours under civilian travel speed.
Escape potential: Once entering forested slopes near the LoC, militants typically abandon vehicles and use foot trails.

Why This Matters

Multiple checkpoints along NH‑44/244 should have been operational, potentially preventing the “militants” (?) from entering initially.
Evading surveillance implies potential insider coordination, local guides, or systemic intelligence failure.
Segment near Uri/LoC is known for densely forested infiltration routes—if attackers reached this undetected, alarm bells should have gone off. Why didn’t they?

3. Picture Perfect Panic: How Did Photos Surface So Quickly?

Even before bodies were counted, a photo — allegedly of the attackers — began circulating across major news platforms. Dressed in civilian clothes, faces half-visible, standing in what seemed like a semi-forested zone.

Questions abound:

Who took the photo?
Was it leaked by state agencies?
Was it a “plant” to shape the narrative among the public sphere before facts caught up?

Experts in information warfare have long warned about “pre-emptive optics” — staged visuals designed to manufacture consent for future military operations or justify political clampdowns.

What to believe, and what not to believe in the post-truth society?

4. Was Indian Intelligence Asleep — or Ignored?

Former RAW officials we spoke to confirmed that “inter-agency lapses are routine”. Intelligence units like IB, RAW, and military SIGINT often work in silos, with little real-time coordination.

But in this case, the bigger question is: Was there any actionable input at all?

Or was it received — and deliberately shelved, in order to allow a “manageable” crisis to unfold? After all, nothing strengthens a centralized security narrative like an external enemy and internal fear.

War, panic, and hatred sell quite well these days!

5. Manufactured Crisis? A Convenient Distraction from Boiling Domestic Faultlines

The timing of the “attack” raises eyebrows:

Mass protests were brewing over the Waqf Board land disputes.
Caste census demands in Bihar and Maharashtra had made the government visibly uncomfortable.
Inflation hit double digits. Jobless growth data was being suppressed.
The recent Lok Sabha results had weakened the ruling party’s aura of invincibility.

In such a climate, the sudden emergence of a terror incident reroutes public attention, floods TV debates with toxic (mono-religious) nationalism, and drowns out cries for justice and reform.

This is not new. As Noam Chomsky noted, “If you want to distract a population, escalate the threat of war or terror. Fear makes the obedient forget the hunger in their homes.”

The line evokes poet Saibal Mitra’s rallying cry in his poem, resonating with its subtle call to awareness in this context: “Whenever people seek clothing and food, The sound of war drums rises at the border.”

The Need for Independent Inquiry

No FIR, no official briefing, and a slew of contradictory narratives. Yet the political narrative marches on, already pointing fingers across the border — even before forensic teams finish their reports.

We don’t claim answers — but we demand accountability.
Until then, the question remains:

Was this another intelligence failure? Or something more sinister — a democracy losing its memory and manufacturing its fears?

Investigative Desk | For whistleblowers and confidential sources, contact encrypted: fireline@safejournal.in

SUMMARY

A deepening distrust in state narratives is evident, and such skepticism is not unfounded in a world of manufactured consent, data opacity, and orchestrated crisis exploitation. However, moving from suspicion to evidence requires collective vigilance, independent fact-finding, and resistance to communal scapegoating.

However, to prove deliberate state complicity, one needs whistleblowers, leaked documents, or investigative journalism, not just pattern analysis.

II. Another Mock-Up Investigative Article

Pahalgam 2025 and Pulwama 2019: Mistake or Manufactured Tragedy?

By: Editorial Desk | People’s Sentinel, June 2025

“Had we provided aircraft, Pulwama wouldn’t have happened.”

— Satya Pal Malik, Former Governor of J&K and Member of BJP

In the wake of the Pahalgam attack (2025), which left several civilians and security personnel dead in one of Kashmir’s most visited regions, parallels are being drawn — and not without reason — to the Pulwama massacre (2019).

Both incidents reflect an unsettling pattern: ignored warnings, security lapses, instant blame assignment, and political gain amid national grief.

What’s behind these frequent episodes of overlooked loss?

We hereby examine the eerie similarities between the two episodes, Pulwama and Pahalgam — not as conspiracy, but as caution.

1. SECURITY REQUESTS IGNORED

Pulwama 2019:

Over 70 CRPF vehicles moved in convoy through a volatile stretch.
Requests for aircraft were denied by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Satya Pal Malik confirmed: “The Home Ministry was informed. They said no.”

Pahalgam 2025:

Despite being a tourist hotspot and pilgrimage corridor, no significant security deployment was made.
Locals report an absence of additional paramilitary presence even during high-season footfall.
Security preparedness was either dismissed — or deliberately overlooked.

Is this incompetence — or operational abandonment?

2. INTELLIGENCE DISMISSED

Pulwama:

Kashmir Police had allegedly flagged the threat of an IED-laden car.
Malik admitted actionable intel was “ignored” and “not followed up.”

Pahalgam:

No official briefings yet mention prior alerts — but the history of the region demands routine surveillance.
That such a strike could occur in a known volatile zone implies either a breakdown or deliberate blindness.

What is the value of intelligence anymore if it never reaches or persuades decision-makers?

3. MEDIA/MODIA NARRATIVES OVER FACTS

Pulwama:

Within hours, news networks named Jaish-e-Mohammed and blamed Pakistan — before forensic teams arrived. Is this blame game not presupposed as part of the “Us vs Them” narrative exploited by the far-rightists in India and elsewhere?
The national discourse shifted from grief to vengeance, aiding the re-election campaign of the ruling regime.

Pahalgam:

Unverified images of suspects began circulating within hours — seemingly captured in tense, action-oriented poses.
Such “timely” visuals have the hallmark of pre-packaged propaganda.

Are these events mourned or manipulated for managing headlines, serving as tools for ideological distraction at the cost of innocent human lives?

4. TIMING AND POLITICAL DIVERSION

Pulwama:

Occurred weeks before the 2019 Lok Sabha election, presenting a strategic opportunity to leverage this event for the BJP’s vote bank. Clever, yet lacking in compassion.
Resulted in unprecedented nationalist, or rather “jingoistic” fervour — benefiting the incumbent government.

Pahalgam:

Hits at a time of political flux:
- Caste census unrest
- Waqf property controversy
- Mass youth unemployment and inflation
- A fractured election mandate in 2024

When domestic crises swell, foreign terror often becomes the “newsworthy pivot.”

5. WHISTLEBLOWERS IGNORED

Satya Pal Malik’s Revelations (2023):

Disclosures to The Wire alleging state negligence received little media traction.
No judicial inquiry was initiated despite his position as constitutional authority.

If governors’ testimonies are dismissed, what chance does truth have in a security state?

It is more-or-less clear that the current Indian republic is evolving into a police state characterized by Orwellian conditions!

6. THE STATE’S CONVENIENT FORGETTING

What Pulwama and Pahalgam expose is not just a pattern of repeated tragedy, but the possibility of tragedy used — for narrative consolidation, electoral sway, and silencing dissent.

If warnings are ignored, security is denied, and questions are labelled unpatriotic — the nation is left with tragic myth, not memory.

We must ask:

Are these security failures — or calculated silences in a state addicted to spectacle?

We demand a full, independent, time-bound investigation in both cases: Pulwama and Pahalgam.
We stand with victims — and against the shallow weaponization of their suffering.

For source access, field interviews, or to contribute leads: peoplesentinel@riseup.net
Reproduction permitted with attribution. Free to translate and print.

THE PRIME MINISTER IS “ON DUTY” 24*7

The article provided below discusses an RTI (Right to Information) query filed with India’s Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) regarding whether Narendra Modi participated in the Ram Mandir’s Bhumi Pujan and inauguration in his personal or official capacity. The PMO’s response stated that the Prime Minister is always (24*7) on duty, indicating he attended as the PM, which raises concerns about the violation of India’s secular Constitution. The article further critiques Modi’s actions and highlights the broader political implications, calling for resistance to the perceived rise of a Hindu Rashtra.

The RTI response from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), stating “THE PRIME MINISTER IS ON DUTY ALL THE TIME,” frames all activities of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, including temple visits during his tenure, as official duties. This implies that such visits, including those to various temples across India, are likely funded by governmental or public expenditure rather than personal or crowd-funded sources. The PMO’s one-line reply, as noted in your query and referenced in the aforementioned OBMA article (March 15, 2024), avoids directly addressing the funding specifics, creating ambiguity. This could reflect either a lack of clear distinction between official and personal activities in PMO records or a deliberate choice to classify all actions, including temple visits, as duty-related to deflect scrutiny.

Now, let’s get back to business!

On February 14, 2019, when the Pulwama attack occurred and 40 CRPF personnel were killed, it is alleged that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was filming a promotional episode with Bear Grylls for Man vs. Wild in Jim Corbett National Park. This episode later aired in August 2019. Reports indicate that the PM was “unavailable”, even telephonically, during the initial hours of the attack. Despite the gravity of the situation, there was no immediate public response from him for several hours.

The previous RTI reply does not directly address the Pulwama incident but reaffirms the Prime Minister’s official stance that he is on duty 24×7.

If the Prime Minister holds office continuously, then the choice to engage in a leisure-format shoot while Indian soldiers were being ambushed raises serious questions about executive responsibility, prioritization, and transparency. What does it mean to be “always on duty” if, during one of the deadliest attacks on Indian forces in recent memory, the country’s top elected leader was occupied with a nature show shoot and seemingly out of reach?

This contradiction—between the mythos of constant duty and the absence during crisis—reflects a troubling lack of accountability and blurs the line between image-building and actual pro-people governance.

As a common Indian citizen, the PMO’s vague response as cited before underscores the challenge of obtaining precise answers, highlighting a broader issue of transparency in distinguishing official versus personal activities of the PM.

III. What Was Operation “Sindoor”?

Initiated on May 7, 2025, in direct response to the Pahalgam terrorist attack on April 22, which killed 26 civilians businesstoday.in+15drishtiias.com+15economictimes.indiatimes.com+15.
A tri-service precision-strike operation targeting nine militant camps in both Pakistan and Pakistan‑administered Kashmir (PoK), associated with JeM, LeT, and Hizbul Mujahideen ndtv.com+11drishtiias.com+11insightuk.org+11.

Why War, Not Captures?

1. Speed and Surprise

The operation was executed in 25 minutes, with alleged/reported/supposed simultaneous strikes across ~970 km indiatoday.in.
Military strikes ensure immediate elimination of terror operatives and infrastructure, minimizing escape or destruction of evidence. Ground operations to capture would be time-consuming and riskier.

2. Credible Intelligence + Precision Tools

India possessed high-confidence intelligence pinpointing militant camps — including leadership targets like Yusuf Azhar (linked to IC‑814 and Pulwama) and other high‑value operatives insightuk.org+4indiatodayne.in+4indiatoday.in+4.
Used standoff weapons (SCALP cruise missiles, HAMMER smart bombs, Bramhos, loitering munitions) for accurate strikes with minimal collateral damage insightuk.org+4drishtiias.com+4indiatoday.in+4.

3. Reduced Casualty Risk & International Legitimacy

Avoided ground incursions, which would have risked Indian soldier casualties and opened complex legal/military entanglements.
India emphasized strict focus on terrorist infrastructure, avoiding civilian/military targets to maintain proportionality and seek global support insightuk.org+3ndtv.com+3indiatimes.com+3.

Strategic Shift Since Balakot

Compared to earlier responses (e.g., Balakot, Uri), Operation Sindoor represented a calibrated escalation: deeper penetration (~100 km into Pakistan), faster action, and integration of advanced weapon systems timesofindia.indiatimes.com+15warontherocks.com+15timesofindia.indiatimes.com+15.
Signaled that terrorist acts by non-state actors could be treated as acts of war warranting swift military retaliation.

What Were the ALLEGED/REPORTED/CLAIMED Results?

~80–100 terrorists eliminated, including senior figures tied to major terror attacks (Pulwama, IC‑814) indiatimes.com+5businesstoday.in+5indiatodayne.in+5.
Targeted nine specific terror sites across Pakistan and PoK economictimes.indiatimes.com+10indiatoday.in+10indiatimes.com+10.
Pakistan acknowledged the strikes and requested a ceasefire shortly thereafter economictimes.indiatimes.com+2en.wikipedia.org+2timesofindia.indiatimes.com+2.
The operation reinforced India’s integrated deterrence doctrine, backed by precision weaponry and credible intelligence insightuk.org+1economictimes.indiatimes.com+1.

Operational “Advantages” of Strikes Over Captures

Aspect	Military Strike	Capture Operation
Speed	Instantaneous (minutes)	Days or weeks, allowing militants to escape
Risk to forces	Minimal (air operations)	High (direct engagement)
Intelligence exposure	Limited local footprints	Requires troop deployment and overt presence
Collateral damage	Low (precision weapons)	Potentially higher in populated areas
Global messaging	Swift retaliation; shows resolve	Could be prolonged, contested, slow

Political & Strategic Implications

Government officials framed the action as proportionate, justified, and non-escalatory businesstoday.in+15firstpost.com+15indiatoday.in+15.
Home Minister Amit Shah and Defense Minister Scindia described it as a war against terrorism and signaled that “India’s blood is not meant to be shed” timesofindia.indiatimes.com+15ddnews.gov.in+15timesofindia.indiatimes.com+15.
At the UN, India defended the operation as a counter-terror response, accusing Pakistan of harboring militants insightuk.org+1timesofindia.indiatimes.com+1.

Here’s a fact‑checked breakdown of the damages to the Indian Army and expenditure incurred during the recent escalation stemming from Operation Sindoor, including its aftermath:

Indian Army Losses & Expenditure

1. Human & Material Losses

Zero casualties or material losses reported on the Indian side throughout the operation—Indian military assets and personnel remained unscathed (debuglies.com).

2. Day‑to‑Day Military Expenditure

Direct costs covering missile strikes, troop mobilization, drills, drone patrols, logistics, fuel, and ammunition estimated between ₹1,460 crore to ₹5,000 crore per day (~US $170–$585 million/day) (samajweekly.com).
During the 87-hour operation (May 7–10), equipment and operations alone cost approximately US $1 billion total (thenews.com.pk).

3. Economic Disruption Costs

Stock market lost ~US $82 billion in market cap during the week (thenews.com.pk).
Commercial aviation disruptions cost ~US $8 million/day (thenews.com.pk).
IPL match suspensions incurred ~US $50 million in TV and ticket losses .
Overall economic impact, including trade delays and investor confidence, around US $3 billion over four days (thenews.com.pk).

4. Budgetary Measures

In response, the government granted the military emergency purchase powers up to ₹40,000 crore (~US $5 billion) to replenish armaments (deccanchronicle.com).
A likely ₹50,000–80,000 crore (~US $6–10 billion) budget increase for 2025–26 has been proposed in supplementary and Main Budgets (deccanchronicle.com).
India’s 2025–26 defense allocation reached ₹6.81 lakh crore, marking a 9.5% increase (≈1.9% of GDP) (ndtv.com).

Table Summary

Category	Estimate
Indian Army casualties/material loss	None reported
Daily military expenditure	₹1,460–5,000 cr/day (~US $170–585 m)
Total operational cost (3–4 days)	~US $1 billion
Stock market loss	~US $82 billion
Aviation + sports disruption	US $58 million+
Total economic hit	>US $3 billion over 4 days
Emergency procurement funds	₹40,000 cr (~US $5 billion)
Projected defense budget bump	₹50,000–80,000 cr (~US $6–10 billion)
FY 25–26 defense budget	₹6.81 lakh crore (~1.9% of GDP)

Key Takeaways

No direct military losses, but the financial toll in ongoing readiness and precision operations has been substantial. This is disastrous, given the current deranged state of the Indian economy.
Emergency procurement authorities and defense budget increases underscore a long-term escalation shift.
Macro-economic impact—market volatility, flight and sporting disruptions—precedes operational costs and affects civilians.

Here’s a fact-checked breakdown regarding claims of Indian Rafale fighter jets being destroyed during recent Indo-Pakistani tensions:

What We Know (and Don’t Know) At The Time Of (Dis/Mis-)Information Explosion

“Orwell’s problem is to explain how we can know so much, and yet understand so little—how the same person can be so well educated, and yet so gullible and morally indifferent to state crimes.” — Noam Chomsky, Knowledge of Language (1986)

1. Pakistan’s Claims

Pakistan’s military claimed to have shot down up to three Indian Rafales, along with other jets, during the initial confrontation—asserting use of Chinese J‑10C fighters equipped with PL‑15 missiles. (en.wikipedia.org)

2. Visual Evidence

Visual analysis by The Washington Post confirmed debris from at least two Indian jets—one a Rafale, the other a Mirage 2000. Locations appeared to be within Indian territory, and the nature of the crashes is unclear (could be mechanical failure, collision, or combat). (washingtonpost.com)

3. Indian Acknowledgment

India’s Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Anil Chauhan, admitted that fighter jets were lost during the early phase but did not specify types or numbers, only noting that tactics were adapted thereafter. (en.wikipedia.org)

4. Dassault (Rafale Manufacturer) Response

Dassault Aviation’s CEO, Éric Trappier, has firmly rejected Pakistan’s claims that three Rafales were downed, labeling them as “factually incorrect” and “absolutely incorrect.” (en.wikipedia.org)

5. Third‑Party & Analyst Perspectives

A French analyst noted that only one Rafale may have been damaged, not destroyed, and suggested Pakistani claims were exaggerated.
A report in Moneycontrol also referenced a French MP citing NATO intelligence, suggesting possibility of one Rafale lost, without official confirmation. (moneycontrol.com)

What is the (Ir-)Reality?

Claim	Status
Pakistan shot down 3 Rafales	Disputed—not independently confirmed, denied by Dassault
One Rafale damaged or crashed	Possible, based on visual evidence and third-party analysis
Multiple Rafales lost	Not credible—Dassault directly refutes
India suffered “fighter jet loss”	Confirmed, but no details on type

Bottom Line:
It is confirmed that India lost some fighter aircraft during the conflict.
Whether these losses included Rafales remains unverified—claims of 3 downed Rafales are strongly disputed by Dassault and lack transparent evidence.
Visuals show debris from at least one Rafale, but it doesn’t prove a shootdown—could be crash landing or non-enemy damage.
The most plausible scenario: India may have lost one Rafale, but firm evidence is lacking in the age of (dis-)information explosion, and manufacturer statements dismantle the more dramatic tallies.

Remarks:

No official confirmation exists of any Rafale being destroyed in combat.
One Rafale may have crashed, based on debris and analysis—but without clarity on cause.
The largest claims (three downed) are unreliable and countered by Dassault.
Until detailed crash investigations or presented wreckage surface, the exact fate of Rafales remains ambiguous.

economictimes.indiatimes.com
timesofindia.indiatimes.com
reuters.comYes, the name “Sindoor” can be perceived as ideologically loaded—especially in a secular, pluralistic democracy like India.

IV. The Use of the Patriarchal Term “Sindoor” and Religious Fundamentalism: Heading Towards Hindu Rashtra?

The name “Sindoor” can be perceived as ideologically loaded—especially in a secular, pluralistic democracy like India.

Religious Symbolism

“Sindoor” traditionally refers to the red vermillion worn by married Hindu women, symbolizing marital status.
Naming a military operation after such a Hindu religious-cultural symbol risks projecting state violence through a majoritarian lens—implying that national grief or retaliation is rooted in Hindu identity.

Implications in a Multi-faith State

In a country with 200+ million Muslims, along with Sikhs, Christians, Buddhists, and others, using Hindu-specific iconography in military nomenclature may alienate citizens and undermine secular constitutional values.
It fosters the perception that state policy is influenced by Hindutva ideology, especially when:
- Similar emotionally-charged terms (e.g., “Shaurya Diwas,” “Ram Rath”) have been used politically.
- The operation is against targets tied to Islamic terror networks—risking religious polarization in public perception.

Strategic vs. Symbolic Language

Military operations often use neutral or code-based terms (e.g., “Operation Thunderbolt,” “Operation Neptune Spear”).
By contrast, “Operation Sindoor” introduces cultural-religious metaphor, transforming a counter-terror act into a symbolic revenge ritual, easily co-opted by nationalist narratives.

Public and Academic Concerns

Some secular and left-leaning commentators have flagged the trend of weaponizing Hindu symbols in state actions.
They warn that it blurs the line between cultural identity and state ideology, which the Indian Constitution explicitly separates under Articles 25–28.

Remarks:

Yes, “Operation Sindoor”, while possibly intended to symbolize martyrdom or grief, risks reinforcing Hindutva ideology by aligning state military action with a Hindu ritual metaphor. In a plural or diverse republic, such naming could—and arguably should—be reconsidered to maintain ideological neutrality and constitutional secularism.

V. Conclusion: On the Economy of War, the Art of Propaganda, and the Dance of Manipulation

The Pahalgam attack of April 2025 and the subsequent Operation Sindoor expose a troubling nexus of security lapses, political opportunism, and ideological signaling that demands rigorous scrutiny. The unanswered questions surrounding the attack—security vulnerabilities, intelligence failures, suspiciously timed media leaks, and potential insider complicity—echo the unresolved doubts of the 2019 Pulwama tragedy, suggesting either systemic incompetence or deliberate orchestration to serve political ends. Operation Sindoor, while framed as a decisive counter-terror strike, raises concerns with its mono-religiously loaded nomenclature, risking the alienation of India’s diverse populace and reinforcing perceptions of a state leaning toward Hindutva ideology, in violation of its secular constitutional mandate. The staggering economic costs, coupled with unverified claims of military losses, further muddy the narrative, highlighting a broader crisis of transparency and accountability. The Prime Minister’s ambiguous “24×7 on duty” stance, juxtaposed with his absence during critical moments like Pulwama, underscores a disconnect between image-building and governance. As India grapples with internal dissent and external threats, only an independent, time-bound investigation can separate fact from manipulation, ensuring justice for victims and safeguarding the nation’s pluralistic ethos from the perils of manufactured crises and ideological overreach.