'India has gone some way to meeting its objectives because it has established a deterrent value that Pakistan will have to take into account when it plans future terrorist attacks.'
In a candid interview with Rediff's Prasanna D Zore, Colonel Ajai Shukla (retd) -- the well-known commentator on defence matters -- dismisses claims of Indian military setbacks -- particularly reports that Chinese-supplied J-10C fighters outperformed India's Rafales.
To what extent has the US-brokered ceasefire altered the strategic calculus of Operation Sindoor -- has India achieved its core military objectives, or were key goals sacrificed for the sake of the truce?
India didn't have any goals up to the point where the terror attack took place (in Pahalgam on the afternoon of April 22, 2025). India was quite happy (till that time) -- just sort of living in peace and not having to deal with these regular terrorist attacks.
To that extent, India's objective was to be left alone, rather than be subjected to a barrage of terrorists and militants and gunmen, whatever you choose to call them.
I would say India has gone some way to meeting its objectives because it has (the airstrikes launched by India since the intervening night of May 6 and May 7) established a deterrent value that Pakistan will have to take into account when it plans future (terrorist attacks with help of Pakistan-sponsored terrorists) attacks.
How should India rebalance its forces along the Line of Control and the Line of Actual Control?
Well, if India's current deployment pattern is fine, it doesn't need to be re-established or re-looked at. It's got a direct value: Two strike corps that are ready at all times to strike into Pakistan if the need arises. And that's something that nobody really believes needs to change.
So, as long as there is no major terrorist attack or anything that requires India to attack Pakistan or carry out operations to re-establish its deterrent, I think India is doing perfectly fine.
By welcoming US mediation in a conflict traditionally governed by the Simla Agreement's principle of bilateralism, has India undermined its long-held stance against third-party intervention?
But India has not yet got any third party to intervene. There is speculation that President Trump could be the third partner in the equation, but that is just speculation -- no formal offer has been made at all.
As of now, India is talking to Pakistan through the DGMO channels, and that is all that's needed according to India's top leadership.
When India feels the need for a third party, then we can have this conversation -- but right now, India hasn't asked any third party (intervention) at all.
But President Trump has gone on social media and trumpeted that he has brokered a ceasefire between India and Pakistan.
I don't think Donald Trump will be invited by India to provide third-party mediation. And what is there to mediate? In any case, there's a claim by Pakistan over the province of Kashmir, but other than that, there's nothing. India does not acknowledge the need for third-party mediation.
Do you regard this ceasefire -- or whatever the situation is between India and Pakistan right now -- as a lasting de-escalation or a fragile pause?
Anybody who sees anything lasting in the India-Pakistan context is a bigger optimist than I am (laughs). As of now, it's a strategic pause. It's an interval in which all kinds of questions will be discussed. Then comes the question of whether the strategic pause translates into a dialogue process.
Pakistan's air force claims -- flying Chinese J-10C fighters -- to have downed an Indian Rafale which has been widely circulated in the Western media.
How credible are these reports, and might the prospect of air losses have driven New Delhi towards a ceasefire?
India is perfectly within its rights to decline to answer that question (about how many Indian aircraft have gone down). As of now, we are just speculating (about Indian aircraft being downed by Pakistan fighter planes).
We don't know whether a Rafale has been downed at all. We don't know that as a consequence of losing a Rafale, India is going to start accepting third-party mediation.
There's talk about how China J-10C fighters outperformed the Rafale...
No, I don't yet buy into the argument that the Rafale was outperformed by the J-10. There is little to support such an argument.
As soon as there becomes a certainty that some (Indian) planes have been downed and if so, which planes, one can then talk about what happened exactly.
But the Indian Air Force is carrying out its briefings regularly and so far they are absolutely steadfast in saying that there is no evidence yet of the air force losing any aircraft.
© 2025