Defence Minister Rajnath Singh on Monday shook the Lok Sabha with a revelation that had long been rumoured but never confirmed—India has already retaliated against the Pahalgam terror attack through a precision strike named Operation Sindoor. The operation, which targeted nine critical terrorist training hubs in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, was conducted with full strategic oversight and zero casualties on the Indian side. The targets, Singh said, were Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hizbul Mujahideen bases supported directly by Pakistan’s military and ISI.
The name Sindoor was symbolically chosen, signifying the sacred red mark of the motherland. “It is not merely vermilion—it is the pride of our soil. If someone dares to touch it, they must pay,” Singh said with fervor. He clarified that the mission was not reactive but planned, precise, and executed at a time of India’s choosing. The operation, according to Singh, eliminated over 100 operatives, including trainers and handlers, thereby dismantling key networks without losing a single Indian soldier.
Opposition Interruption, Demand for Proof, and a Stern Rebuttal
As Singh detailed the operation’s success, opposition benches erupted with demands for proof, echoing past political patterns that have often questioned India’s military operations. But the minister held his ground. He reminded them that when he was in opposition, he had never questioned the integrity of India’s armed forces. “Ask about the results, not about the camera footage,” he countered sharply, accusing the opposition of dishonouring the strategic work of India’s security establishment. “This is not an exam; this is warfare. And in warfare, the only mark sheet that matters is :mission accomplished.”
Singh stressed that operations of such magnitude are built on secrecy and strategic silence, not television debates. “When our forces strike, they strike with intention and purpose—not for applause. Our army met every objective it was given. That is proof enough.” The defence minister’s reply effectively turned the tables on those accusing the government of opacity, shifting the conversation toward accountability in the national interest.
Diplomatic Muscle: India Rejects Symbolic Defence Talks at Shanghai Meet
Adding depth to the government’s response, Singh disclosed that he had recently been invited to Shanghai for high-level defence discussions. However, he refused to sign any formal documentation, condemning the lack of space for India to raise its stance against global terrorism. “They came with nothing, so I signed nothing. I told them until India is given a global platform to present our case against terrorism, we will not engage in hollow photo ops.”
The statement underlined a strategic shift in India’s foreign policy—one that demands equal footing in international narratives. Singh explained that even at the BRICS summit and other high-level visits, India’s stand remained unwavering: that it would never tolerate terror sanctuaries operating from across the border. “We have told them clearly—no more terrorist interference from Pakistan will be tolerated. There is no room for misinterpretation.”
Singh’s Sledgehammer Statement Echoes Beyond Parliament
If Singh’s speech had a crescendo, it came with his now-viral declaration: “India is a lion—and we don’t fight frogs.” The phrase captured the spirit of India’s current defence posture—majestic, calm, but prepared to pounce. In one line, Singh dismissed Pakistan’s provocations as petty and unworthy of engagement, reinforcing India’s stature as a power that operates on a higher strategic plane.
The metaphor did more than sting; it summed up India’s entire security ethos in the face of repeated terror attacks. Lions don’t chase distractions. They strike when the moment demands, with calculated force. It was also a message to India’s own citizens—that the time for fear, hesitation, and political gamesmanship was over. National unity, Singh insisted, must supersede political one-upmanship in such critical times.
Unity as Armour
In his closing remarks, Singh elevated the discussion from geopolitics to philosophy. “Our unity and social ethics are our strongest, most powerful wisdom. We stand on samprabhekta (inclusiveness) and samprabhta (sovereignty). That’s our identity. That’s our strength.” His voice lowered as he said this—not out of fatigue, but conviction.
It was a reminder that India’s response to terrorism cannot be viewed through mere bullet points or news flashes. It is a holistic stand—military, diplomatic, moral, and philosophical. A lion doesn’t roar every day. But when it does, it silences the jungle.
India has roared—and the echoes will not fade soon.
In Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s tenure, India is no longer the India it once was. Today, the nation doesn’t just endure aggression—it retaliates. This is the time to stand united, to accumulate all our collective strength and willpower, and to send a clear, unwavering message to the supporters of terrorism: India will do whatever it takes to defend its Matribhoomi. We hail the spirit of “Sanghachhadhvam” and “”Samvadadhvam”—ancient Vedic ideals of walking together, speaking in unison, and acting in harmony. Our unity and social ethics remain our most powerful wisdom. We stand on the foundation of national harmony, collective resolve, and an uncompromising commitment to sovereignty and peace.
