GS Analyst: Daily Editorial In Brief

The Indian Armed Forces conducted ‘Operation Sindoor’ in response to a Pakistan-sponsored terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu & Kashmir, exposing the direct nexus between Pakistan’s military establishment and terrorist groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM). The operation signaled a decisive shift in India's counter-terrorism posture, with deep strikes across Pakistan's military and terror infrastructure.

Pakistan's State-Terror Nexus: Irrefutable Proof

• Blurring of State–Non-State Distinction: Evidence from Pahalgam attack and aftermath shows complete erosion of the line between Pakistan's state actors and terror outfits like JeM and LeT.
• State-Backed Martyrdom: Video footage confirms state funerals for killed terrorists with attendance of Pakistan Army officers — a clear legitimisation of terror actors by the state.
• Escalation by Pakistan: In response to India’s precision strikes, Pakistan launched missile and drone attacks on both civilian and military targets in Jammu & Kashmir, Punjab, and Rajasthan, marking a serious escalation.

India’s Calibrated Military Response

• Legitimacy of ‘Operation Sindoor’: The operation was grounded in Article 51 of the UN Charter (Right to Self-Defence), targeting terror infrastructure on Pakistani soil.
• Targeting Terror Nerve Centres: The strikes were precise, aimed at camps run by JeM and LeT, avoiding collateral damage to civilians, showcasing India's responsible military posture.
• Crossing Pakistan’s Strategic Red Lines: India hit deep into Pakistan’s Punjab, home to military assets and terror handlers, challenging the nuclear deterrence shield that Islamabad historically leveraged.

Strategic Implications for India-Pakistan Dynamics

• End of Asymmetry in Warfare Assumptions: India has discarded strategic restraint, making clear that asymmetric attacks will now face direct kinetic retaliation.
• Shift in Military Goalposts: The conflict's rules have changed — India is prepared to neutralise terror threats inside Pakistan, rather than confining responses to borders or proxies.
• Message to Rawalpindi Establishment: Pakistan Army and ISI, creators and sustainers of terror outfits, now face Indian strikes as a direct consequence of their sponsorship of terrorism.

Practice Question

Amidst growing threats from both China and Pakistan and persistent cross-border terrorism, a renewed debate has emerged on the urgent need for India to adopt a comprehensive National Security Doctrine to move beyond reactive responses and establish a proactive strategic framework.

The Doctrinal Gap and Existing Responses

• Current Success ? Strategic Preparedness: India has won wars and prevented incursions, but lacks a codified doctrine to preempt threats and project power. Operational efficiency without a guiding doctrine risks strategic drift and reactive policymaking.
• Nuclear Doctrine—A Lone Example: India articulated a nuclear doctrine in 2003 with principles like ‘No First Use’ and a ‘credible minimum deterrent’, but it remains an isolated case. Deterrence alone hasn't dissuaded China or Pakistan from provocations.
• Doctrinal Vacuum and Strategic Ambiguity: Absence of a broader doctrine means inconsistent responses—seen in tackling terrorism or hybrid threats. Even “No First Use” was debated controversially, reflecting lack of doctrinal clarity and political consensus.

Comparative Insights and Theoretical Anchors

• China’s Strategic Doctrine—A Model: China hasn’t fought a war since 1979 yet has expanded its influence, driven by Sun Tzu’s doctrinal strategy of "winning without fighting"—an approach missing in India’s current stance.
• Historical Indian Doctrinal Thought: From Chanakya’s Mandala Theory to Krishna’s war ethics, India has deep doctrinal roots stressing both preemptive action and righteous ends. Modern strategic thought must reconnect with this civilizational memory.
• Ashoka’s Security Diplomacy: Emperor Ashoka’s missionary diplomacy wasn’t just cultural—it created buffer zones of influence. A doctrinal lens helps decode this as a form of soft power-driven deterrence.

 Imperatives for a National Security Doctrine

• Beyond Military: A Holistic Security Vision: Security today spans diplomacy, politics, society, and religion. A national doctrine would integrate internal cohesion with external posturing, unlike the current compartmentalised approach.
• Codifying Deterrence and Response Mechanisms: A doctrine would formalize red lines, response thresholds, and escalation ladders, enabling India to impose “unacceptable costs” on aggressors across terror, cyber, and grey zone warfare.
• From Romanticism to Realpolitik: India’s posture has often been guided by idealist principles (e.g., non-violence), but evolving threats require strategic pragmatism, blending moral authority with decisive action.

Practice Question

Q. “Strategic doctrines are not mere military blueprints but comprehensive statecraft tools.” In the context of India’s evolving security environment, critically examine the need for a National Security Doctrine.

A 42-year-old woman in Malappuram district, Kerala, tested positive for the Nipah virus, marking the third reported case in the district within two years. With previous spillovers and outbreaks, this recurrence underscores a growing epidemiological concern in the region.

Epidemiological Trends and Clinical Profiles

• Increasing Frequency of Occurrence: Kerala has recorded two outbreaks involving human-to-human transmission (2018 and 2023) and four spillovers (2019, 2021, and twice in 2024), suggesting a pattern of regular re-emergence.
• Clinical Variation in Presentations: Spillover cases mostly exhibit Acute Encephalitis Syndrome (AES), while outbreak cases involve Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS), which is linked with greater severity and transmissibility.
• Transmission Pathways and Severity Correlation: ARDS patients carry higher viral loads, especially in the throat, combined with cough symptoms, increasing the likelihood of human-to-human transmission, which correlates with fatality rates — 17 deaths out of 18 cases in 2018, and 2 out of 6 in 2023.

Virological Insights and Research Findings

• Genetic Mutation Concerns: The 2018 Nipah virus strain showed minor genetic differences from the Bangladesh strain, capable of causing multisystemic disease in animal models (Syrian hamsters), mimicking human pathology.
• Significance of Viral Load and Sample Type: Regardless of other biological samples, throat swabs consistently test positive in infected individuals, especially those with ARDS, making it a crucial indicator for transmissibility risk.
• Diversity in Viral Behaviour: The Nipah virus demonstrates a broad clinical spectrum and inconsistent transmissibility, necessitating continuous surveillance and genomic mapping to understand its evolving nature.

Policy Imperatives and Surveillance Strategies

• Routine Surveillance of Fruit Bats: As fruit bats are the natural reservoir of Nipah virus, systematic and periodic monitoring of their virology is essential for early warning systems and understanding zoonotic dynamics.
• Urgency for Open Genetic Data Sharing: To enable timely research and global collaboration, genetic sequences of the virus must be deposited in public databases, allowing real-time tracking of mutations.
• Need for Institutionalised Genomic Studies: A robust mechanism involving multi-institutional and interdisciplinary genomic surveillance, especially in high-risk zones like Kerala, is necessary to pre-empt outbreaks and refine policy responses.

Practice Question

Q. With the increasing regularity of Nipah virus spillovers and outbreaks in India, especially in Kerala, critically evaluate the need for genomic surveillance, zoonotic monitoring, and public health preparedness as part of India’s epidemic response strategy.