The Wire twists Indian Armed Forces official’s statement to peddle false narrative, blames ‘political constraints’ under Modi govt for aircraft loss during Operation Sindoor
When it comes to distorting facts, undermining India’s national interests, and demonising the Modi government, The Wire has consistently outdone itself. In their latest hit job, The Wire tried to insinuate that India lost fighter jets due to the political leadership of the country.
Titled “IAF Lost Fighter Jets to Pak Because of Political Leadership’s Constraints’: Indian Defence Attache”, the write-up is a quintessential propaganda exercise, a textbook example of selective reporting, half-truths, and manipulative spin aimed at eroding public confidence in India’s military leadership and elected government.
Let’s expose this propaganda, call out the distortion, and set the record straight on Operation Sindoor—India’s audacious and bold response to Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.
The context: Terror in Pahalgam, retaliation across IB and LoC
Operation Sindoor wasn’t an unprovoked military operation. It was in response to the gruesome Pahalgam terror attack in May 2025, where Pakistan-sponsored Islamic terrorists targeted tourists in Jammu & Kashmir, checking for circumcision to identify Hindus before brutally executing them. This was not only an attack on civilians but a naked attempt to stoke communal tensions within India.
Unlike previous administrations that often confined their responses to diplomatic dossiers or toothless condemnations, the Modi government authorised direct military action. Indian Armed Forces were greenlit to strike terror infrastructure operating deep within Pakistan’s borders, calling Islamabad’s nuclear bluff and challenging decades of Pakistani impunity.
But India, being a responsible nation that believes in a rules-based order, limited itself to restricted rules of engagement: attacking only terror infrastructure and not the Pakistani defence apparatus.
But this fact was conveniently brushed aside by The Wire to mount a propaganda blitz against the Modi government.
The so-called ‘Political Constraints’ — responsible statecraft, not weakness
At the centre of The Wire’s propaganda is the distortion of remarks by Captain (IN) Shiv Kumar, India’s Defence Attache to Indonesia. Speaking at an academic seminar, he highlighted how, during the initial phases of Operation Sindoor, Indian Air Force (IAF) fighter jets operated under strict political directives, not to target Pakistani military installations or air defence systems, but solely terror camps.
According to The Wire, this proves “political constraints” from the Modi government that led to aircraft losses. This interpretation is not only disingenuous but reveals a fundamental ignorance about military doctrine, international law, and strategic calculus.
What the so-called “political constraints” represent is New Delhi’s conscious, calibrated approach to distinguish between punishing terrorism and escalating into an all-out war. India’s initial restraint was a strategic signal to the enemy and the world: this is not India vs. Pakistan’s sovereignty, it is India vs. terrorism sheltered by Pakistan. It is was promptly communicated to Pakistan following precise strikes against terror camps. But as Pakistan came out in support of its terror network, India changed the rules of engagement and incapacitated Pakistan’s military installations and defence systems.
Ironically, the same leftist commentators who endlessly warn against “nuclear escalation” when India retaliates, now attack the Modi government for not being aggressive enough. Their doublespeak is apparent. They oppose any Indian action that showcases strength, regardless of context. If the Modi government attacks Pakistan, fear-monger about a spiralling wider conflict that could impact the country’s growth trajectory. If it doesn’t, blame the government for “clipping the wings” of the Armed Forces to deal a decisive blow to the enemy. Either way, the blame lies with the Modi government, if rags like The Wire are to be believed.
Losses in War: Unfortunate, but not unusual
No military operation, especially those involving precision strikes in a hostile airspace, is free of risks. However, this is something that narrative spinners at The Wire find it incredibly hard to comprehend. Even the world’s most advanced air forces, including the United States and NATO, have suffered aircraft losses during high-stakes missions. The US lost one of its most advanced choppers in an operation to eliminate Osama Bin Laden, who was hiding in Abottabad, Pakistan.
Even Russia has lost aircraft and drones in the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. So has Israel against Iran, even though the former is hailed for possessing world-class combat equipments, including most advanced jets and drones provided by the United States.
The loss of IAF aircraft, while regrettable, does not signal incompetence or weakness; it reflects the complex reality of operating under restrictive rules of engagement, in a hostile, unpredictable environment, against an adversary that brazenly shields terrorists with military cover.
The real measure of success lies not in avoiding every single loss, but in achieving strategic objectives. By that metric, Operation Sindoor was a resounding success. But for The Wire, long used to following the anti-India playbook, lauding the Modi government for its strategic brilliance in Operation Sindoor was an anathema, guided by its ideological and political compulsions to oppose the Centre. So it did the next best thing it could do: nitpicking the government by selectively quoting an Indian Armed Forces official and casting aspersions on Operation Sindoor.
Operation Sindoor’s phased retaliation: A masterclass in military adaptation
Once Pakistan exposed its duplicity by scrambling air defences and fighter jets to shield terror infrastructure, India swiftly revised its tactics. Within days, the IAF neutralised enemy air defences, leveraged stand-off weapons like the BrahMos missile, and systematically degraded Pakistan’s air bases and military assets.
The results were indisputable:
- Eleven Pakistani air bases suffered damage.
- Key air defence installations were neutralised.
- Pakistan’s offensive drone swarms were intercepted.
- Pakistani military casualties mounted, forcing Islamabad to sue for a ceasefire.
Pakistan’s Directorate General of Military Operations (DGMO) reportedly pleaded with their Indian counterparts to de-escalate, a scenario inconceivable had India been “weak”, indecisive, or tied up with “political constraints.”
The Wire conveniently ignores this, cherry-picking selective remarks to fabricate a narrative of incompetence, all while Pakistan’s military and terror proxies were left reeling.
The Wire’s habitual distortions: Undermining India for narrow political agenda
This isn’t The Wire’s first brush with misinformation. Their track record includes downplaying Pakistan’s role in cross-border terrorism, amplifying “intelligence failure” narratives while ignoring the real perpetrators—the Islamic jihadist infrastructure and the Pakistani Army, and painting decisive Indian military actions, like Balakot airstrikes or Galwan Valley responses, as reckless rather than necessary.
Their distortion of Captain Kumar’s remarks follows this pattern.
In reality, Captain Kumar’s broader presentation emphasised:
“The Indian Armed Forces serve under civilian political leadership, unlike some other countries in our neighbourhood… the objective of Operation Sindoor was to target terrorist infrastructure and the Indian response was non-escalatory.”
The contrast with Pakistan is glaring. Islamabad’s military dictatorship operates without accountability, uses civilian air traffic as human shields during military operations, and protects terrorists as strategic assets. Meanwhile, India, despite provocations, adheres to democratic oversight and proportional use of force.
Yet, The Wire weaponises ambiguity, exploiting the use of “political constraints”, used most likely in philosophical terms conveying a sense of moral and international constraints that democratically elected India chooses to adhere unlike a rogue Pakistan where the democratic leadership is just a smokescreen to mask the country’s dictatorial impulses.
India’s doctrine has shifted, and The Wire can’t digest it
What The Wire refuses to acknowledge is the strategic shift Operation Sindoor represents:
- Terror attacks originating from Pakistan are now treated as acts of war.
- India will respond militarily, even under nuclear shadow, without succumbing to Pakistan’s blackmail.
- The myth of Pakistani “non-state actors” operating independently is shattered—India has exposed the seamless nexus between the Pakistani Army and jihadist groups.
In short, Modi’s India has moved beyond hollow diplomacy and token responses, ushering in an era of credible deterrence. It is this muscular, unapologetic posture that rattles both Pakistan and the left-liberal ecosystem that romanticises “peace at any cost.”
Manufactured outrage and moral incoherence
Let’s consider the absurdity: had India immediately struck Pakistani military installations at the outset, The Wire would’ve screamed “war-mongering” and “destabilisation of South Asia.” When India exercised measured restraint, they cry “weak leadership.” that allegedly lost us jets. Their outrage isn’t grounded in facts, it’s rooted in political opportunism.
Moreover, their selective outrage never extends to Pakistan’s sanctuary to UN-designated terrorists, Pakistan’s open use of jihad as state policy, and the grotesque communal profiling and slaughter of Hindus in Pahalgam.
In their hierarchy of concerns, defaming Modi trumps defending India’s security interests.
Strategic success, media malfeasance
Operation Sindoor showcased India’s military prowess, strategic patience, and willingness to escalate proportionally. It exposed Pakistan’s terror-military nexus, degraded enemy capabilities, and redefined India’s red lines.
The Modi government’s approach—calibrated yet uncompromising—marked a new doctrine that balances restraint with retaliatory resolve.
The Wire, blinded by ideological hostility, twists facts, undermines morale, and peddles a false equivalence that serves neither truth nor national interest. Their attempt to rewrite Operation Sindoor’s legacy as a tale of weakness is not just dishonest; it borders on disinformation and deserves institutional rebuttal and unequivocal public condemnation. It is high time that The Wire is called out for it is: a propaganda outlet doing the enemy’s bidding under the guise of dissent.
India’s security cannot be held hostage to propaganda outlets desperate to score political points, even if it means distorting the words of military officials and misrepresenting hard-won victories.
The facts are clear. The enemies are exposed. And India’s message is louder than ever: Terrorism will be met with force, deception will be met with truth, and propaganda will be exposed for what it is — anti-national, morally corrupt, and intellectually bankrupt.
News