'First to lie strategy': Top US warfare expert punches holes in Pakistan’s Operation Sindoor claims

Within hours of India launching Operation Sindoor, Pakistan unleashed a “first to lie” strategy, spreading exaggerated claims of success to shape global perception.

John Spencer, Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute, called out the tactic, warning that international media had once again fallen for a familiar playbook.

“Like we have seen in Gaza, fact-checking has become a lost standard. All in the name of being ‘first,’” Spencer posted on X.

As Pakistan’s military boasted of inflicting “great damage,” Prime Minister Narendra Modi was compelled to address the misinformation, holding a press conference from a military base to counter the narrative.

Beyond the information war, Spencer offered a blunt assessment of the operation itself. “After just four days of calibrated military action, it is objectively conclusive: India achieved a massive victory. This was not symbolic force. It was decisive power, clearly applied.”

 

Operation Sindoor, India’s limited yet focused campaign, struck terrorist infrastructure inside Pakistan, neutralized counterattacks, and established new red lines. Rather than escalating into full-scale conflict, India demonstrated its ability to impose costs without losing control of the conflict’s pace.

Modi made the strategic shift clear: “Terror and talks can’t go together. Water and blood can’t flow together.” He also vowed India would not tolerate “nuclear blackmail.”

India’s briefing to 70 nations after the strikes, excluding China and downgrading Turkiye, underscored that Operation Sindoor was not just a retaliation but a doctrinal statement.

For Spencer, India’s approach reflects a broader shift among democracies facing grey-zone threats — balancing restraint with decisive, limited military action. His analysis positions Operation Sindoor as a model for modern deterrence, resonating far beyond South Asia.