‘Not rely on post-facto narrative building with delegations’: Brahma Chellaney says Israel’s military ops a striking contrast to India’s

Noted geostrategist Brahma Chellaney compared the military operations of both India and Israel, and pointed how, when it comes to using force – always the last resort – it must be guided by a clarity of thought. He also said that military operations should be based on decisive actions and not “post-facto narrative-building” through roadshows or delegations of lawmakers. 

Chellaney’s post is a remark on India’s decision to send delegations to foreign countries to talk about the Pahalgam attack, Operation Sindoor and the subsequent conflict between India and Pakistan. India targeted Pakistani air bases after which they reached out to New Delhi to talk about a possible ceasefire. 

Nevertheless, Pakistan has been declaring its “victory” and how they destroyed many Indian jets, even though the evidence pointed otherwise. 

“Israel’s population is just 10 million, while India has 1.4 billion people. Yet their latest military operations present a striking contrast. Israel decapitated Iran’s top military command through powerful preemptive strikes. In contrast, India launched its Operation Sindoor tentatively — after giving Pakistan 15 days’ advance notice. It initially targeted some terrorist camps but without first neutralising Pakistan’s air defences. That strategic oversight led to the loss of some Indian warplanes,”  said Chellaney. 

“Only then did the political leadership authorise the Air Force to strike Pakistani air defences and air bases. But just as the Indian military was gaining the upper hand, the operation was abruptly halted — only three days after it began,” he said. It was neither India nor Pakistan but US President Donald Trump who announced the ceasefire. He has, since, mentioned the US’ involvement to mediate multiple times – a claim that India refutes. India has said the ceasefire was agreed upon after both the neighbours had a talk. 

Chellaney further stated, “Force should always be a last resort — but when used, it must be guided by strategic clarity. A military operation should aim for decisive results that speak for themselves — not rely on post-facto narrative-building through domestic roadshows or delegations of lawmakers dispatched abroad.” 

ISRAEL ATTACKS IRAN

The comparison between India and Israel comes after the latter struck Iran’s nuclear sites. Israel launched extensive strikes against Iran on Friday, targeting nuclear facilities and military sites in an operation, named 'Rising Lion,' intended to prevent Tehran from advancing its nuclear weapon capabilities. "Moments ago Israel launched Operation Rising Lion, a targeted military operation to roll back the Iranian threat to Israel's very survival," said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, emphasising the critical nature of this intervention.

Iran's response was swift, with approximately 100 drones deployed towards Israeli territory in retaliation, as reported by Israeli military spokesman Brigadier General Effie Defrin. In anticipation of further strikes, Israel declared a state of emergency, and Israeli forces claimed success in neutralising key targets, including the chief of staff of the Iranian Armed Forces and other high-ranking officials.

The United States distanced itself from the operation, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio clarifying that the US was not involved in the strikes and that Israel acted unilaterally. Despite this, some coordination with Washington was acknowledged, although the US maintains it is not directly implicated. The situation has caused significant concern over potential escalations in Middle Eastern tensions.

Iranian media reported considerable damages, including attacks on the Natanz uranium enrichment facility and the death of key military figures. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei condemned the strikes, predicting a "bitter fate" for Israel. Meanwhile, the National Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company reported no damage to oil facilities, maintaining their activities amid the conflict.