In a significant admission, Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar has confirmed that Indian airstrikes during Operation Sindoor targeted key airbases in Pakistan, causing considerable damage. This revelation marks a critical moment in the ongoing tensions between the two nations, as it highlights the vulnerability of Pakistan’s military infrastructure in the face of India’s military capabilities.
During a televised address, Dar disclosed that multiple airfields in Pakistan were struck by Indian forces, and he specifically mentioned the Nur Khan and Saroda airbases as suffering extensive damage. He claimed that it would take approximately three to four months to restore the affected facilities to operational status. This acknowledgment from a senior Pakistani official underscores the seriousness of the situation and Pakistan’s recognition of India’s military strength.
Dar also revealed that Pakistan sought assistance from Saudi Arabia, in addition to the United States, to intervene in the conflict. He indicated that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman had offered to communicate with India’s External Affairs Minister, Dr. S. Jaishankar, to convey Pakistan’s readiness to de-escalate. This plea for external intervention suggests that Pakistan is feeling the pressure of its military setbacks and is eager for support to mitigate the crisis.
The Deputy Prime Minister’s statements have raised questions about Pakistan’s strategic position. By reaching out to Saudi Arabia and the United States for help, Dar portrayed Pakistan as being in a defensive posture, which contrasts sharply with the narrative of strength typically espoused by Pakistani leaders. Analysts argue that this signifies a shift in the balance of power, as India has consistently maintained a stance against third-party mediation in its bilateral relations with Pakistan.
Military expert Major General A.K. Shiv remarked on the implications of Dar’s admission, stating that the acknowledgment of airstrikes indicates a realization within Pakistan of its military inadequacies. He emphasized that the Pakistani military’s Integrated Air Defense System failed to respond effectively to the Indian attacks, reinforcing the perception that Pakistan is at a disadvantage.
The situation is further complicated by the diplomatic dynamics at play. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been clear in affirming that India will not accept any form of third-party intervention, a position he reiterated during a recent phone call with the U.S. President. This steadfastness in foreign policy highlights India’s commitment to addressing its security concerns independently.
The commentary from Shazad Poonawala, a spokesperson for the Bharatiya Janata Party, further emphasized the narrative that Pakistan is struggling to manage the fallout from India’s military actions. He criticized Pakistan’s reliance on external powers for assistance, framing it as a sign of weakness and an inability to confront India directly.
As the situation unfolds, the implications of these developments will be closely scrutinized by both domestic and international observers. The admission by Ishaq Dar not only reveals the extent of the damage inflicted by Indian forces but also reflects the broader geopolitical landscape in which Pakistan is navigating its relationships and military strategy.
In conclusion, the admission from Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister serves as a pivotal moment in the ongoing tensions with India. It illustrates the challenges Pakistan faces in maintaining its military posture and the growing necessity for external support in the wake of military setbacks. As both nations continue to engage in a complex geopolitical struggle, the potential for further escalation remains a pressing concern.