Content:
- Trumpeting claims
- Operation Sindoor — a reshaping of confrontation
- Principled criminalisation and the police as pivot
Trumpeting claims
Context : Problematic Nature of Trump’s Claims
- Repeated Assertion: Trump has claimed five times that he mediated a ceasefire between India and Pakistan on May 10, hinting he averted a nuclear conflict.
- Contradicted by India: The MEA has consistently rebutted these claims, asserting that the ceasefire was a bilateral military agreement between DGMOs of both countries.
- Indian Narrative: India maintains that Pakistan reached out after suffering setbacks from Indian strikes during Operation Sindoor.
Relevance : GS 2(International Relations)
Practice Question : Discuss how third-party mediation attempts, like those claimed by U.S. President Donald Trump, challenge India’s core diplomatic principles. (15 marks)
Violation of India’s Core Diplomatic Principles
- No Third-Party Mediation: Trump’s claims violate India’s long-held stance of not accepting third-party involvement in bilateral issues like Kashmir.
- Internationalisation of Kashmir: His remarks undermine India’s position that Kashmir is an internal matter and not open to international negotiation.
- False Equivalence: Trump’s framing of both India and Pakistan as equal contributors to conflict promotes hyphenation, which India strongly opposes.
Misleading Statements and Diplomatic Concerns
- Trade Threats & Promises: Trump falsely claimed he used trade deals as leverage to push for peace, which MEA categorically denied.
- Ignoring Terrorism: No mention of India’s key concern—cross-border terrorism from Pakistan—weakens India’s global case.
- Trivialisation: Trump’s suggestion of a Modi-Sharif “dinner” makes light of serious geopolitical tensions.
Larger Strategic Implications
- From Friend to Friction?: India must assess whether Trump’s statements reflect:
- A personal eccentricity (“Trump being Trump”), or
- A shift in U.S. policy towards South Asia.
- Quad & Regional Balance: As a Quad member, the U.S. must not appear to side with narratives that contradict India’s security concerns.
- China Factor: The growing China-Pakistan nexus may be reshaping U.S. calculus, causing indirect pressure on India.
India’s Required Response
- Clear Messaging Needed: India must firmly communicate its red lines to Washington, especially on:
- No foreign mediation
- Terrorism as the central issue
- Preserve Credibility: India’s policy integrity and diplomatic credibility are at stake; hence strong diplomatic engagement is necessary.
Operation Sindoor — a reshaping of confrontation
Evolution of Warfare and Strategic Posture
- Operation Sindoor marks a paradigm shift in South Asian military confrontation.
- Moves beyond the traditional India-Pakistan bilateral conflict to represent a global model of modern warfare.
- Warfare now involves a combination of technology, strategy, and psychological manipulation, not just physical combat.
Relevance : GS 3(Internal Security)
Practice Question : Operation Sindoor marks a new phase in India’s military doctrine. Critically evaluate the shift towards drone warfare and information warfare in the Indian strategic context. (15 marks)
Rise of Drone Warfare
- Drone deployment is the centerpiece of this shift, replacing manned aircraft.
- Use of swarms of inexpensive, expendable drones signifies an asymmetric technological leap.
- India reportedly intercepted 300–400 Pakistani drones, showing the scale of drone-based warfare.
- India’s use of SkyStriker kamikaze drones reflects the new trend of precision, low-risk, and intelligence-driven strikes.
Air Defence Transformation
- India’s layered air defence integrates indigenous (Akash, QRSAM) and imported (S-400, Barak-8) systems.
- Akashteer system enables real-time, digital integration of radar data for smarter threat response.
- Defence strategy has shifted from static systems to adaptive, dynamic networks capable of neutralising simultaneous threats.
Information Warfare as a Strategic Weapon
- Psychological operations and disinformation campaigns are now central to warfare.
- Pakistan employed digital propaganda — doctored videos, fake narratives, and social media manipulation — to weaken morale and shift perceptions.
- Similar trends seen in Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Palestine conflicts, where information control is as crucial as military power.
Strategic Deterrence and Escalation Control
- India’s response showcases escalation management without total war, allowing military assertion with diplomatic space.
- The PM’s speech (May 12) reflects doctrinal evolution with three pillars:
- Rapid, proportionate response to provocation.
- Comprehensive offensive-defensive integration.
- Advanced escalation control avoiding full-scale war.
Technological Independence and Self-Reliance
- Emphasis on indigenous platforms like Akash and Project Kusha reflects:
- Reduced foreign dependence
- Boost to defence exports
- Enhanced technological sovereignty
Jointness and Inter-Service Integration
- Integrated Air Command and Control System (IACCS) enabled real-time coordination between Army, Navy, and Air Force.
- Transition from conceptual jointness to operational synergy.
- Unified intelligence support improved precision targeting and strategic planning.
Democratisation of Warfare Technology — Double-Edged Sword
- Advanced tech is now accessible to state and non-state actors, including Pakistan.
- Increases potential for asymmetric threats and hybrid warfare.
- Necessitates overhauling India’s defence and intelligence architecture to remain ahead.
Redefining Victory and Warfare
- Modern victory is not about territory but multi-dimensional dominance:
- Technological superiority
- Information control
- Psychological edge
- Traditional metrics of military success have become outdated.
Key Takeaway
- Operation Sindoor symbolizes India’s shift from reactive defence to proactive, tech-savvy, multi-domain warfare—setting a template for future strategic conflicts.
Principled criminalisation and the police as pivot
Central Thesis
- Criminalisation must be guided not only by substantive criminal law (what is criminal) but also by procedural criminal law (how it is enforced).
- The police plays major role of this process, and their discretion must be regulated and principled.
- The Supreme Court’s Imran Pratapgarhi v. State of Gujarat case highlights the need for procedural restraint and responsible policing.
Relevance : GS 2(Governance , Polity)
Practice Question : What do you understand by “principled criminalisation”? Critically analyse the role of police discretion in shaping criminal justice outcomes in India. (15 marks)
Understanding Principled Criminalisation
- It refers to legitimising the state’s power to label an act as criminal and impose punishment.
- Criminalisation should align with:
- Collective interests of society.
- Violent attacks against individuals.
- Violation of personal autonomy or rights (non-intervention principle).
- Despite well-structured laws (like the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita), ground-level criminalisation can still be disproportionate or misused.
Importance of Procedure in Criminal Law
- Procedural law (BNSS) is not just about ‘how’ but determines whether and how fairly criminalisation occurs.
- Real criminalisation occurs through:
- Detection → FIR → Investigation → Arrest → Prosecution → Conviction → Sentencing.
- Discretion and bias in this process often lead to over-criminalisation or under-criminalisation of certain groups.
Police as the Pivot
- Police are the primary agents in implementing criminal law.
- Their discretionary powers (who to arrest, what to register) shape the actual reach of criminalisation.
- Risks:
- Overzealous policing of minor/non-harmful infractions.
- Neglect of serious, harmful offences.
- Frivolous or politically motivated FIRs.
Section 173(3) of BNSS: A Check on Overreach
- Allows police 14 days for a preliminary inquiry before registering an FIR for certain offences (punishable between 3–7 years).
- Intended to prevent misuse of police powers and unnecessary criminalisation.
- Empowers police to filter out frivolous cases before formal proceedings.
Imran Pratapgarhi Case: A Procedural Landmark
- Case facts:
- FIR registered against a Rajya Sabha MP for an allegedly inflammatory poem.
- Police failed to conduct mandatory preliminary inquiry as per Section 173(3).
- Supreme Court quashed the FIR, citing non-compliance and misuse of procedural powers.
- Emphasised that police have a duty to apply procedural safeguards, especially when fundamental rights (like speech) are involved.
Conclusion
- Principled criminalisation = Substantive + Procedural discipline.
- Police must act with accountability and restraint, especially when fundamental rights are at stake.
- Judicial oversight is essential to ensure that the state’s coercive power is used responsibly and constitutionally.
