India-Pakistan Clash: Operation Sindoor vs. Bunyan Ul Marsoos – Was War Necessary?

May 12, 2025 Pardesi Lounge team

The recent military clash between India and Pakistan, marked by India’s Operation Sindoor and Pakistan’s Operation Bunyan Ul Marsoos in May 2025, has reignited tensions in South Asia. This conflict, rooted in a long-standing dispute over Kashmir, raises critical questions about the necessity of war, the motivations behind such military actions, and the urgent need for both nations to prioritize peace and resolution over violence. With both countries grappling with economic challenges, this article explores whether the clash was a genuine necessity or merely a spectacle for domestic audiences, the costs incurred, the loss of innocent lives, and the role of media in escalating tensions. Additionally, it proposes a potential solution for the Kashmir issue and emphasizes the importance of responsible journalism.

Table of Contents

Was War Necessary or a Show for Domestic Audiences?

Operation Sindoor, launched by India on May 7, 2025, aimed to dismantle alleged terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK) following a deadly attack on April 22 in Pahalgam, Indian-administered Kashmir, which claimed 26 civilian lives. Pakistan retaliated with Operation Bunyan Ul Marsoos on May 10, targeting Indian military installations with drones and missiles, including the Fattah-1 ballistic missile. While both nations justified their actions as defensive or retaliatory, the timing and scale of these operations suggest a strong element of domestic political posturing.

In India, Operation Sindoor, named after the vermilion mark symbolizing marriage and valor, was framed as a tribute to the victims of Pahalgam, resonating emotionally with the public. Similarly, Pakistan’s choice of “Bunyan Ul Marsoos,” a Quranic reference to a “solid wall of lead,” symbolized unity and strength, rallying nationalistic fervor. Critics, including former Afghan Vice President Amrullah Saleh, have pointed out the lack of credible evidence for Pakistan’s claims of success, suggesting the operation was more about projecting strength domestically than achieving strategic goals. In India, the narrative of avenging civilian deaths played well with a public seeking decisive action, as noted in reports from Times Now. This indicates that both operations may have been tailored as much for local consumption as for military necessity, diverting attention from internal issues like economic struggles and political dissent.

Why Poor Nations Like India and Pakistan Must Avoid War

India and Pakistan, despite their military capabilities, face significant socio-economic challenges. India, with a GDP per capita of approximately $2,400 (as of recent World Bank data), and Pakistan, with a GDP per capita of around $1,500, are home to millions living below the poverty line. War diverts critical resources from education, healthcare, and infrastructure to defense spending. The recent conflict, though brief, saw both nations deploying advanced weaponry and sustaining damages, further straining their economies. Pakistan, already reliant on IMF loans (recently approved for $2.4 billion as per Times Now), cannot afford prolonged conflict, while India’s focus on military escalation risks undermining its development goals.

Instead of war, both nations must channel efforts into resolving the Kashmir issue, the core of their rivalry. A peaceful resolution would not only save lives and resources but also foster regional stability, opening avenues for economic cooperation. The ceasefire agreed upon on May 10, 2025, as reported by Al Jazeera, offers a fragile window for dialogue that must be seized.

Best Possible Solution for Kashmir

The Kashmir dispute, dating back to 1947, remains a flashpoint between India and Pakistan, with both claiming the region in full while controlling parts of it. A viable solution lies in a multi-pronged approach centered on dialogue, autonomy, and international mediation. First, both nations should commit to a sustained bilateral dialogue, prioritizing the aspirations of Kashmiri people over territorial claims. Second, granting greater autonomy to both Indian-administered and Pakistan-administered Kashmir could address local grievances, reducing militancy and unrest. Third, involving neutral mediators like the United Nations or a consortium of nations (as suggested by US offers reported in The News International) could ensure impartiality and build trust.

A long-term solution might involve a demilitarized zone along the Line of Control (LoC), with joint monitoring by both countries and international observers. This, coupled with economic integration projects like cross-border trade, could transform Kashmir from a conflict zone into a bridge of cooperation. While challenging, such a framework prioritizes human lives over political pride, a necessity for two nuclear-armed neighbors.

Costs and Casualties of the Clash

The financial and human toll of the May 2025 clash is staggering, though exact figures remain contested due to conflicting narratives. Based on available data from search results, here’s an overview of the expenses and losses incurred.

India’s Operation Sindoor Costs and Equipment

Equipment Used: India deployed drones, loitering munitions, and fighter jets, including Rafale aircraft. Reports from Al Jazeera suggest strikes targeted multiple Pakistani airbases, with claims of destroying terrorist infrastructure.
Cost Estimates: While precise costs are unavailable, a single Rafale jet costs approximately $240 million (based on 2016 deal prices adjusted for inflation). If Pakistan’s claim of downing five Indian jets (three Rafales, one SU-30, one MiG-29) as per Express Tribune is accurate, the loss could exceed $700 million. Additional costs for drones and munitions likely run into tens of millions.
Damages: Pakistan claims to have targeted Indian bases like Pathankot and Udhampur, with damages to S-400 systems (worth $1.5 billion as per The News International) and other infrastructure. India disputes the extent, reporting “limited damage” (Al Jazeera).
Casualties: India reported five civilian deaths from Pakistani missile fire on May 10 (Al Jazeera), with military losses undisclosed.

Pakistan’s Operation Bunyan Ul Marsoos Costs and Equipment

Equipment Used: Pakistan used Fattah-1 ballistic missiles, JF-17 and F-16 jets, and numerous drones (300-400 as per India.com). The Fattah-1 missile’s cost is estimated at $1-2 million per unit based on regional missile pricing.
Cost Estimates: With strikes on 26 Indian locations (India Today), the operational cost, including drones and missiles, could be in the range of $50-100 million. India’s strikes damaged key Pakistani airbases like Nur Khan and Rafiqui (Times Now), with losses of F-16s and JF-17s potentially costing $25-50 million per aircraft.
Damages: India claims significant damage to Pakistani military assets, including 10 airbases and air defense systems (Times Now), though Pakistan disputes the scale.
Casualties: Pakistan reported 33 deaths, including children, from Indian strikes, with over 50 injured (Al Jazeera). Military casualties remain unclear.

Innocent Lives Lost

The human cost is heartbreaking. India lost at least 26 civilians in the initial Pahalgam attack and five more during Pakistani strikes. Pakistan reported 33 civilian deaths from Indian attacks. These numbers, though likely underreported, highlight the tragic impact on non-combatants caught in the crossfire.

Media Responsibility and Indian Media’s Role in Fake News

Media plays a pivotal role in shaping public perception during conflicts, but its responsibility to report accurately is often compromised. In this clash, both Indian and Pakistani media outlets have been accused of bias and exaggeration. Indian media, in particular, faced criticism for spreading unverified claims, such as Pakistan’s alleged destruction of the S-400 system at Adampur, which India later debunked (Times Now). Reports of exaggerated damage to Pakistani bases without visual evidence further fueled misinformation. Such narratives, driven by sensationalism, risk escalating tensions by inflaming public sentiment.

Media on both sides must adopt a sincere, fact-based approach, avoiding propaganda and prioritizing de-escalation. Responsible journalism involves cross-verifying claims, providing balanced perspectives, and highlighting the human cost of conflict over nationalistic rhetoric. International outlets like Al Jazeera have attempted more neutral reporting, which local media should emulate to foster understanding rather than division.

A Call for Peace and Focus on Kashmir

The India-Pakistan clash of May 2025, through Operations Sindoor and Bunyan Ul Marsoos, underscores the futility of war for nations burdened by poverty and developmental challenges. With costs running into billions and dozens of innocent lives lost, the conflict appears more a display of strength for domestic audiences than a strategic necessity. Both countries must redirect their energies toward resolving the Kashmir issue through dialogue, autonomy, and international mediation, ensuring a future where resources are spent on human welfare rather than destruction. Media, as a powerful influencer, must uphold truth and responsibility, avoiding the trap of fake news that deepens enmity. Only through peace can India and Pakistan secure a stable, prosperous future for their people and the region.