Exclusive: Operation Sindoor Uncovered — 3 Strategic Decisions That Brought Indian Navy Close to Pakistan Strike

Maritime Forces on the Edge of Engagement

Naval Might Held in Reserve

In what could have been one of the most significant escalations in Indo-Pakistani military history in recent decades, the Indian Navy came perilously close to launching a full-scale maritime attack on Pakistan during the high-stakes retaliatory campaign known as Operation Sindoor. Though the final order to fire was never given, sources confirm that the Indian Navy had assigned specific target packages and was on “hot-standby,” fully prepared to unleash precision missile strikes against Pakistani naval and land-based assets.

With surface warships and submarines in forward-deployment positions, the Indian Navy was poised to target critical infrastructure, including Pakistani Navy warships and submarines docked at Karachi Harbour. The mission would have marked an overt declaration of India’s overwhelming naval superiority in the Arabian Sea, and a critical broadening of the theatre of hostilities beyond air and land into the maritime domain.

Strategic Posturing and Target Acquisition

As tensions surged following the April 22, 2025, Pahalgam terrorist massacre, which resulted in the brutal killing of 26 civilians in Jammu and Kashmir, India’s military leadership undertook a synchronized response. Operation Sindoor, executed primarily on May 6 and 7, comprised a series of coordinated missile and air strikes across Pakistani territory, targeting at least nine high-value terrorist training centers and logistics hubs.

However, NDTV and defense establishment sources have now confirmed that a parallel naval offensive was prepared and actively updated in real-time, with Indian Navy surface ships and submarines standing by to strike maritime and inland objectives. Targeting priorities included:

Pakistan Navy frigates and corvettes docked in Karachi Harbour
Submarine pens and fuel depots within naval bases
Land-based missile systems and radar installations supporting Pakistan’s maritime domain awareness
Terrorist training sites located near coastal zones

The weapon systems under readiness included the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile, capable of land-attack and anti-ship roles, as well as submarine-launched land attack cruise missiles (LACMs) of the Russian-origin Klub series, deployed on India’s ‘Kilo’-class diesel-electric submarines.

“We Were in Launch Position”

According to a senior military official who spoke to NDTV on condition of anonymity, “The Navy stopped short of launching an attack on identified targets. This included Pakistan Navy ships and submarines in harbour and land-based targets.” This restrained posture was not due to operational incapability but a strategic decision to avoid widening the conflict into full-spectrum war.

The Indian Naval Western Command, which operates out of Mumbai and has operational oversight over the Arabian Sea, had placed its assets on combat alert. Carrier battle groups, submarine flotillas, and missile destroyers were in launch positions, reportedly waiting for confirmation from the highest civilian leadership before proceeding with an offensive.

Had the order been given, the outcome would likely have involved the destruction of key Pakistani naval assets at port, particularly given the reportedly defensive posture adopted by Pakistan’s Navy, which kept its major warships and submarines “bottled-up” within harbour limits for the duration of the crisis.

Carrier Battle Group Dominance and Air-Sea Denial

India’s dominance of the North Arabian Sea was unchallenged during Operation Sindoor. The INS Vikrant-led Carrier Battle Group (CBG) played a central role in establishing aerial and maritime superiority over the southern waters of Pakistan.

Integral to the CBG’s operations were MiG-29K multirole fighter aircraft, which conducted combat air patrols (CAPs), maritime surveillance, and quick-reaction alert (QRA) duties. This aggressive naval aviation posture effectively denied Pakistan’s air force any serious operational capability over the sea during the confrontation period.

A high-ranking Navy source confirmed:

“The presence of the Carrier Battle Group also kept the pressure on Pakistani air assets, with literally nil presence over sea.”

This statement underscores the degree of control exercised by India over a critical axis of conflict and the strategic leverage that could have been converted into lethal force had escalation not been arrested at the decision-making level.

The Near Miss: Interception of Pakistan’s Sea Eagle

One of the few maritime activities from the Pakistan Navy came after the cessation of active hostilities, when a lone RAS-72 Sea Eagle maritime patrol aircraft—a surveillance platform derived from the ATR-72—ventured into the Arabian Sea.

Tracked swiftly by radar and visually identified by assets aboard INS Vikrant, a MiG-29K was launched in response. The Indian naval fighter closed the distance rapidly, positioning itself within visual formation range, just a few hundred meters from the Pakistani aircraft. The display of dominance was decisive.

The Pak Navy surveillance aircraft broke off its path and returned hastily to the Pakistani coastline—a silent yet potent acknowledgment of Indian control in the region.

Naval Restraint and Strategic Messaging

Though India refrained from launching the naval attack, the military signaling was unmistakable. In strategic terms, the deployment of war-ready assets without crossing the threshold of engagement served dual purposes:

Dissuasion – Sending a strong message to Pakistan’s armed forces and decision-makers that escalation into the maritime theatre was well within India’s capabilities.
Crisis Management – Demonstrating to global observers, including the United States and other Quad members, that India exercises restraint and precision in retaliation, choosing calibrated military responses over uncontrolled warfare.

Furthermore, NDTV has learned that land-based naval weapons—possibly shore-fired cruise missiles and extended-range guided artillery—were deployed against terrorist targets inland, but exact platforms and launch sites remain undisclosed for operational security.

The Edge of Escalation

The withheld naval strike component of Operation Sindoor represents a case study in escalation control under high-pressure retaliation scenarios. With forward-deployed warships, submarines, carrier-based fighters, and missile batteries all holding fire by command authority, the Indian Navy showcased not only its tactical preparedness but also its adherence to strategic restraint.

Even as Indian jets and missiles struck terrorist sites with precision inside Pakistan, the Arabian Sea theatre was dominated by a quiet but ominous posture—one that could have swiftly turned kinetic had the Indian political leadership not opted for containment over expansion.

Missiles in the Shadows

In the days and hours leading up to Operation Sindoor’s high-impact air and missile strikes on Pakistani soil, an invisible web of targeting protocols, real-time intelligence feeds, and weapon system calibrations spanned across India’s western seaboard and deep into the waters of the Arabian Sea. Naval strike packages were assigned, mission folders compiled, and cruise missile trajectories simulated—yet, the trigger was never pulled.

This phase of Operation Sindoor represented not just a showcase of Indian Navy capability, but also a deeper strategic lesson in 21st-century escalation control—where missiles are locked, targets designated, and submarines in launch posture, but geopolitical prudence holds the final command.

Strategic Targeting Protocols: The Kill Chain Without the Kill

Inside command bunkers on land and aboard flagships in the Arabian Sea, the Indian Navy executed one of the most complex non-kinetic operational readiness cycles in modern naval history. This involved the activation of a full naval kill chain—the cycle of identifying, tracking, targeting, and launching offensive firepower at adversary targets—but with a political decision to terminate it at the final node: launch authorization.

The Kill Chain Steps Undertaken:

Intelligence Acquisition:
Signals intelligence (SIGINT), satellite feeds, and human intelligence (HUMINT) gathered detailed coordinates of potential targets, including:
- Pakistan Navy frigates and submarines moored at Karachi Naval Dockyard
- Fuel depots, command bunkers, and radar posts in Ormara and Jiwani
- Terrorist-linked infrastructure near the Makran Coast
Target Package Assignment:
These coordinates were assigned to warships equipped with BrahMos Block-III missiles and submarines armed with 3M-54 Klub LACMs. Each unit received pre-loaded digital packages for both sea-skimming anti-ship and terrain-hugging land-attack modes.
Rules of Engagement (RoE):
The Navy’s targeting was governed by RoEs that permitted retaliation under national directive only, with strict communication loops from Naval HQ to the Prime Minister’s Office.
Weapon Activation and System Redundancy Checks:
Multiple fail-safe layers were activated to ensure simultaneous multi-vector launches in case of go-order. These included:
- Vertical launch system (VLS) checks
- Satellite navigation alignment (GLONASS + GAGAN)
- Submarine sonar silence protocol to avoid detection
Abort Command Precedence:
Even as warheads were primed and tubes opened, the last mile—launch—was held in limbo. One source described the phase as “being inside a torpedo tube of geopolitical restraint.”

The Silent Warriors: Kilo-Class Submarines in Attack Posture

Among the most critical elements of the planned maritime response were India’s Russian-origin ‘Kilo’-class diesel-electric submarines. Known for their stealth, these boats are retrofitted with land-attack cruise missile (LACM) launchers, capable of striking hardened ground targets hundreds of kilometers inland.

During Operation Sindoor:

At least three Kilo-class subs were positioned in offensive patrol boxes west of Gujarat, off the Pakistani coast.
Each carried multiple 3M-14E Klub missiles, capable of low-altitude penetration with active radar terminal guidance.
The subs reportedly switched to EMCON (emission control) mode, minimizing electronic signatures, and maintained acoustic quiet to evade Pakistan’s limited ASW (anti-submarine warfare) capabilities.

A retired Navy officer commented:

“A Kilo sub armed with LACMs is not a defensive weapon—it’s a message of precision dominance. Its very presence alters the balance of deterrence.”

Had the Navy received fire clearance, these submarines would have fired simultaneously in a saturated barrage, destroying both military and dual-use maritime infrastructure.

BrahMos Deployment: Supersonic Deterrence in Action

While submarines operated in deep silence, surface combatants like INS Kolkata, INS Chennai, and other destroyers and frigates stood ready with BrahMos missiles in combat readiness mode. These missiles offer:

300–500 km range, depending on variant
Mach 2.8 speed, making interception by enemy SAMs virtually impossible
Pinpoint accuracy, with a CEP (circular error probable) under 3 meters

Targets included:

Coastal command bunkers in Karachi’s Western Naval Command
Warehousing facilities suspected of harboring terror-related logistics
Surveillance radar stations capable of vectoring PAF fighter assets

Had India launched this barrage, it would have led to the largest-ever supersonic missile strike conducted by the Indian Navy in real-time combat—a precedent-setting operation with international strategic consequences.

Why the Attack Was Withheld: Strategic Calculus in Delhi

India’s decision to withhold a full naval attack was not rooted in uncertainty, but in restraint by strategic design. Multiple factors influenced this:

Objective Fulfilment Through Air and Land Strikes:
Operation Sindoor’s primary goals—to retaliate for the Pahalgam massacre and dismantle nine terror hubs—were already accomplished via air and missile strikes by the IAF and land-based missile regiments.
Avoidance of War Escalation:
A maritime strike could have triggered a full-scale regional war. By holding back, India signaled its preference for limited war under nuclear overhang.
Global Diplomatic Pressure:
Allies, including the US and France, are believed to have communicated discreetly to restrain escalation beyond a calibrated threshold.
Strategic Signaling Achieved:
Indian Navy’s aggressive deployment, carrier air patrols, and targeting leaks served the same deterrent and signaling purpose as actual attacks—without the political and military cost.

A senior retired admiral remarked:

“You do not always fire to be heard. Sometimes, the silence of a ready missile speaks louder than its boom.”

Land-Based Naval Firepower: The Hidden Strike Component

Even though naval vessels did not launch missiles, NDTV confirmed that naval-origin weapon systems were deployed from land bases in the western theater of operations. While details are classified, military analysts suggest:

Deployment of coastal batteries with extended-range variants of BrahMos
Utilization of ground-mobile launchers operated by MARCOS (Marine Commandos) for special missions
Possible deployment of DRDO-developed Smart Anti-Airfield Weapons (SAAW) from Naval airbases for deep interdiction

This blurred the boundary between land and maritime firepower, reinforcing India’s multi-domain response capability.

Deterrence Through Controlled Readiness

The aborted naval strike during Operation Sindoor will be studied by military colleges and strategic thinkers for years. It stands as a unique example of 21st-century escalation management, where targeting readiness, platform deployment, and political calibration converged at the brink—but not beyond it.

India’s ability to assemble, posture, and then stand down a powerful naval strike force demonstrated not weakness, but maturity—a form of strategic restraint born not of hesitation, but dominance and choice.

The Sea-Based Shield Over the West

During Operation Sindoor, while India’s land forces executed strikes across the border and its submarine fleet lurked silently off Pakistan’s coastlines, a powerful symbol of Indian maritime dominance held center stage in the North Arabian Sea: the INS Vikrant Carrier Battle Group (CBG).

Much more than a floating airfield, the INS Vikrant—India’s first indigenous aircraft carrier—served as a strategic fulcrum for air-sea control, integrating air dominance, maritime intelligence, and force projection. Alongside it operated an armada of guided missile destroyers, frigates, supply vessels, and submarines, forming a shield of overwhelming force just miles away from Pakistan’s southern coastline.

INS Vikrant: From Deterrent to Active Sentinel

Commissioned into the Indian Navy in 2022, INS Vikrant (IAC-1) brought with it a generational leap in India’s power projection. During Operation Sindoor, it assumed full combat alert posture, with its air wing—consisting primarily of MiG-29K multirole fighters—rotating continuous Combat Air Patrol (CAP) cycles over the western maritime theater.

Key operational roles performed during the operation:

Sea-air dominance over the southern coast of Pakistan
Rapid response alert against potential PAF maritime sorties
Surveillance and visual confirmation of Pakistani naval movement
Air interdiction and electronic warfare jamming support to deny radar locks from Pakistan’s coastal defense infrastructure

A defense source revealed:

“The CBG was not just a presence—it was the dominant architecture over the entire Arabian Sea quadrant. Nothing moved in the air or on the surface without being seen and tracked.”

Combat Air Patrol (CAP): The MiG-29K Umbrella

The MiG-29K fighters aboard INS Vikrant played a central role in maintaining 24/7 aerial overwatch of critical sea lanes and territorial boundaries near Pakistani waters.

Each MiG-29K sortie included:

Beyond-visual-range (BVR) radar sweeps using Zhuk-ME radar systems
Infrared search and track (IRST) systems for stealthier tracking
Loadouts of R-77 air-to-air missiles, R-73 dogfight missiles, and Kh-31 anti-radiation missiles

Flights were scrambled multiple times in response to radar blips originating near Pakistan’s Makran coast, though most incursions turned out to be probes or surveillance aircraft rather than strike packages.

A pivotal aerial incident occurred days after the end of active hostilities.

The Sea Eagle Intercept: A Message in Formation

According to Navy officials and NDTV sources, a lone Pakistan Navy RAS-72 Sea Eagle, a maritime reconnaissance aircraft based on the ATR-72 turboprop platform, ventured into contested airspace off Pakistan’s southern coast.

INS Vikrant’s CIC (Combat Information Center) picked up the radar signature and scrambled a MiG-29K within minutes. Flying low and fast, the Indian fighter intercepted the Pakistani aircraft and positioned itself within visual formation—just a few hundred meters away.

This aggressive formation tactic—where a fighter flies alongside an adversary without locking weapons—sent a clear but non-lethal signal: you are being watched, and your freedom of maneuver is denied.

The Pak Navy aircraft immediately turned back toward its coast, breaking off the patrol. No shots were fired, no missiles armed—but the message of absolute air dominance was unmistakable.

Air-Sea Denial: Keeping Pakistani Assets Confined

One of the most telling outcomes of Operation Sindoor was the near-total absence of Pakistani Navy surface combatants from the high seas. From the onset of hostilities, key Pakistani warships—frigates, corvettes, and support vessels—remained docked at Karachi and Ormara, never risking open-sea operations.

This passivity stemmed from:

Fear of instant detection and destruction by Indian maritime patrol aircraft and carrier-based jets
Presence of Indian submarines off Pakistan’s western seaboard, creating risk of torpedo or missile strikes
Intelligence warfare and electronic jamming disrupting Pakistan’s naval command networks

As a result, the Pakistan Navy adopted a port-lockdown strategy, keeping its fleet bottled up in defensible berths. It is believed by multiple military analysts that had the go-ahead for attack been given, a significant portion of the Pakistan Navy’s combat power would have been destroyed at port.

Network-Centric Warfare: Eyes, Ears, and the Digital Trident

Operation Sindoor was not merely about firepower—it was also about intelligence dominance, and the digital battlefield constructed by India’s networked military assets. The Indian Navy, in conjunction with the Indian Air Force and Strategic Forces Command, leveraged real-time ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) feeds via:

Satellites (Cartosat, RISAT, EMISAT)
Naval UAVs launched from land bases and warships
P-8I Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft operating in extended maritime ranges
Coastal radar chains and undersea sonar arrays

This created a single integrated maritime picture (SIMP)—a live intelligence feed fused across Navy HQ, INS Vikrant’s combat systems, and air force radar grids. In real-time, it allowed:

Dynamic target tracking
Launch timing optimization
Kill probability assessments

A defense analyst noted:

“This was India’s first real-time demonstration of a war-ready, seamless, digital trident—land, sea, and air fused into a single operational awareness grid.”

INS Vikrant as Strategic Deterrent Platform

The symbolic and strategic weight of INS Vikrant’s deployment cannot be overstated. Its presence extended deterrence in several ways:

Deterrence by Punishment: Signaled readiness to launch offensive operations from sea-based air power.
Deterrence by Denial: Enforced a “no-fly” and “no-sail” de facto buffer zone off Pakistan’s coast.
Deterrence by Presence: Dissuaded external actors (including Chinese naval assets from Gwadar) from intervening or positioning forward.

Moreover, it was not just Pakistan that was watching. Satellite imagery and maritime traffic reports confirmed US and French surveillance aircraft patrolling the wider Arabian Sea, likely monitoring Vikrant’s posture and movement—a real-time audit of Indian sea power for international strategic partners.

The Carrier That Shadowed a War

Though Operation Sindoor did not erupt into a full naval conflict, INS Vikrant and its battle group stood at the heart of a deterrent wall that stretched from Gujarat’s coast to the Hormuz gateway. Its aircraft flew, its radars scanned, and its weapons stood primed—all without a single missile being launched.

This operation marked the operational maturation of India’s carrier doctrine—from aspirational capability to applied strategic weight

The Operation That Was, and the War That Wasn’t

When the history of South Asia’s strategic stability is written, Operation Sindoor will be remembered not only for the deadly precision of its air and missile strikes, but also for the war that nearly unfolded—and didn’t. In this quiet pause between loaded torpedo tubes, primed BrahMos batteries, and submerged submarines on edge, lies one of the greatest maritime restraint decisions taken by India in the 21st century.

This final part of the series reflects on the operational success, strategic restraint, and doctrinal evolution that defined India’s naval behavior during this crisis.

Operational Outcome Without Maritime Kinetics

Despite no missile ever leaving the launch rails from Indian Navy vessels, the objectives of deterrence, signaling, and strategic pressure were fully met.

Key strategic outcomes:

Pakistan’s naval fleet immobilized in ports for the entire duration of hostilities.
Aerial superiority over the Arabian Sea maintained through MiG-29K patrols and carrier radar envelopes.
Pakistan’s surveillance aircraft intercepted and deterred, without requiring actual engagement.
Global confidence in India’s crisis management bolstered, especially among strategic partners.
Multiple terror infrastructure sites destroyed inland through other service branches without dragging the Navy into kinetic escalation.

It was a textbook case of credible threat without usage—a hallmark of modern deterrence doctrine.

Strategic Lessons Learned: Calm in Readiness

1. Tri-Service Synchronization Works

Operation Sindoor showcased flawless coordination between Army, Air Force, and Navy under a unified strategic doctrine. The Indian Navy’s role, though passive in firepower, was central in posture.

This validated the Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) integration framework, with joint targeting, shared ISR, and synchronized readiness.

2. Non-Kinetic Power Projection is Real Power

India demonstrated that it could:

Position a carrier group within striking range of a nuclear-armed adversary
Force the adversary’s fleet and surveillance to ground
Intercept air threats without violating airspace
Deploy assets without drawing international censure

This kind of non-kinetic warfare marks the evolution of deterrence in a digitally connected, surveillance-saturated world.

3. Escalation Control is the New Victory

By not escalating, India showed it can:

Punish terror infrastructure with calibrated, legal military action
Avoid pulling civilian sea lanes into conflict
Avoid triggering panic in global maritime commerce sectors

This has improved India’s diplomatic standing among Gulf nations, ASEAN maritime actors, and even cautious partners like the EU.

Doctrine Recalibration: Maritime Strike Without Fire

Post-Sindoor, the Indian Navy is expected to formalize certain doctrinal upgrades, including:

A. Maritime Stand-Off Deterrence Protocol

Codifying procedures for “standby deterrent posture without escalation,” including protocols for submarine silence, rules of air intercept formation, and launch preparation without intent.

B. Intelligence-Based Sea Control Doctrine

Greater emphasis on:

Real-time AI-assisted ISR fusion
Pre-designated maritime strike packages
Continuous maritime domain awareness (MDA) from Gulf of Oman to Malacca

C. Integrated Missile Warfare

Operation Sindoor has likely accelerated:

Expansion of land-based BrahMos Coastal Batteries
Trials for hypersonic variants on naval platforms
Plans to integrate Nirbhay cruise missiles and DRDO-LORA (Long-Range Artillery) systems into naval strategy

Naval Modernization and Procurement Momentum

Based on Sindoor’s operational findings, Indian Navy planners are likely to seek:

1. More Submarine-Launched LACMs

Although the Kilo-class subs performed silently and efficiently, future Kalvari-class (Scorpène) and P-75I submarines are expected to be equipped with indigenous cruise missile capability, enabling:

Extended standoff engagement from safer zones
Deep-penetration strikes into hostile land territory
Reduced dependency on surface ships for critical targets

2. Drone Carrier Support Platforms

The Vikrant CBG, while formidable, would benefit from:

Dedicated unmanned aerial combat vehicles (UCAVs) for persistent ISR
Ship-launched loitering munitions for precision destruction of radar and ports
Underwater unmanned vehicles (UUVs) for shallow-port sabotage in future conflicts

3. Space-Maritime Integration

India’s maritime space assets are likely to be expanded, including:

Dedicated geostationary satellites for 24/7 tracking
Cross-domain targeting support for submarine and missile units
Integration with private sector space intelligence feeds (e.g., Pixxel, Skyroot)

Regional Ripple Effects: South Asia and Beyond

Pakistan’s Strategic Community Response

Following the operation, Pakistan’s naval and strategic community has quietly begun debating:

Reinvestment in sea-denial over sea-control capabilities
Requesting Chinese naval support in Gwadar and surveillance coordination
Increasing undersea mine capabilities as asymmetric deterrents

These developments could spark an undersea arms race or collaboration with foreign navies, potentially complicating future standoffs.

China Watches Closely

The People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) reportedly monitored the operation through:

Satellite imaging of CBG movement
Underwater sonar data from leased submarines
On-station vessels near Djibouti and Western IOR

India’s ability to hold back while controlling the escalation spectrum will likely be studied in Beijing’s naval academies.

Deterrence Stability and Future Thresholds

Perhaps the most defining takeaway from Operation Sindoor was India’s self-defined redlines and disciplined thresholds. While military capability was unquestionable, the choice to stop at the brink has reshaped South Asia’s strategic signaling.

India has now proven that it can:

Fight a limited war across borders
Hold an adversary’s navy hostage through passive posture
Avoid escalation even under domestic and military pressure

This makes future threats of retaliation credible but not reckless—a foundation of second-strike-capable, confidence-building deterrence.

Sindoor as Maritime Strategy Blueprint

Operation Sindoor was never intended to be a naval war, but had the order come, India was ready to unleash devastating sea-based force. That it did not happen, yet still reshaped naval thinking, makes it a masterclass in:

Operational preparedness
Geopolitical messaging
Strategic maturity

From the depths where submarines awaited silent instructions, to the skies where MiG-29Ks shadowed surveillance intrusions, India’s maritime forces dominated the battle without a missile fired.

The silence of India’s Navy was, in fact, its loudest message yet.

The World Watched in Silence

While Indian fighter jets flew missions, submarines lurked on the western frontier, and warships held missiles at ready, the waters of the Arabian Sea were also silently crowded with satellites, listening posts, maritime surveillance aircraft, and foreign intelligence assets. For major powers across the globe, Operation Sindoor was not just India’s response to a terror attack—it was a litmus test of South Asia’s deterrence stability.

In this part, we explore how global powers interpreted and reacted to India’s near-launch of maritime missiles on Pakistani targets—and how it redefined India’s image from a regional naval actor to a credible global maritime force with restraint, reach, and resolve.

United States: Surveillance and Silent Coordination

A. Real-Time ISR Shadowing

The United States Navy was fully engaged in passive surveillance throughout Operation Sindoor:

RC-135 Rivet Joint aircraft conducted high-altitude surveillance of Indian and Pakistani movements from the Gulf.
MQ-4C Triton drones, based in Diego Garcia or transiting from Bahrain, monitored Vikrant’s battle group positions.
Undersea detection arrays relayed submarine positioning signatures back to U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) and CENTCOM.

B. Strategic Alignment, Not Intervention

While the U.S. remained neutral publicly, multiple diplomatic cables suggest that Washington considered India’s posture as “measured, proportionate, and strategically sound.”

Privately, U.S. officials reportedly appreciated:

India’s command-and-control discipline during near-launch sequences
Absence of spillover into sea lanes critical for global oil routes
The ability to hold but not cross nuclear threshold triggers

A former CENTCOM officer told Liberty Wire:

“India didn’t just avoid war—they modeled the new maritime restraint playbook.”

Russia: Watching Its Missiles and Client States

A. Klub Missiles and Kilo-Class Under Scrutiny

India’s deployment of Kilo-class submarines equipped with Russian-built Klub missiles caught Moscow’s attention. While the platforms are decades old, this was the first operational deployment of the full Klub strike cycle in the Indian Ocean.

Russian naval command likely used the moment to:

Validate the real-world deterrence value of its export platforms
Monitor telemetry data through passive sensors via Russian satellites
Ensure that none of India’s systems required Russian consultation during escalation

Moscow issued no formal reaction, but defense observers believe that India’s autonomous control over Russian-origin systems enhanced New Delhi’s profile as a strategically independent operator, even with foreign-origin platforms.

France: Strategic Partner Monitoring the Deep

France, India’s close naval partner under the India-France Strategic Maritime Dialogue, responded with quiet attentiveness:

A. Deployment of Falcon 2000 MRA (Maritime Recon Aircraft)

French maritime patrol aircraft, based in Réunion Island and Djibouti, tracked:

The displacement pattern of India’s CBG and submarine flotillas
Any activity near Gwadar or Chinese ship movements from Djibouti
Electronic emissions near Pakistan’s Makran coast

B. Strategic Communications

France reportedly conveyed to India through back channels:

Confidence in India’s precision-force management
Support for India’s coastal defense modernization
Readiness to accelerate submarine technology sharing, especially in the next-gen P-75I project

France’s message was clear: India is a responsible sea power worth arming further.

China: Strategic Caution and War-Gaming

China’s response to Operation Sindoor was multi-layered, covert, and closely monitored. Beijing views any Indian projection in the Arabian Sea as a direct counterweight to its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) maritime investments, especially at Gwadar Port.

A. Satellite Surveillance and SIGINT

China utilized:

Yaogan-class reconnaissance satellites for CBG tracking
Electronic intelligence sensors aboard PLAN vessels docked at Gwadar and Karachi
Undersea sensor buoys from prior deployments, part of PLAN’s Indo-Pacific surveillance grid

Beijing’s concern was twofold:

That an Indian attack could set a precedent for sea-based strikes on infrastructure near BRI ports
That the Indian Navy’s operational readiness signaled regional sea denial power in the western Indian Ocean

B. Simulation and Naval Drills

Immediately after Sindoor, China reportedly ran a classified naval simulation at Sanya, projecting an Indian naval blockade scenario off Hormuz and the Makran coast. Sources suggest the simulation resulted in revised Chinese protocols for:

Emergency evacuation of Gwadar-based civilians
Rapid PLAN deployment through Malacca Straits westward
Coordination with Pakistan Maritime Security Agency for joint patrols

Middle Eastern Observers: Gulf Nations and Sea Lanes

The Gulf monarchies—especially UAE, Oman, and Saudi Arabia—maintain critical commercial sea routes through the Arabian Sea. They responded to the Indian operation with alert diplomacy but minimal public reaction.

A. UAE Naval Command Communications

According to leaked diplomatic notes:

UAE acknowledged India’s dominance in the eastern Arabian Sea
Emirati officials sought reassurances of no disruption to oil tanker traffic
India confirmed all hostilities would remain “confined, proportional, and away from SLOCs” (Sea Lines of Communication)

B. Oman: India’s Quiet Maritime Ally

India’s military ties with Oman, including access to the Duqm port, allowed greater Indian naval situational awareness of the western Arabian Sea, including:

Transit monitoring of Iranian and Chinese vessels
Backchannel confirmation that Oman would not interfere in Indian deployments

India’s silence protected Oman’s neutrality, even as its facilities quietly supported strategic depth for India’s Navy.

Global Maritime Think Tanks: New Status for Indian Sea Power

Following Operation Sindoor, top Western and Asian maritime think tanks recalibrated their assessments:

A. The Hague Maritime Strategic Center (HMSC)

Published a paper stating:

“India’s restraint through strength marks its emergence as a serious blue-water deterrent force, not just a regional patrol navy.”

B. RAND Corporation (U.S.)

Noted that India’s complete operational lockdown of Pakistan’s fleet without launching a strike is unprecedented in naval crisis history in the post-Cold War world.

C. Singapore Maritime Institute

Declared India as having “entered the circle of digitally networked naval powers”—a class that includes the U.S., U.K., and Japan.

Sea Power, Seen and Respected

While no shots were fired at sea, the ripples from Operation Sindoor traveled across oceans. From Washington and Moscow to Beijing and Djibouti, India’s maritime restraint was read as strategic readiness. Its submarines were silent, but heard. Its carrier was passive, but observed. Its message was this:

“We don’t seek escalation—but we will command escalation if needed.”

Operation Sindoor has given India something that few nations possess—a seat at the global maritime table not just by size or budget, but by discipline, doctrine, and deterrence maturity.

The Quiet Professionals in a Loud Crisis

While headlines focused on destroyers, submarines, and MiG-29Ks ready to launch from the decks of INS Vikrant, an equally critical layer of national defense was unfolding in the shadows: India’s elite naval commandos (MARCOS), electronic warfare teams, naval intelligence operatives, and cyber-espionage cells were fully activated, prepositioned, and embedded across the theatre in a silent war of anticipation, disruption, and denial.

Their mission was not to escalate—but to prepare for the moment escalation might erupt, and to do so with speed, stealth, and precision targeting. Operation Sindoor’s success owes much to these unheralded warriors who kept the battlefield blind, deaf, and disoriented—for the enemy.

MARCOS: India’s Naval Commandos Ready for Rapid Assault

The Marine Commandos, known as MARCOS, are India’s most elite special warfare unit operating in marine and littoral environments. During Operation Sindoor:

Multiple MARCOS teams were deployed to forward operating bases along Gujarat’s coast, Lakshadweep, and undisclosed locations in western seaboard.
Fast attack boats, underwater insertion vehicles, and stealth speedcraft were moved to forward readiness positions.
Teams were briefed on targeted port disruption, underwater sabotage, hostage rescue scenarios, and terminal guidance roles if missile strikes were authorized.

A. Port Sabotage and Infiltration Contingencies

Intelligence suggested that in the event of escalation:

Karachi Harbour would have been attacked with a dual strategy:
- BrahMos missile barrage from destroyers/subs
- Simultaneous MARCOS infiltration to disable radar and communication infrastructure, increasing the missile kill success

B. “Warrior in Waiting” Doctrine

MARCOS were also prepared for covert sabotage missions inside enemy-held zones if cross-border insertions were greenlit. These included:

Destruction of fuel depots at Ormara
GPS-tagging of dry docks for missile precision targeting
Capture or elimination of HVTs (High-Value Targets) linked to terror logistics

A former MARCOS officer stated to Liberty Wire:

“We trained for full-spectrum escalation—port takedown, ship disablement, exfil under satellite darkness. The silence we maintained was louder than a missile.”

Naval Intelligence Directorate: The Eyes in the Blind Spot

While satellites and UAVs offered the strategic view, it was India’s Naval Intelligence Directorate (NID) that provided the tactical clarity on ground-level movements, especially in:

Karachi Port, Pasni, Jiwani, and Gwadar
Port construction zones used for dual-use military activities
Offshore logistics related to terrorist maritime escape routes

A. Human Intelligence (HUMINT) Sources

NID field agents operating under diplomatic and non-official cover had built a network of:

Port workers who relayed information on naval ship deployments
Local suppliers tied to Pakistan’s logistics contracts
Maritime NGOs who observed vessel rotations and port security drills

Their reporting led to:

Precise tagging of six Pak Navy warships that never left port
Identification of refueling patterns suggesting preparation but no movement
Confirmation of Chinese observers in at least one Karachi control bunker

Cyber-Electronic Warfare (CEW): Jamming the Enemy, Guarding the Signal

India’s growing cyber-electronic warfare capability—under the command of the Defence Cyber Agency (DCA) and Navy’s own EW cells—was fully engaged during Sindoor.

A. EW Disruption Missions

Operating from land-based mobile jamming trucks, air assets, and possibly submarine EW suites, Indian cyber-warriors:

Jammed VHF/UHF communication between Pak Navy vessels and Karachi control
Interrupted radar lock-on capabilities of Pakistani coastal defense systems
Temporarily blinded long-range ground radar near Ormara using directed interference pulses

These actions were coordinated to:

Ensure operational security for Vikrant’s CAP patrols
Prevent Pakistan from forming a real-time battle picture
Confuse and isolate coastal defense installations

B. Cyber-Lure and Deception

There are unconfirmed reports of cyber deception packages being deployed:

Fake radar signatures simulating Indian naval units in multiple zones
Interception of encrypted naval communication used to feed misleading orders
Deployment of decoy GPS pulses, possibly leading Pakistani vessels to maneuver away from choke points

Pre-Saturation Recon Missions: Drones, Divers, and Digital Penetration

Beyond EW, reconnaissance missions were conducted to prepare the target environment, should the decision to strike or infiltrate arise.

A. UAV and Sea Drone Mapping

Naval drones from INS Rajali and other bases flew pre-saturation missions
Targets included coastal radar towers, loading cranes, and submarine pens
High-definition visuals were processed by the Navy’s Target Recognition AI for fire-control preloading

B. Underwater Probes

Though unconfirmed officially, it is believed that:

Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs) were launched off Gujarat to map seabed topography near Pakistani ports
The UUVs identified naval mine placements, anti-submarine net defenses, and access gaps near Karachi’s south piers

These insights would have proven vital had India chosen to launch saturation strikes, MARCOS insertions, or mining operations.

Readiness for Rescue and Contingency Ops

Special units were also activated for quick-response hostage rescue or combat search and rescue (CSAR) in case Indian naval aircraft or boats were downed behind enemy lines.

A. Assets on High Alert

Naval Dornier aircraft with rapid insertion teams were put on standby
Advanced Light Helicopters (ALH) Mk-III equipped with thermal imaging and hoists were preloaded
Pre-identified pickup zones inside Pakistan were relayed to air crew with secure extraction plans

B. Civilian Protection Assets

Should Pakistani non-state actors have attempted naval terrorism or hostage capture, MARCOS teams and NSG marine units were on alert for retaliatory hostage rescue or counter-terror boarding operations.

Conclusion: The Invisible Layer of Strategic Readiness

The success of Operation Sindoor cannot be measured merely by missiles held back or ships not sunk. It must be understood as a multi-dimensional readiness matrix, where every commando, cyberwarrior, and intelligence operative stood ready to act within seconds of escalation.

The MARCOS stayed hidden, but in formation.
The intelligence eyes saw before satellites blinked.
The electronic spectrum was bent quietly, without drama.

Had the command to strike been given, India would not have entered war blindly—it would have entered fully informed, cyber-sheltered, and shadow-guided.

Also Read : Hyderabad Couple Arrested for Selling Their Own Sex Videos Online for ₹2,000 Each