The interactive session, moderated by The Wave Andaman’s Rashmi Rao, covered a range of topics including national security, foreign policy, and India’s global image in the aftermath of terror-related incidents. The audience included local leaders, students, defence observers, and members of the press.
Sri Vijaya Puram, May 24 — India’s counter-terror strategy has entered a new phase, marked by a deliberate shift from defensive posturing to active retaliation, BJP national spokesperson Tuhin A. Sinha said on Saturday. Speaking at a public interaction organised as part of The Wave Andaman’s launch in the capital of the islands, Sinha described the government’s response to the recent Pahalgam terror attack as an example of this evolving doctrine.
The interactive session, moderated by The Wave Andaman’s Rashmi Rao, covered a range of topics including national security, foreign policy, and India’s global image in the aftermath of terror-related incidents. The audience included local leaders, students, defence observers, and members of the press.
“This time, India has responded. We’ve made it clear we won’t only defend—we will retaliate when provoked,” Sinha said, referring to what he described as a “decisive military response” to the attack in Jammu and Kashmir earlier this month. The government has not formally confirmed any cross-border action, but defence sources cited in national media have indicated that a targeted operation may have taken place.
Policy shift, not escalation
Sinha said the change in approach does not reflect a desire for escalation but a recalibration of deterrence. “We’ve traditionally been reactive. What you are seeing now is a government that has drawn clear red lines,” he said. When asked whether this marks a shift in foreign policy, he responded: “India is not a country that seeks war. But when it comes to self-defence, the approach today is more assertive.”
The comments come at a time when India’s internal and external security calculus is under renewed scrutiny. The recent attack in Pahalgam, which left multiple civilians dead, has revived debate on the effectiveness of India’s cross-border deterrence strategy and its engagement with global powers in counter-terror diplomacy.
The venue of the conversation—the Andaman and Nicobar Islands—also underscored a larger strategic backdrop. The islands are home to India’s only tri-service command and are seen as central to India’s maritime security ambitions in the Indo-Pacific.
Ceasefire remarks and U.S. messaging
When asked whether the U.S. President’s public call for a ceasefire had influenced India’s actions, Sinha said such announcements had no bearing on India’s internal security decisions. “The U.S. President made a statement on social media. There was no formal diplomatic engagement. India has always made its position clear through the right channels,” he said.
He recalled a similar episode during the Trump administration, when the U.S. President had claimed he was asked to mediate on Kashmir. “That was clarified swiftly. We do not accept third-party mediation,” Sinha said.
On the ceasefire terminology, Sinha said it was being incorrectly applied. “This wasn’t a conventional war. It was retaliation to a terror attack. Using the term ‘ceasefire’ creates a false equivalence,” he said.
The event concluded with Sinha reiterating the government’s stated objective of maintaining peace while responding firmly to provocation. “India remains committed to stability. But the response framework has changed—and that message has gone out clearly,” he said.
