NEW DELHI: John Spencer , a military strategist who is also an urban warfare expert, has weighed in the debate on the extent of the success of ‘Operation Sindoor’, asserting that India scored a decisive victory .
“After just four days of calibrated military action, it is objectively conclusive: India achieved a massive victory. Operation Sindoor met and exceeded its strategic aims — destroying terrorist infrastructure, demonstrating military superiority, restoring deterrence, and unveiling a new national security doctrine . This was not a symbolic force. It was decisive power, clearly applied,” Spencer wrote in his latest blog.
Spencer currently serves as the chair of the Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point (US Military Academy), New York, and has been a part of the strategic research group at Pentagon.
“India has not declared Operation Sindoor completely over. What exists now is a sensitive halt in operations — some may call it a ceasefire, but military leaders have deliberately avoided that word. From a war-fighting perspective, this is not merely a pause; it is a strategic hold following a rare and unambiguous military victory,” he says.
Spencer said Operation Sindoor was “more than a retaliation, this was the unveiling of a strategic doctrine”, quoting PM Narendra Modi as saying, “terror and talks can’t go together. Water and blood can’t flow together”.
He said that India’s military response to terror attacks is “overwhelming yet controlled — precise, decisive, and without hesitation. That kind of clarity is rare in modern war. In an era defined by ‘forever wars’ and cycles of violence without strategic direction, Operation Sindoor stands apart. It offers a model of limited war with clearly defined ends, matched ways and means, and a state that never relinquished the initiative”.
“In an age where many modern wars spiral into open-ended occupations or political confusion, Operation Sindoor stands apart. This was a demonstration of disciplined military strategy: clear goals, aligned ways and means, and adaptive execution in the face of unpredictable escalation. India absorbed a blow, defined its objective, and achieved it — all within a contained timeframe,” he added.
The controlled escalation, he said, sent a clear deterrent signal: India will respond, and it controls the pace. “India’s restraint is not weakness — it is maturity. It imposed costs, redefined thresholds, and retained escalation dominance. India didn’t just respond to an attack. It changed the strategic equation,” he adds.
Spencer noted the fact that India handled this crisis without seeking international mediation, enforced its doctrine on sovereign terms, using sovereign means.
“After just four days of calibrated military action, it is objectively conclusive: India achieved a massive victory. Operation Sindoor met and exceeded its strategic aims — destroying terrorist infrastructure, demonstrating military superiority, restoring deterrence, and unveiling a new national security doctrine . This was not a symbolic force. It was decisive power, clearly applied,” Spencer wrote in his latest blog.
Spencer currently serves as the chair of the Urban Warfare Studies at the Modern War Institute at West Point (US Military Academy), New York, and has been a part of the strategic research group at Pentagon.
“India has not declared Operation Sindoor completely over. What exists now is a sensitive halt in operations — some may call it a ceasefire, but military leaders have deliberately avoided that word. From a war-fighting perspective, this is not merely a pause; it is a strategic hold following a rare and unambiguous military victory,” he says.
Spencer said Operation Sindoor was “more than a retaliation, this was the unveiling of a strategic doctrine”, quoting PM Narendra Modi as saying, “terror and talks can’t go together. Water and blood can’t flow together”.
He said that India’s military response to terror attacks is “overwhelming yet controlled — precise, decisive, and without hesitation. That kind of clarity is rare in modern war. In an era defined by ‘forever wars’ and cycles of violence without strategic direction, Operation Sindoor stands apart. It offers a model of limited war with clearly defined ends, matched ways and means, and a state that never relinquished the initiative”.
“In an age where many modern wars spiral into open-ended occupations or political confusion, Operation Sindoor stands apart. This was a demonstration of disciplined military strategy: clear goals, aligned ways and means, and adaptive execution in the face of unpredictable escalation. India absorbed a blow, defined its objective, and achieved it — all within a contained timeframe,” he added.
The controlled escalation, he said, sent a clear deterrent signal: India will respond, and it controls the pace. “India’s restraint is not weakness — it is maturity. It imposed costs, redefined thresholds, and retained escalation dominance. India didn’t just respond to an attack. It changed the strategic equation,” he adds.
Spencer noted the fact that India handled this crisis without seeking international mediation, enforced its doctrine on sovereign terms, using sovereign means.
You may also like
Deadly highway collision in central Mexico kills 21, injures dozens
Watch: Ben & Jerry's co-founder Ben Cohen arrested during Senate protest over Gaza
"Proud of my daughter," says father of acid attack survivor who secured 95.6% in CBSE class 12 exam
Pregnant Israeli woman critically injured in West Bank shooting
Can Spending Time with Your Pets Ease Your Stress?
