Parliament Session Erupts Over Pahalgam Attack and Operation Sindoor: Modiji Slams Opposition, Calls Out Congress

On April 22, 2025, India witnessed one of its most horrifying terrorist incidents in recent memory. The Pahalgam attack in Jammu and Kashmir claimed the lives of 26 individuals, most of them Hindu tourists. Armed militants disguised in Indian military uniforms ambushed a group of pilgrims near the Baisaran Valley, unleashing indiscriminate gunfire. The nation reeled in shock, and as public outrage surged, the Indian government responded swiftly with a military retaliation code-named Operation Sindoor.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi speaks during a debate in the Lok Sabha on the Pahalgam terror attack and Operation Sindoor, at the Monsoon session of Parliament, in New Delhi | Hindustan Times

India’s Swift Retaliation

Just days after the attack, India launched Operation Sindoor, a high-precision military operation aimed at terror launchpads deep within Pakistan-occupied territories. The mission, executed using advanced Indian-made drones, missiles, and long-range artillery, lasted a mere 22 minutes but was described by government officials as highly effective. According to National Security Advisor Ajit Doval, the strikes were meticulously planned to ensure minimal collateral damage while maximizing the impact on enemy infrastructure. Over 100 terrorists were reportedly neutralized in the operation.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, addressing Parliament during the Monsoon Session on July 29, 2025, hailed the operation as a testament to India’s new military doctrine—assertive, rapid, and strategic. He emphasized that India acted with restraint but precision, and stressed that “no world leader asked India to stop.” This, he said, was a reflection of global support for India’s right to defend itself.

International Response and Diplomatic Backing

India’s diplomatic machinery moved swiftly in the wake of the attack. According to External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, 190 out of 193 UN member countries backed India’s right to respond to terrorism. Only three nations reportedly sympathized with Pakistan’s position. This overwhelming global support was framed by the government as evidence of India’s rising stature and the effectiveness of its foreign policy.

Despite the cross-border nature of the strike, there was no major international backlash against India. Instead, the narrative largely favored India's position, recognizing the country as a victim of terrorism rather than an aggressor. This diplomatic win was lauded in both national and international circles.

Congress and the Opposition’s Sharp Critique

However, while the world largely stood with India, the same could not be said about the domestic political opposition. In Parliament, Prime Minister Modi took direct aim at the Congress party, accusing it of failing to stand with the nation in a time of crisis. “The world stood with India, but not Congress,” he declared, pointing to statements from Congress leaders that questioned the origins of the attackers and the objectives of Operation Sindoor.

Senior Congress leader P. Chidambaram was specifically called out by Home Minister Amit Shah for suggesting that the attackers might have been “homegrown” rather than Pakistani nationals. Shah presented forensic and documentary evidence linking the terrorists to Pakistan-based groups, including Lashkar-e-Taiba. He demanded to know why leaders from the principal opposition party were echoing the narrative of a hostile neighboring nation.

Opposition’s Demands for Accountability

In response, Congress and other opposition leaders pushed back strongly. Rahul Gandhi challenged the government’s account of Operation Sindoor, asking why the operation lasted only 22 minutes and why, according to media reports, Indian officials reached out to Pakistan’s military moments after the strikes. He accused the government of political posturing and demanded clarity on whether any external powers, particularly the United States, had mediated a sudden ceasefire.

Gaurav Gogoi, Congress MP, described the BJP-led administration as a “cowardly government,” accusing it of failing to secure Kashmir and questioning how terrorists could infiltrate tourist zones in soldier disguises. Samajwadi Party leader Akhilesh Yadav expanded the debate to foreign policy, alleging that India’s trade and diplomatic engagement with China was emboldening Pakistan. He demanded a phased economic disengagement with China in protest.

Dimple Yadav, another opposition MP, raised concerns about the security arrangements in Kashmir during foreign VIP visits and criticized the lack of transparency around follow-up operations like Operation Mahadev. The opposition demanded answers, not just on military action but also on the glaring intelligence and logistical failures that allowed the Pahalgam attack to occur in the first place.

Heroism and Civil Response

Amid the political storm, stories of civilian bravery offered a glimmer of hope. Local tourist guide Nazakat Ahmad Ali Shah emerged as a hero for his role in saving over a dozen lives during the Pahalgam attack. His actions underscored the courage and resilience of local Kashmiris who defied danger to protect visitors. The incident also prompted the Indian government to organize a massive civil defence drill—Operation Abhyaas—across 244 districts, preparing the country for potential emergencies and reinforcing homeland security.

Judicial and Administrative Developments

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in the Supreme Court, demanding an independent inquiry into the Pahalgam attack, was dismissed. The court ruled that such investigations fall within the domain of the executive and military, not the judiciary. Meanwhile, Jammu & Kashmir Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha publicly accepted responsibility for the security lapse, a rare move that added both transparency and urgency to the region’s counterterrorism efforts.

Conclusion: Between National Unity and Political Polarization

The Pahalgam tragedy and India's subsequent military response have become defining moments in the national security narrative of 2025. Operation Sindoor, hailed by the government as a success, demonstrated India’s capability and willingness to respond to terror threats swiftly and decisively. Yet, the aftermath has also exposed deep political divisions.

While the government celebrates diplomatic victories and operational efficiency, the opposition demands transparency, accountability, and strategic clarity. At the heart of the issue lies a critical question: Can India present a united front in the face of terrorism, or will political fault lines continue to overshadow collective national interest?

As the debate rages on, what remains indisputable is the need for robust security, informed policy-making, and a political climate where dissent does not weaken national defence—but strengthens democratic scrutiny.

(Sources: OpIndia, Hindustan Times, NDTV)