© The Indian Express Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
THE PAHALGAM attack was “directly ordered by Pakistan’s military and political leadership”, and the Indian Air Force “took out command and control centres, radars, surface-to-air guided weapons, runways, and hangars with aircraft” during Operation Sindoor, breaching Pakistan’s air defence and “creating visible gaps that the world saw”, according to the NCERT’s new module on Operation Sindoor for school students.
It refers to Operation Sindoor as a “military success, a technological breakthrough, and a political message all rolled into one”.
Two modules have been released – one for the preparatory (classes 3 to 5) and middle stage (classes 6 to 8), and another for the secondary stage (classes 9 to 12).
The NCERT’s modules – separate from the textbooks — are short publications on specific topics that schools can use as an additional resource.
In the form of a conversation between the teacher and students, the module for the secondary stage – ‘Operation Sindoor – A Mission of Honour and Bravery’ – states that since Independence, Pakistan “has often tried to disturb peace in India – sometimes through war, and at other times, through terrorism”.
In 2019, Article 370 was abrogated, paving the way for development in Jammu and Kashmir, including improved infrastructure, upgraded schools, and direct rail links connecting the region more closely with the rest of India, the module says, adding: “…by 2023, Kashmir saw the highest number of tourists ever. People were living in peace. But unfortunately, Pakistan was not ready to accept this progress.”
“After years of calm”, in April 2025, terrorists attacked tourists in Pahalgam, killing 26 innocent people. The terrorists’ “goal” was to create fear and religious tension, going by the module, and Operation Sindoor was a “strong and clear response to that cowardly attack.”
Before it goes into Operation Sindoor, the module features a section on the 2019 Pulwama attack, and India’s response in the form of the Balakot air strike. It specifies that India chose to target terrorist camps, not civilian areas.
On the Pahalgam attack, the module states: “TRF (The Resistance Front) first claimed responsibility, then denied it four days later. But India’s National Investigation Agency confirmed the group was behind it— with solid evidence and eyewitness accounts. Indian agencies found that the attack was a well-planned conspiracy led by Pakistan’s ISI and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). It was directly ordered by Pakistan’s military and political leadership.”
In addition to the details of Operation Sindoor, the module refers to “a coordinated and extensive exercise” taken to “reach out diplomatically by our missions abroad.”
Pointing to Operating Sindoor as a strategic move that “told the world – India will protect its people and values” and “restored faith in our armed forces and reassured citizens that justice would not be delayed”, the module refers to the Indian Armed Forces’ planning – pinpointing terrorist infrastructure, choosing the right weapons for precision strikes, setting the date and time for the attack, and strategically moving naval assets forward. The armed forces were directed to identify multiple targets related to terrorism, minimise civilian casualties, and gather evidence after the strike.
The nine targets that were attacked were directly linked to terror networks threatening India, it states.
Pakistan then resorted to ceasefire violations all along the Line of Control, and “escalated the conflict by attacking our bases, logistic nodes, forward posts all along the Line of Control and Army formation headquarters – some using Unmanned Aerial Systems, or UAS”.
The module refers to India’s defence systems: “Our integrated air defence grid and Counter-UAS grid were already in place. These systems—like the S-400, MRSAM, AKASH, and traditional air defence guns—proved highly effective. Along with legacy platforms like Pechora, L-70, ZU-23 and OSA-AK, we created a layered defence.”
On May 8, India targeted select Pakistani air defence systems and sensor networks using precision air launched munitions, and “it was a calibrated response—sending a strong message while avoiding civilian population.”
Pakistan’s ceasefire violations continued on May 9, and they intensified attacks not only on military sites, but also schools, religious places, and civilian infrastructure, killing 14 Indian civilians, it added. The Indian army “neutralized 35-40 Pakistani Army personnel.”
In another attack on May 10, Pakistan targeted Indian Air Force bases, army ammo depots and cantonments, but “not one critical Indian asset was damaged.”
“The Indian Air Force took out command and control centres, radars, surface-to-air guided weapons, runways and hangars with aircrafts. The response shook Pakistani establishment as our airstrike breached their air defence, creating visible gaps that the world saw,” the module reads.
It also refers to the Indian Navy’s contribution in asserting maritime dominance by deploying its Carrier Battle Group “with Integral MiG-29K fighter jets, early warning helicopters, and surveillance systems in the North Arabian Sea, to protect Indian maritime interest and prevent any misadventure by Pakistan in the maritime domain.”
Pointing to the use of Indian-made systems, the module states that Operation Sindoor was a symbol of technological self-reliance.
“…it also shows we don’t depend on foreign tech anymore. We are building our own systems, and they’re actually working when it counts,” it added.
