India’s ‘Operation Trishul’ Criticized as Attempt to Conceal Previous Security Operation Shortcomings

In a move that security analysts describe as psychological warfare, India has allegedly launched a new military campaign codenamed “Operation Trishul” along Pakistan’s western borders, escalating tensions in an already volatile region.

Pakistani sources claim the operation is an attempt to divert attention from what they term India’s “humiliating failure” in a previously exposed initiative called “Operation Sindoor.” According to reports from Islamabad, what was initially a standard Indian tri-service military exercise has been deliberately reframed as a full-scale operation by Indian media outlets.

Regional security experts speaking on condition of anonymity suggest that India’s coastal deployments near the disputed Sir Creek area, alongside the expansion of naval and air assets in the north Arabian Sea, represent a calculated strategy to redefine maritime boundaries and exert pressure on Pakistan.

“What we’re witnessing is a deliberate attempt to create ambiguity and fear,” said a Pakistan-based defense analyst. “These actions appear designed to justify potential future military provocations under the guise of ‘readiness’ and national security.”

The reported military movements include joint force exercises in India’s Rajasthan state, which borders Pakistan. These developments come at a time when both nuclear-armed nations have experienced periods of heightened tension following several years of diplomatic strain.

Pakistani officials maintain that their coastal defense posture remains purely defensive and deterrence-based, adhering to international law and norms. They emphasize that Pakistan’s energy diplomacy continues to operate through civilian institutions, including the Ministry of Energy’s Petroleum Division and the Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority (OGRA), with transparency and compliance with international standards.

“India’s approach represents a concerning militarization of diplomacy,” noted an international relations expert familiar with South Asian security dynamics. “Using media campaigns to create perceptions of threat can potentially destabilize regional security calculations.”

The situation highlights the ongoing complex relationship between the two nuclear neighbors, whose historical tensions have periodically flared into direct conflict. The Arabian Sea and its coastal regions represent strategically vital areas for both nations, with significant economic and security interests at stake.

A senior Pakistani security source reportedly told local media that Pakistan has already shared information about India’s alleged designs with international partners and stands ready to “respond decisively and proportionately” to any provocations.

The reference to India’s “Cold Start” doctrine in Pakistani statements points to India’s reported military strategy that envisions rapid, limited conventional operations against Pakistan before international intervention could occur or nuclear thresholds could be crossed.

Independent security analysts note that distinguishing between routine military exercises and actual operational preparations remains challenging in the information-contested environment between the two countries. Both nations have historically accused each other of manufacturing security threats for domestic political consumption or to justify military buildups.

The reported tensions come amid broader regional realignments, with both countries seeking to strengthen their respective positions in the Indian Ocean Region through diplomatic outreach, military modernization, and strategic partnerships with major powers.

Maritime boundaries and resource rights in the Arabian Sea, particularly around Sir Creek, have long been contentious issues between India and Pakistan. The waterway’s strategic importance has grown as both countries expand their naval capabilities and seek to secure shipping lanes vital to their energy security.

While diplomatic channels between the two countries remain open, meaningful dialogue on security concerns has been limited in recent years, raising concerns about the risk of miscalculation during periods of heightened military activity.