Today, India carried out an airstrike against an alleged terrorist camp based in Pakistan. After the strike, India claimed they killed about 350 terrorists.

India has not provided any proof of this.

Given that tensions between India and Pakistan are high, that both nations possess nuclear weapons (Pakistan have an estimated 140 warheads, India have 130, and neither country are part of the proliferation treaty, so these numbers are estimated to rise in the coming years), and that Pakistan literally came out and said it would 'retaliate', what possible reasons does India have for not providing proof that they actually did target and accomplished demolishing a terrorist training camp?

It seems logical that in carrying out such a strike, India has brought the two nations closer to warfare. As everyone would like to avoid such an event (an all-out war means mutual destruction), what reasons does India have to not cool tensions by merely providing proof that it did indeed target a terrorist group?

Since it was an air-strike, obviously such proof ought to exist: any sort of aerial or satelitte photo would be enough to garner the support of the international community and Pakistan would be pressured to accept it, similar to how Pakistan was forced to accept US strikes on Pakistani soil, because the US provided proof that it actually hit terrorists.

Questions: So, in short, what reasons are there for India not providing proof? Has they stated any reasons as to why they do not provide proof? Has any member of the international community stated that it requires proof?

For what it's worth (probably not much), Pakistan claim that India's attack hit nothing but a few trees.

  • 1
    I think this question could do with some links to news stories etc. Otherwise, it can be a good question but it might be somewhat speculative.
    – JJJ
    Feb 26, 2019 at 16:52
  • 1
    What exactly constitutes "proof" here? Indeed, it's not entirely clear to me what exactly you want to be proved. That India carried out airstrikes? That what was struck was in fact a jihadist base? That about 350 jihadists were killed?
    – jamesqf
    Feb 26, 2019 at 17:09
  • 1
    The AP is reporting that no one was hurt. Speculation (hence, a comment and not an answer) but India is practicing deterrence with an "acceptable" escalation; and this is relevant as elections (including Modi seeking a second term) are in a few weeks, as WaPo points out.
    – BurnsBA
    Feb 26, 2019 at 19:32

4 Answers 4


A good reason for not supplying proof is that then there would be proof out there. As it is, it's just a claim that India is making. If India provides proof and releases it publicly, it could have the effect of increasing pressure on Pakistan to respond. By witholding proof, Pakistan has the option of claiming that the attack was not as bad as India is claiming (which they seem to be doing), giving some domestic political cover if Pakistan's politicians decide not to make the next move.

The claim itself may not have any proof behind it at all if it is in fact false, and a good reason for not releasing something is that it doesn't exist. There are some claims I've seen floating around that the "terrorist camps" were in fact "empty forested areas" with the net result of causing "no casualties." To me half a world away it sounds at least plausible if the impetus behind the attack was to satisfy domestic Indian hardliners that "something is being done" after the Pulwama bombing, instead of there being any tactical or strategic goal of the armed forces.

Even if India's claims are true, Pakistan has the option currently of saying they are not and instead choose to step down tensions.


To answer a broad question with a broad answer:

  1. Airstrikes usually look like buildings and people blowing up from gun cams. Unless they have other footage it would prove nothing.

  2. Militaries hate having their doctrine and equipment shown. Even if their kind and capabilities are well known.

Perhaps the question should be How can the Indians prove their attack was on a terrorist camp.


If by proof you mean those scary frame by frame videos of smart bombs locking on and destroying the target in a flash of IR...it depends.

It is reported that 1000 kg bombs were used in the attack delivered by Mirage 2000H attack aircraft.

Early on Tuesday (Feb 26) at around 3.30am, a group of Mirage 2000 - a single engine fighter jet - dropped 1,000kg bombs on terror camps across the Line of Control (LoC), the de facto border between India and Pakistan, said ANI, a multi-media news agency.

As far as I know, the IAF is currently using GBU-12 Paveway II 500 kg smart bombs, such as used in Desert Storm. I cannot find any evidence that they have GBU-16 1000 kg smart bombs.

While they claimed to have conducted a "surgical strike", it is possible they were using 1000kg. dumb bombs. No cameras. Satellite photos and resolution are usually restricted as they give away intelligence capabilities.


According to Indian claim, they killed no less than 300 terrorists.

So, the answer is simple - if India faked the incident, they don't have anything to show other than some chest thumping and vociferation.

If India really struck terrorists with a 1000 kg bomb, there would be dead bodies everywhere. Three hundred dead bodies are no joke. It takes time and manpower to cover up those evidences, and certainly impossible to cover up in a few hours. In the mean time domestic and international media would certainly flock to go there to have a glimpse of the incident. Pakistani media has since reported that they didn't find any such evidence:

Villagers in Jabba were woken up by successive explosions in the early hours of Tuesday morning when Indian aircraft reportedly dropped bombs on a hill overlooking their small hamlet, thirty kilometres to the north-east of Balakot city that was devastated by a huge earthquake in 2005 ... The lone injury case reported was that of a 60-something Nooran Shah, whose nearby mud house door was ripped from a wall by the impact of the explosion which hit him in the head ... Local residents said they did not see any ambulances or any evacuation soon after the bombing that could lend credence to India’s claim of having targeted a militant training camp or killing several hundred of them.

... Dr Mohammad Javed Tanoli, Medical Superintendent of the King Shah Abdullah Teaching Hospital, the only tertiary care hospital in the district, said no casualty was brought from the scene of the bombing, except for the lone wounded man. “There would have been chaos here, had there been casualties of the scale the Indians are claiming,” Dr Tanoli said. “This is like any other day, routine work and nothing else. No wounded person from the strike area was brought here and the government did not issue any [emergency] alert,” the medical superintendent added.

I am not even bringing the issue of smart-phone recordings. So, the news of such a calamity would be out in the open in a few hours.

Pakistan's Maj Gen Asif Ghafoor pointed out that the IAF planes dropped the payload when they were forced to retreat by PAF:

@OfficialDGISPR: Indian aircrafts intruded from Muzafarabad sector. Facing timely and effective response from Pakistan Air Force released payload in haste while escaping which fell near Balakot. No casualties or damage.

@OfficialDGISPR Payload of hastily escaping Indian aircrafts fell in open.

IAF payload in open

So, in essence, this is just a domestic propaganda made by BJP government in India for domestic consumption, during an election.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .