Rijiju Slams Rahul Gandhi Over 'False Claims' on Operation Sindoor After IAF Chief's Clarification
When Union Minister Kiren Rijiju stood up in the Lok Sabha on August 9, 2025, and asked Rahul Gandhi, "Why do you keep lying all the time?" — the chamber fell silent. It wasn’t a heated political outburst. It was a direct, public rebuke from a senior minister to the Leader of the Opposition, backed by irrefutable military testimony. The trigger? Gandhi’s claims about Operation Sindoor, a covert Indian Air Force strike launched in response to the July 28, 2025, terrorist massacre in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, that killed 26 civilians. The twist? The Indian Air Force had already told the truth — and it didn’t match Gandhi’s version.
What the Air Force Actually Said
On August 8, 2025, Air Marshal AP Singh, Chief of the Air Staff since June 30, 2024, addressed the nation in a rare public statement. "I’m speaking clearly because I’ve heard so many false narratives," he said. "We were given very clear political willpower and clear instructions. No restrictions were placed on us." He confirmed what intelligence sources had quietly leaked: six Pakistani aircraft were shot down during the 22-minute operation that began at 1:05 a.m. local time. No air defense systems were spared. No "hands tied" orders. No last-minute calls to Pakistan begging them not to escalate.
It’s a stark contrast to Gandhi’s claim in Parliament that the government had told pilots: "Go ahead, attack, but face Pakistan’s air defense with your hands tied." That’s not just inaccurate — it’s dangerously misleading. Air Marshal Singh didn’t just correct the record. He made it personal. "I was in every meeting. I heard every word. We were never held back."
The 1971 Comparison That Backfired
Gandhi tried to anchor his argument in history, invoking the 1971 war. "In 1971, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi gave General Manekshaw full freedom," he said. "Even when the U.S. Seventh Fleet entered the Indian Ocean, she said: Take all the time you need."
But here’s the thing — Indira Gandhi didn’t just give freedom. She gave authority. And in 1971, the Indian military operated under a unified command structure with no political interference. In 2025, the same principle held — but Gandhi’s implication was that political leadership had withheld that authority. That’s not what happened. The IAF didn’t need permission to strike. They needed the political signal to act — and they got it.
What Gandhi didn’t mention? The 1971 war lasted 13 days. Operation Sindoor lasted 22 minutes. One was a full-scale war. The other was a surgical, targeted response. Comparing them isn’t just misleading — it’s intellectually dishonest.
Why the Confrontation Escalated
Rijiju’s outburst wasn’t impulsive. It was calculated. He didn’t just call Gandhi a liar. He said: "You haven’t just damaged your own credibility — you’ve hurt India’s international standing." And he had evidence. Reports from Prabhasakshi.com and others noted that Turkey openly sided with Pakistan during the operation, citing India’s "lack of political resolve" — a narrative Gandhi’s statements had inadvertently amplified.
And then there was the Trump angle. Gandhi challenged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to publicly refute Donald Trump’s repeated claims — 29 times, according to Gandhi — that he had brokered the ceasefire. But here’s the reality: Trump made no such claims in any official U.S. government channel. The statements were made on Truth Social, a platform where he routinely exaggerates. The Modi government’s silence wasn’t complicity — it was strategic. Engaging with a former president’s social media rants would have been a distraction.
And then there’s China. Gandhi asked why Modi didn’t mention China during his parliamentary address. The answer? Because China had no direct role in Operation Sindoor. Mentioning it would have been a red herring — a tactic to shift focus from the real issue: the credibility of the opposition’s claims.
The Broader Stakes
This isn’t just about one speech. It’s about how political narratives shape national security perception. When a senior opposition leader tells the public that the military was "handcuffed," it doesn’t just misinform — it erodes trust. Families of pilots worry. Foreign allies question India’s resolve. Adversaries test limits.
And in an age of viral misinformation, the stakes are higher than ever. NDTV, Jagran, and Vichar Suchak all reported on the fallout. The IAF’s statement wasn’t just a correction — it was a defense of institutional integrity. Rijiju’s words? They were the political echo of that defense.
What Comes Next?
The Lok Sabha has moved on. But the damage is done. Rahul Gandhi’s reputation as a serious national security voice has taken a hit — not because he was wrong once, but because his pattern of selective facts, historical distortions, and unsubstantiated claims has become predictable. The government, for its part, must now do more than just respond. It needs to proactively counter misinformation with transparency — without turning every debate into a war of words.
Operation Sindoor was a success. It was precise. It was decisive. And it was politically authorized. That’s the truth. Anything else is noise.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did the Indian Air Force really have no restrictions during Operation Sindoor?
Yes. Air Marshal AP Singh, Chief of the Air Staff, confirmed in a public address on August 8, 2025, that the IAF received "very clear political willpower and clear instructions" with no operational restrictions. Six Pakistani aircraft were shot down, and the strike targeted military infrastructure without hitting civilian sites — all within 22 minutes.
Why did Rahul Gandhi compare Operation Sindoor to the 1971 war?
Gandhi used the 1971 war to imply that India’s current leadership lacked the political courage of Indira Gandhi. But the comparison is flawed: 1971 involved a full-scale war over Bangladesh, while Operation Sindoor was a limited, retaliatory strike. The military’s autonomy in both cases was real — but the scale, context, and objectives were entirely different.
Was Turkey really supporting Pakistan during Operation Sindoor?
Yes. Multiple Indian media outlets, including Prabhasakshi.com, reported that Turkey publicly expressed support for Pakistan following the operation. This diplomatic alignment was likely influenced by narratives in India’s own opposition, including claims that India had shown "lack of political will," which Turkey cited in its public statements.
Did Donald Trump really broker the India-Pakistan ceasefire?
No credible evidence supports Trump’s claim. He made the assertion 29 times on Truth Social, but no U.S. State Department, Pentagon, or White House official confirmed it. The Indian government chose not to engage because responding to a former president’s social media posts would have legitimized misinformation and distracted from the real issue: national security.
Why didn’t Prime Minister Modi mention China during the parliamentary debate?
China had no direct involvement in Operation Sindoor, which was a bilateral response to a terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir. Mentioning China would have been a deliberate misdirection. The operation’s focus was on Pakistan’s military infrastructure — not regional power dynamics — and bringing China into the discussion would have unnecessarily complicated the narrative.
What impact did this confrontation have on India’s international image?
Union Minister Kiren Rijiju warned that Gandhi’s false claims damaged India’s credibility abroad. Countries like Turkey used those claims to question India’s resolve. When a major opposition leader suggests the military was "handcuffed," allies wonder if India’s commitments are reliable. That’s not just political noise — it’s a national security risk.
- Nov, 23 2025
- Zander Lockhart
- 0
- Permalink
Written by Zander Lockhart
View all posts by: Zander Lockhart