On May 6, former Jammu and Kashmir Governor Satyapal Malik appeared in a much-publicised interview with controversial journalist Karan Thapar, unleashing a scathing attack on the Modi government. He went so far as to call the government “cowardly,” accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi of lacking the courage to act against terrorism.
Malik declared that “Pakistan is laughing at us,” while also mocking India’s previous strong declarations of eliminating terrorism “inch by inch.” His words, loaded with cynicism, were immediately circulated and celebrated across social media by the same entrenched ecosystem of Islamo-leftist commentators that thrives on undermining Indian statecraft.
But what happened after that? When India launched Operation Sindoor, a series of highly successful and precise strikes on nine terror camps across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoK), resulting in the elimination of over 100 terrorists, Satyapal Malik and the ecosystem he represents suddenly disappeared into an abyss of silence.
This selective outrage and convenient silence is not new. It is a pattern, an ideological reflex of a segment that finds fault only when India asserts itself.
Instead of lauding the military’s precision and restraint, many members of the Islamo-leftist brigade turned their attention to bizarre, irrelevant criticisms. For instance, several self-proclaimed feminists and “progressive” activists began criticising the name of the operation Operation Sindoor calling it patriarchal and misogynistic. It’s baffling that the act of avenging innocent Indian lives was side-lined by semantic debates over cultural symbols.
But let’s set the record straight. The name Operation Sindoor was chosen with deep symbolic intent. In Hindu culture, sindoor represents the marital bond and the presence of a husband in a woman’s life. During the Pahalgam terror attack, several women saw their husbands, innocent Indian citizens, shot in cold blood merely for their faith. The operation’s name was a tribute to their loss and a statement of resolve: anyone who tries to wipe that sindoor—that sacred identity from an Indian woman’s life will pay a price.
Yet the Islamo-leftist ecosystem couldn’t stomach this. Rather than focus on Pakistan’s direct role in orchestrating the Pahalgam killings or the fact that groups like Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and Hizbul Mujahideen openly operate with impunity on Pakistani soil, their narrative once again turned inward. They accused India of escalating tensions, invoked stale slogans about “war not being the answer,” and warned of the dangers of “jingoism.”
It’s worth asking: where were these moral sermons when 26 unarmed civilians, including a newlywed naval officer, were butchered in Pahalgam? Why do words like “de-escalation” and “dialogue” suddenly pour out only when India responds in strength? The truth is, this ecosystem has long viewed national pride, military assertiveness, and cultural symbolism as tools of oppression unless those values are expressed by regimes and ideologies they favour. They preach gender sensitivity, yet find no empathy for the widows left behind by jihadist terror. They decry religious extremism, yet remain silent when Hindu pilgrims are targeted for their faith. They champion human rights but conveniently ignore the rights of Indian citizens when Pakistan-backed terrorists gun them down.
Operation Sindoor is more than a military operation it is a declaration that India will not remain a passive victim. It is a message to those sitting in drawing rooms in Delhi and tweeting from safe havens abroad: your cynical narratives will not dictate the nation’s security policy.
