Operation Sindoor: What’s the significance of India’s Pakistan targets?

The Indian military launched multiple missile attacks targeting sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir early on Wednesday in an attack it called Operation Sindoor. The Pakistani military claims to have retaliated, shooting down multiple Indian military planes.

At least 26 Pakistanis have been killed in the six targeted cities, according to Lieutenant Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry, the director general of the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) media wing of Pakistan’s military. India says it struck nine sites.

But what’s the significance of the cities and sites that India attacked? And what are India and Pakistan saying about those strikes? And why did India launch these attacks in the first place?

Why did India strike Pakistan?

The missiles were India’s response to the deadly April 22 attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir in Pahalgam, during which 26 men were killed.

An armed group called The Resistance Front (TRF), which demands independence for Kashmir, claimed responsibility for the Pahalgam attack. India claims that the TRF is an offshoot of Pakistan-based armed group, the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). Islamabad has denied its involvement in the Pahalgam attack and has asked for a neutral investigation into the incident.

However, since the attack, India has suspended its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty that Pakistan relies on for its water supply. Pakistan has responded by threatening to suspend its participation in the Simla Agreement, a pact signed in 1972 following the Indo-Pakistan War. Both countries have also scaled back their diplomatic ties, and each has expelled the other’s citizens.

How has India justified the attacks?

India claims it hit “terrorist infrastructure”, targeting organisations including the LeT and Jaish-e-Muhammad (JeM), an armed group based in Pakistan which claimed responsibility for a suicide bombing in February 2019, which killed 40 Indian paramilitary soldiers in Pulwama in Indian-administered Kashmir.

In a briefing on Wednesday, Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri insisted that the missile strikes “focused on dismantling the terrorist infrastructure and disabling terrorists likely to be sent across to India”.

Joining Misri in the briefing, Indian military officials Colonel Sofiya Qureshi and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh detailed the operation. Five of the nine sites that India hit, they said, were in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. The remaining four were in Punjab – in Bahawalpur, Muridke, Shakar Garh and a village near Sialkot.

During the briefing, the Indian military showed a map marking out what it claimed were 21 “terrorist camps” in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Al Jazeera has not been able to independently verify the claims of either the Indian or Pakistani militaries.

The map shown by the Indian military during a media briefing on Wednesday [Priyanshu Singh/Reuters]

What has Pakistan said about the sites attacked?

Chaudhry of the ISPR described the Indian strikes as an “unprovoked attack, targeting innocent people”. He indicated that India had launched a total of 24 strikes across six locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir.

Chaudhry said at least 26 civilians, including women and children, had been killed, and at least 46 people were injured. He claimed mosques and residential areas were targeted, killing and injuring civilians.

Interaxctive_Indian_strikes_Pakistan_May7_2025_0348_GMT

What’s the significance of the sites targeted by India?

The Indian missile strikes represent the most extensive attacks on Pakistani soil outside the four wars that the nuclear-armed neighbours have fought. They also mark the first time since the war of 1971 that India has attacked Punjab, Pakistan’s most populated province and historical and economic hub.

Unlike previous aerial attacks by India in Pakistan or in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, some of these strikes targeted large population centres. Muridke is next to Lahore, Pakistan’s second-most populous city. Sialkot and Bahawalpur are major cities, too.

But many of the sites chosen as targets by India also hold specific strategic importance, at least from New Delhi’s perspective. Here’s a breakdown:

Muridke, Punjab

Muridke is a city in Punjab’s Sheikhupura District, peppered with totems of historical memory from the Mughal, Mauryan and Gupta eras.

Chaudhry said a mosque named Masjid Ummul Qura was targeted with four strikes. One man was killed and one man was injured as a result. Two people have been missing from this location, Chaudhry said, adding that surrounding residential quarters have also been damaged in these attacks.

But the town, according to India and much of the international community, also hosts the headquarters of the Jamat-ud-Dawa, a charity organisation that New Delhi insists is a front for the LeT.

On Wednesday, India’s Qureshi claimed that Indian missiles struck the LeT’s Markaz Taiba camp in Muridke. The Indian army claimed that key perpetrators of the 2008 Mumbai attack – including Ajmal Kasab, the sole gunman who was captured alive after that assault on India’s financial capital – were trained at that camp.

Meanwhile, images emerging from Muridke showed rescuers searching for victims amid the debris of a damaged government health and education complex.

Bahawalpur, Punjab

Chaudhry said that four Indian missiles struck Ahmedpur Sharqia, a town near Bahawalpur, targeting a mosque named Masjid Subhan, which was destroyed in the attack. He said that at least five people were killed in the attack, including two men, two women, and a three-year-old girl. Additionally, he said, 31 people were injured – 25 men and six women. He added that four “residential quarters”, where civilian families were living, were damaged.

But Qureshi said India had hit the headquarters of the JeM, called Markaz Subhanallah. India described the site as a hub for “recruitment, training and indoctrination”.

Muzaffarabad, Pakistan-administered Kashmir

Muzaffarabad is the capital city of Pakistan-administered Kashmir, located at the confluence of the Jhelum and Neelum rivers. Muzaffarabad is sustained by its cottage industry ecosystem, including furniture making, wood carving, garment making and embroidery work, according to the State Bank of Pakistan.

Chaudhry said that a mosque called Masjid e Bilal was hit in Muzaffarabad, and a “young girl was injured”.

But Qureshi said India hit a LeT training centre, Sawai Nala camp in Muzaffarabad, 30km (19 miles) away from the Line of Control (LoC), the de facto border that separates Indian-administered and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. She claimed that those responsible for multiple attacks, including the April 22 Pahalgam killings, were trained at this camp.

The Indian military officials also said they attacked a Jaish-e-Muhammad “staging area”, the Syedna Bilal camp in Muzaffarabad. A staging area refers to a place where people, vehicles and equipment are assembled and readied before being assigned a mission.

Kotli, Pakistan-administered Kashmir

Kotli is a city along the Poonch river and is an agricultural and tourist hub.

Chaudhry said a mosque named Masjid Abbas was targeted in Kotli. A 16-year-old girl and an 18-year-old boy were killed. At least two other people were injured, he added.

Qureshi, however, said that India hit a LeT base, Gulpur camp, about 30km (19 miles) away from the LoC. The Indian army added that it also struck what it called the Abbas camp in Kotli, 13km (8 miles) away from the LoC, where Qureshi said up to 15 “terrorists” could be trained at a time.

Qureshi said India has also hit Mehmoona Joya, which she described as a facility of the Hizbul Mujahideen (HuM), a rebel group based in Indian-administered Kashmir. The HuM was founded by separatist leader Muhammad Ahsan Dar in September 1989, with a pro-Pakistan ideology, calling for India to leave the parts of Kashmir that it administers.

Bhimber, Pakistan-administered Kashmir

Qureshi claimed India struck what India called the Barnala camp in Bhimber, about 9km (5.6 miles) away from the LoC. She claimed that fighters were trained in using weapons, improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and in jungle survival at this camp.

Pakistani officials had not mentioned Bhimber as the site of any of the Indian attacks by late Wednesday evening. However, Bhimber is just south of Kotli, so it is unclear whether a missile strike on Bhimber is being counted by Pakistan as among the attacks on Kotli.

Sialkot, Punjab

Sialkot is one of Pakistan’s most important industrial centres for the manufacture of surgical items, sporting goods and leather products.

Chaudhry said that a village north of Sialkot called Kotli Loharan was targeted in two strikes. One of these strikes misfired and did not explode, while the other landed in an open field, resulting in no damage, Chaudhry said.

India’s Qureshi and Singh, however, claimed that India had struck what they called the Sarjal camp in Sialkot. They claimed this was the training centre for those responsible for the killing of four police officers in March this year in Indian-administered Kashmir.

Shakar Garh, Punjab

Chaudhry said Shakar Garh was targeted with two strikes and reported “minor damage” to a “small hospital, a dispensary”.

Regions in jeopardy unless WRU deal is signed

Picture agency for Huw Evans

Scarlets, Ospreys, and Dragons are required to sign a new Professional Rugby Agreement (PRA) by the Welsh Rugby Union (WRU), or they could face a two-year notice period that could threaten the region’s future.

Following a meeting with the three teams on Tuesday, the WRU wrote to them to discuss the potential for significant changes in professional rugby in Wales.

The parties made it known in February that a five-year deal had been in principle agreed upon, but that was before Cardiff’s temporary administration and WRU acquisition.

Scarlets, Ospreys, and Dragons initially received a notification on April 15 to confirm their intention to accept the new proposal, but Scarlets, Ospreys, and Dragons expressed concern about what Cardiff’s change in ownership would mean.

Abi Tierney and Richard Collier-Keywood at the press conference to announce the WRU One Wales Strategy in 2024Picture agency for Huw Evans

The proposed agreement is intended to be a crucial component of WRU’s long-term strategy, which it has called the “One Wales” strategy.

Wales’ BBC Sport understands that if the three independent regions fail to sign, the WRU will consider options that could lead to lasting structural changes in Welsh professional rugby.

Despite chief executive Abi Tierney repeatedly expressing her desire to keep all four regions, one possible outcome could be a decrease in the number of Welsh professional teams.

Welsh teams competing in the United Rugby Championship (URC) and European competitions are granted licenses by the WRU.

After serving a two-year notice period, the union has the right to revoke those licenses, but they would face severe financial penalties if they did not continue to offer four sides for the respective competitions.

The independent clubs have expressed concern that the proposed agreement would not establish a cap on the amount of money that WRU could give to Cardiff, which could put the other teams at a disadvantage financially.

Harri Millard celebrates scoring with Cardiff team-mates Picture agency for Huw Evans

Last month, WRU President Richard Collier-Keywood reaffirmed that it was the WRU’s intention to “provide the other three professional clubs with similar debt relief.”

The union has stated that the WRU will establish a subsidiary to run the Arms Park outfit on an independent basis and that Cardiff will be set up on the same terms as the other clubs under the new PRA.

Late in April, WRU CEO Abi Tierney stated that there would be no set timetable for the professional clubs in Wales to sign a new agreement but that they “need to move” quickly.

Scarlets, Ospreys, and Dragons had a deadline of 15 April to confirm their intentions to sign the agreement, according to Collier-Keywood.

As negotiations continued, Tierney acknowledged that Dragons, Ospreys, and Scarlets had “some very valid questions” regarding what the union’s ownership of Cardiff “means for the PRA and what it means for the other three clubs.

related subjects

  • Dragons
  • Welsh Rugby
  • Cardiff
  • Scarlets
  • Ospreys
  • Rugby Union

India-Pakistan: Can other countries pull them from the brink of conflict?

India has carried out strikes on what it has described as “terrorist infrastructure” in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir in response to last month’s deadly attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, further raising tensions between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.

Pakistan said on Wednesday that at least 26 people were killed and 46 others injured in the Indian attacks. In retaliatory attacks by Pakistani forces, at least 10 people have been killed in Indian-administered Kashmir.

Islamabad said civilians were targeted in India’s strikes, while India’s defence ministry said its forces only hit bases from where attacks on India are “planned and directed”.

India has blamed Pakistan for the April 22 attack in Pahalgam, Indian-administered Kashmir, that killed 26 people. Islamabad has denied it played any role and called for a “neutral” investigation into the worst attack on tourists in Kashmir in a quarter century – a call rejected by India.

India claims Pakistan has provided a haven for armed groups, which have carried out deadly attacks, including the 2008 Mumbai attack and the 2019 Pulwama attack. More than 200 people, including security forces, were killed in the two attacks combined.

Amid soaring tensions, international leaders have called for restraint after New Delhi’s biggest attack on Pakistan and territory it controls in decades.

Islamabad has long welcomed mediation or international involvement to resolve the decades-old conflict over Kashmir, which lies at the heart of their broader dispute, but New Delhi has tried to avoid internationalisation of the conflict. Both India and Pakistan claim Kashmir, but each controls a part of it — with China also administering a chunk of northern Kashmir.

Here is what you need to know about the international efforts to calm tensions between the nuclear-armed nations.

What have countries said so far about the escalation?

While reactions from the international community continue to trickle in, there is an overwhelming consensus that both countries should exercise maximum restraint.

United States: Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke with the national security advisers of India and Pakistan on Wednesday, urging the two sides to “keep lines of communication open and avoid escalation”, the US State Department said. Rubio said he would continue to stay engaged with both sides, was monitoring the situation between the neighbours closely and hoping for a “peaceful resolution”.

United Kingdom: The UK too has offered to play a diplomatic role in the India-Pakistan conflict. “We stand ready to support both countries,” UK Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds told BBC Radio.

“Both have a huge interest in regional stability, in dialogue, in de-escalation and anything we can do to support that, we are here and willing to do.” The conflict dates back to the 1947 partition of the Indian subcontinent by British colonial rulers into India and Pakistan.

China: Beijing called India’s attack “regrettable” while urging both sides to exercise restraint. “They’re both China’s neighbours as well. China opposes all forms of terrorism,” the Chinese foreign ministry said in a statement.

France: Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot said that while India’s desire to “protect itself from the scourge of terrorism” was understandable, it called on both countries to avoid escalation and protect civilians.

United Nations: Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said the international community could not “afford a military confrontation” between the nuclear-armed nations.

Prior to India’s much-anticipated attack, a number of countries said they would be willing to get involved to help de-escalate the continuing crisis.

China: After Pakistan suggested that China could play a role in an international probe to investigate the Pahalgam attack, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun welcomed “fair and just investigations at an early date”. He urged “dialogue and consultation to … uphold regional peace and stability”.

Russia: Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told his Pakistani counterpart Ishaq Dar that Moscow was ready to “act for a political settlement of the situation”, in the case there was a mutual willingness “on the part of Islamabad and New Delhi”, his ministry said in a statement. Lavrov spoke to Dar on May 4, two days after speaking to Indian Foreign Minister S Jaishankar.

Malaysia: Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim in a post on X expressed support for Pakistan’s call for an “independent and transparent investigation” into the Pahalgam attack. “Malaysia remains open to playing a constructive role, should the need arise,” he added, suggesting a willingness to mediate if acceptable to New Delhi and Islamabad.

Iran: Tehran was willing to “use its good offices in Islamabad and New Delhi to forge greater understanding at this difficult time”, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said on X, four days after the Pahalgam attack.

India has stationed more than half a million forces in the part of Kashmir it administers, to quash decades-old armed rebellion. Ties between the neighbours have been practically frozen since India’s right-wing Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government stripped Kashmir of its special status in 2019.

The two countries have fought three out of four wars over the Himalayan region. They briefly stood on the brink of war in the wake of a deadly attack in 2019 on Indian soldiers in Indian-administered Kashmir.

India’s longstanding position on Kashmir is that the issue remains a bilateral one between New Delhi and Islamabad, and it has historically rejected any third party from mediating in the conflict. India cites the Simla Agreement, a 1972 pact between the nations that spoke of the bilateral resolution of disputes, to buttress its position.

Senior analyst at the International Crisis Group, Praveen Donthi, believes India’s “suspicion” of foreign involvement in the Kashmir conflict is derived from the view that international invention would amount to “levelling the field”.

“India considers its claims to be stronger,” Donthi told Al Jazeera. India, he added, sees itself as a regional power and would like to “use its heft to negotiate with Pakistan bilaterally”.

In 1948, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 mandating the holding of a plebiscite in the territory, giving residents a choice between joining India or Pakistan.

On the other hand, Pakistan has been open to third-party mediation from individual countries and global organisations like the UN. Pakistan has regularly brought up the Kashmir issue at different UN forums, calling on the organisation to help solve the conflict.

The UN human rights council and international rights organisations have accused India of rights violations in Indian-administered Kashmir.

Rabia Akhtar, director at the Centre for Security, Strategy and Policy Research at the University of Lahore, said Pakistan seeks third-party mediation over the Kashmir conflict because it sees it as “a matter of international concern given deep humanitarian, legal and political dimensions of the conflict”.

“With limited leverage in direct bilateral engagement since India continues to shun it, Islamabad sees international mediation as the only way to level the diplomatic playing field and keep the issue alive globally,” she told Al Jazeera.

While India has consistently opposed third-party mediation over the Kashmir conflict, external involvement has played a key role in helping pause previous wars and military standoffs between the two neighbours.

The second war between India and Pakistan in 1965 ended with the two nations signing the Tashkent Declaration in January 1966, after it was brokered by the Soviet Union.

The accord saw the Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri and Pakistani President Mohammad Ayub Khan agree to a mutual withdrawal to pre-war positions and the restoration of diplomatic and economic ties.

In 1999, during the Kargil War, Pakistani-backed rebels and soldiers crossed the Line of Control (LoC) – the de facto border dividing Kashmir between Indian-administered and Pakistan-administered parts – and took over positions on the Indian side. However, former US President Bill Clinton successfully pressured then Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to withdraw Pakistani forces, using the threat of international isolation.

The 10-week fighting over the snowy heights of Kargil led to the deaths of nearly 1,000 soldiers and fighters on both sides.

Akhtar said that historically, third-party mediation has played a critical role in de-escalating India-Pakistan tensions.

“Both countries lack bilateral crisis mechanisms and have outsourced escalation control to third parties,” she said. “Traditionally, these backchannels have been run by the US, China, United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia.”

While she noted that such efforts had failed to resolve the Kashmir issue, “they have helped both sides save face and step back from the brink”.

“In the current crisis, discreet backchannel facilitation, not formal mediation, may be the most viable option,” she added.

Donthi from the International Crisis Group said mediation will be difficult as “both sides show a greater appetite for risk, driven by domestic pressures”, adding that they are “already at a higher point on the escalatory ladder”.

BBC Sport extends Queen’s Club deal until 2027

Images courtesy of Getty

The Lawn Tennis Association will continue to broadcast the Queen’s Club Championships through a three-year rights extension from BBC Sport.

The agreement will continue to serve audiences until 2027 across all of the TV, radio, and digital services.

For the first time in over 50 years, women will play in the 2025 edition of Queen’s, and a WTA 500 competition will take place the week before the men take to the courts.

In the grass-court preparations for Wimbledon, the London tournament is a traditional event.

The director of BBC Sport, Alex Kay-Jelski, said, “The grass-court season is synonymous with British summer.”

“The women’s tournament at Queen’s kicks off a significant summer of women’s sporting events,” reports BBC Sport.

In the two weeks leading up to the Wimbledon Championships, the agreement also grants the rights to LTA events in Eastbourne and Nottingham.

Women and men competing in all of our events for the first time this year, according to Chris Pollard, LTA’s managing director of commercial and operations.

related subjects

  • Tennis