Newly declassified accounts of Operation Sindoor have revealed the story behind the name given to India's retaliatory military operation following the Pahalgam terror attack, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi personally suggesting the name "Operation Sindoor" instead of the Army's proposed "Operation Tulip Garden".
According to Army Chief General Upendra Dwivedi, the Army had initially proposed "Operation Tulip Garden" for the mission, referring to the Kashmir Valley where the April 22, 2026, Pahalgam attack took place.
When Modi asked what name had been chosen for the planned operation, Dwivedi gave him the Army's suggestion. Modi, however, proposed a different name - "Operation Sindoor".
Dwivedi initially thought the name might have been linked to the Indus Water Treaty, one of the measures India had acted upon after the Pahalgam attack. Modi clarified that the name was instead a reference to the women who had lost their husbands in the terrorist attack.
"Operation Sindoor isliye kyunki unhone humare mahila ke maan ka sindoor ujada hai toh hume uska badla lena hai," Modi explained, according to the declassified account.
The name was subsequently adopted across the Army, Navy and Air Force, marking the first time that all three services operated under a common name for the mission.
From Pahalgam attack to Operation Sindoor
The naming of the operation came amid an extensive military planning process that followed the Pahalgam attack.
The newly declassified accounts reveal that India's military leadership initially drew up a list of around 34 potential targets before narrowing it down to nine locations in Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoJK) and Pakistan.
The objective was not simply to maximise the number of strikes, but to identify targets that could deliver a strong and unmistakable message to terrorist organisations, their handlers and supporters while minimising the possibility of civilian casualties.
National Security Adviser Ajit Doval said Modi was clear that India's response should not result in collateral damage and that the country was not waging a war against Pakistan.
Air Chief Marshal A P Singh recalled that the Prime Minister had given clear instructions on the scope of the operation.
"The objectives were decided: terrorist camps, nothing more and nothing less," Singh said.
How 34 targets were narrowed to nine
According to the Director General of Military Operations, around 34 potential targets were initially identified. The crucial question, however, was how many of those targets would actually need to be struck to send a sufficiently strong message.
"The most important thing was how many would have been enough to send a stern message across," the DGMO recalled.
The target-selection exercise involved continuous intelligence gathering and assessment. The DGMO said intelligence on the potential targets was being studied and updated around the clock.
Military planners considered several factors, including how easily a target could be hit, the available line of sight, the number and nature of people present, whether important terrorist functionaries were located there, the probability of mission success, the potential deterrence effect and the risk of collateral damage.
Each location was therefore assessed for both its strategic significance and the feasibility of carrying out a precise strike.
Following the detailed assessment, the list was reduced from 34 potential targets to nine — five in PoJK and four in Pakistan.
According to National Security Analyst Nitin Gokhale, Modi was briefed about the risks involved in the proposed strikes and apparently asked for around 10–12 hours before taking the final decision.
The plan to strike the nine locations was formally approved by the Prime Minister on April 30.
The nine targets
The final list comprised:
Syedna Bilal Camp
Sawai Nala Camp
Kotli
Gulpur Camp
Bhimber
Mehmoona Joya Camp
Sarjal Camp
Bahawalpur
Muridke
General Dwivedi said every building at the selected locations was examined in detail so that the armed forces could determine the most appropriate weapons and methods for the strikes.
According to the DGMO, the Indian Army targeted seven of the nine locations, while the Indian Air Force struck the remaining two — Bahawalpur and Muridke.
Air Marshal Narmdeshwar Tiwari, former Vice Chief of the Air Staff, said Bahawalpur and Muridke held particular symbolic and organisational significance because of their links to Pakistan-based terror groups.
Muridke was identified as the headquarters of Lashkar-e-Taiba, while Bahawalpur was described as the headquarters of Jaish-e-Mohammed. Both locations were situated within urban areas, making precision a key challenge for the forces planning the strikes.
Precision at the centre of the operation
The declassified accounts suggest that Operation Sindoor was conceived as a calibrated military response rather than a broader conflict with Pakistan.
The planners had to balance the importance of each target with the presence of terrorist operatives, the probability of a successful strike, its deterrence value and the possibility of civilian casualties.
The emphasis on precision was also in line with Modi's direction that India was targeting terrorist infrastructure rather than waging war against Pakistan.
Against this backdrop, the choice of "Operation Sindoor" carried a significance beyond being a military code name. According to the declassified account, Modi chose it as a reference to the women whose husbands were killed in Pahalgam, linking the name of the operation directly to the human cost of the terrorist attack.
The decision to use the same name across all three armed forces also gave the retaliatory mission a unified identity as India moved from intelligence gathering and target selection to military action.
