Islamabad/New Delhi:
After months of denial, Pakistan has officially acknowledged that India carried out a drone and missile strike on the Nur Khan airbase during Operation Sindoor earlier this year. The admission comes just days before the end of the year and marks a significant shift from Islamabad’s earlier stance, which had consistently rejected claims of damage to its military infrastructure.
Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar confirmed that multiple Indian drones targeted the strategic airbase, although he maintained that several of them were intercepted by Pakistan’s air defense systems. His statement is the first formal recognition by a senior Pakistani official that the Nur Khan facility was indeed hit.
Background: Operation Sindoor
The escalation followed the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22, which India described as a massacre. In response, India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7, 2025. The operation continued until May 10, resulting in a four-day military confrontation that analysts have described as one of the most serious India-Pakistan escalations in decades.
During the operation, India reportedly deployed large numbers of drones and missiles, targeting what it described as key military assets. Pakistani authorities, however, initially claimed that Indian strikes were limited to civilian areas and denied any damage to military bases.
Satellite Evidence and Social Media Footage
Despite official denials, satellite imagery and independently verified visuals suggested otherwise. Images circulating globally showed visible damage at several Pakistani airbases, including Nur Khan. At the same time, videos recorded by Pakistani residents and shared on social media appeared to show missiles landing near air force installations.
These clips weakened Pakistan’s narrative, as they were uploaded by civilians inside the country. Observers noted that without this publicly shared footage, authorities may have been able to sustain their denial more effectively.
DG ISPR Statement and Information Control
During the height of the conflict, Pakistan’s military spokesperson, the Director General of Inter-Services Public Relations (DG ISPR), made a late-night announcement acknowledging missile strikes on Nur Khan, Murid, and Shorkot airbases, while claiming that air force assets remained secure.
That video has since become difficult to find on Pakistani platforms, prompting allegations of deliberate removal. Media analysts argue this reflects a broader policy of information control, often referred to as “absolute denial,” which is practiced by several countries during military crises.
Conflicting Claims During the Crisis
At the peak of tensions, Pakistani officials also claimed that Indian missiles had landed in Afghanistan. However, no such incident was confirmed by Afghan authorities, and no independent evidence supported the claim. Analysts later attributed these statements to confusion and panic during the rapidly unfolding situation.
As the conflict ended, Pakistan gradually shifted focus toward highlighting alleged damage to Indian assets, while continuing to downplay or dismiss impacts on its own military facilities.
A Shift in Official Narrative
With Ishaq Dar’s recent statement, Pakistan appears to be adjusting its official account of events. While the government continues to emphasize interception success and minimal losses, the acknowledgment of strikes on Nur Khan airbase signals that complete denial is no longer sustainable.
Experts say Islamabad is now attempting to shape a revised historical narrative—one that partially accepts the attacks while limiting public discussion of the scale of damage.
Transparency Debate
The episode has also reignited debate over transparency in military matters. Unlike Pakistan’s delayed admission, India has historically released information on military incidents more openly, including previous confrontations along the Line of Actual Control and other operations.
As more information emerges, analysts believe the long-term impact of Operation Sindoor will continue to shape regional security discussions and influence how both countries manage public communication during future crises.