The Indian Ministry of Defence described the operation as precise and focused on terrorist infrastructure linked to groups like Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT)
In retaliation for the Pahalgam terror attack, India launched Operation Sindoor, targeting militant camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK). In response, Pakistan invoked Article 51 of the UN Charter and warned of potential military retaliation.
The Indian Ministry of Defence described the operation as precise and focused on terrorist infrastructure linked to groups like Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), both of which are responsible for cross-border attacks. The Indian government clarified that no Pakistani military assets were struck and emphasized that the operation was a legitimate exercise of India라이브 바카라 right to self-defence.
However, Ishaq Dar, Pakistan라이브 바카라 Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, condemned the strikes, stating that they violated Pakistan's sovereignty and did not meet the threshold for legitimate self-defence under Article 51. This article permits military action only if a country is subject to an armed attack.
Article 51 of the UN Charter
Article 51 allows nations to defend themselves when under attack, but any defensive action must be reported to the UN Security Council. While traditionally applied to conflicts between states, its application to counterterrorism actions against non-state actors is debated.
India defends the operation as an essential counterterrorism measure, while Pakistan argues that it doesn’t qualify as an armed attack. This disagreement has sparked ongoing discussions about the scope of self-defence in international law, particularly in the context of cross-border terrorism