Source: Karnad, Bharat. “Rafale failed in Sindoor! Rethink this French option for MFA.” Bharat Karnad’s Blog, May 10, 2025.
Bharat Karnad is Distinguished Fellow at the United Service Institution of India and Emeritus Professor for National Security Studies, Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi. He was Member of the (First) National Security Advisory Board, Member of the Nuclear Doctrine-drafting Group, National Security Council, Government of India, and, formerly, Advisor on Defence Expenditure to the Finance Commission, India.
New Delhi, India – In a scathing critique that challenges the narrative of India’s recent military engagement with Pakistan, prominent strategic affairs analyst Bharat Karnad has declared the Dassault Rafale fighter jet a “showboat” that “came a cropper” during “Operation Sindoor.” In a blog post dated May 10, 2025, Karnad dissects the brief four-day conflict, arguing that the Rafale’s alleged underperformance necessitates a fundamental rethink of India’s military procurement strategy, strongly advocating for the indigenous Tejas aircraft.
Karnad, known for his incisive and often contrarian views on Indian defense policy, lambasts the outcome of Op Sindoor as an “unsatisfactory, inconclusive end,” which he wryly dismisses as “padenga, padenga, phoos” in Deccani Hindustani. Despite Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s pre-conflict rhetoric of “unimaginable” consequences for Pakistan, Karnad contends that the limited exchanges of drone and missile strikes for three days fell far short of any meaningful escalation. While acknowledging the breakthrough of striking Muridke and Bahawalpur as a “precedent,” he deems it “not good enough.”
The Rafale’s Alleged ‘Sitting Duck’ Status:
The core of Karnad’s argument revolves around the perceived failure of India’s expensive French-built Rafales. Citing news stories from CNN, Reuters, and The Telegraph of London – which featured Pakistani claims and US sources supporting the downing of as many as five IAF aircraft (including two Rafales, one Su-30, and two Mirage 2000s) – Karnad presents a chilling account from a former military person:
- “Saab Erieye AWACS patrolling silently,”
- “J-10C fighters flying in passive mode,”
- “PL-15E missiles—the export PL-15E, the domestic variant with over 300 km reach and Mach 5 speed—locked in and fired.”
The stark conclusion, as quoted by Karnad: “The Rafale didn’t even know it was targeted until the missile was 50 km away. At that speed, the Indian pilot had 9 seconds. Not enough to react. Not enough to survive.”
This alleged technological gap, Karnad claims, led to a “sparse” IAF presence over J&K for two of the three days because “every time a fighter lifts off, Pakistani radars pick it up,” and “the Erieye sees what Indian radars can’t.” He dramatically asserts that “the Rafale, once India’s silver bullet, has been turned into a $250 million sitting duck. The IAF now flies 300 km behind its own borders.”
Investment Misjudgment: ‘Kill Chain’ vs. ‘Prohibitively Priced Platforms’:
Karnad argues that while the “spendthrift IAF invested in prohibitively priced weapons platforms, like the Rafale,” the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) intelligently invested in the “kill chain.” This “kill chain” included a few J-10Cs, Saab AWACS, and primarily long-range air-to-air (A2A) ordnance, allowing PAF combat aircraft to “stay well back in their own air space, firing longrange A2A and air-to-ground (A2G) weapons with exceptional support.”
He points out the irony, recalling how former Air Chief Marshal BS Dhanoa had previously lauded the Rafale. Karnad dismisses the notion of the Rafale being merely a “standoff weapons platform,” questioning why the indigenous Tejas couldn’t perform the same role at a “fraction of the cost.”
A Call for a Nationalistic Shift to Tejas:
For Karnad, the Rafale’s alleged performance in Op Sindoor has definitively proved it to be an “overhyped combat aircraft.” He strongly urges the Indian Ministry of Defence (MoD) and the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) to reconsider the ongoing deal for nearly 100 more Rafales, which would cost “additional thousands of billions of US dollars in hard currency.”
His plea to the IAF is unequivocal: to “do the nationalistic thing, save the country a treasure trove of hard currency, and save its flagging reputation, and finally throw off its yoke of imported aircraft and opt for the Tejas instead???” He underscores that “no other major air force opted for this aircraft,” reinforcing his long-standing skepticism about the Rafale.
Beyond the Air War: A Broader Critique of Indian Strategy:
Karnad extends his criticism beyond the air force, questioning the overall strategic thinking of the Indian government and military. He highlights the immediate artillery response from Pakistani army units on the LoC post-ceasefire, suggesting that the Indian threat of striking the Punjab heartland failed to deter. He sarcastically remarks on the expectation that the Pakistan Army would “foreswear terrorism as a tool of asymmetric warfare” when India itself failed to capture territory it was supposedly “militarily in good condition to capture.”
Ultimately, Karnad laments that the Indian government and military seem “caught up in the cycle of petty military actions and outcomes,” apparently forgetting the exhortation to “Think Big, Act Big!” The article concludes with a prediction that “more will be revealed about the Rafale in the Sindoor ops in the days to come,” urging the IAF to begin “distancing itself from this aircraft.”
Disclaimer: The content provided on Vogue Tribune is for informational and educational purposes only. While we strive for accuracy, the dynamic nature of news means that information may evolve over time. We rely on credible sources, but we do not guarantee the completeness, reliability, or absolute accuracy of the content. The views expressed in articles, op-eds, or guest contributions belong to the respective authors and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Vogue Tribune. Readers are encouraged to verify critical information through additional sources before making decisions based on our reporting. Vogue Tribune is not liable for any errors, omissions, or outcomes resulting from the use of this information. For corrections, clarifications, or feedback, please contact: admin@voguetribune.com
