The recent remarks by India’s Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Anil Chauhan at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore have sparked significant controversy and concern among security analysts, particularly regarding his use of the term “tactical mistake” in relation to the India-Pakistan military clash between May 7 and 10, 2025.
Security Affairs Analyst Divya Kumar Soti has highlighted the risks associated with ambiguous or unelaborated statements in high-stakes military communication, warning that such language can inadvertently provide adversaries with a narrative advantage.
Soti argues that the phrase “tactical mistake” should not have been used unless it was accompanied by a detailed explanation. The lack of clarity, coupled with the admission that it took two days to identify and rectify the mistake, has exposed sensitive operational vulnerabilities that could be exploited by both Pakistan and China.
According to Soti, this ambiguity has created an “open field” for adversaries to craft and propagate damaging interpretations, particularly in the realm of international public opinion. China, which has been on the defensive regarding the effectiveness of its military exports, may use this opportunity to restore the prestige of its armaments, such as the PL-15 missile reportedly used by Pakistan.
Meanwhile, Pakistan’s military establishment could leverage the situation to claim a narrative victory, overshadowing any revelations about their own operational shortcomings.
Soti further notes that specific comments by Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif—such as his statement that “before we could do anything, Brahmos hit us before Fajr”—might now be overshadowed by the focus on India’s admitted mistakes.
This could allow the Pakistani military leadership to regain the upper hand in the information war, a development Soti describes as a “textbook narrative victory” for GHQ Rawalpindi. He urges immediate damage control, emphasising that a clear and precise explanation of the “tactical mistake” is now essential to mitigate the fallout and prevent further misinterpretations at the international level.
In his interviews, General Chauhan addressed the clash by focusing on the lessons learned rather than the number of aircraft lost, stating that what matters is understanding why mistakes occurred and how they were corrected.
He acknowledged that Indian jets were out of action for two days after suffering losses, but stressed that the IAF quickly identified and rectified the tactical error, allowing operations to resume with improved effectiveness. Chauhan also categorically denied Pakistan’s claim of shooting down six Indian jets, calling it “absolutely incorrect”.
However, the admission of losses and the use of the term “tactical mistake” without further elaboration have raised concerns about public diplomacy and strategic communication. Critics argue that such admissions, especially when made on foreign soil and in the presence of Pakistani officials, can inadvertently “hyphenate” India with Pakistan and undermine India’s strategic messaging.
The incident has also led to criticism from within India, with some questioning the timing and venue of the remarks, and others calling for greater transparency and maturity in acknowledging and learning from military setbacks.
The episode underscores the importance of precise and well-considered communication in military and diplomatic contexts, particularly during and after high-stakes operations. The ambiguity surrounding the “tactical mistake” has not only provided adversaries with a narrative advantage but also highlighted the need for a robust and transparent approach to information management in modern warfare.
Based On Business Today Report