External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar on Wednesday took a pointed dig at what he described as the “hypocrisy” of some Western countries in their reactions to India’s Operation Sindoor, highlighting the contradictions and selective concern displayed by nations geographically distant from conflict zones. The remarks came during an interaction with the Indian community in Luxemburg, as the minister continues his six-day diplomatic tour of France and Luxembourg.

Operation Sindoor, which was conducted by India in May 2025, involved targeted strikes against terror launchpads and key military establishments in Pakistan in response to the Pahalgam terror attack earlier that year. The operation drew widespread attention not only regionally but also internationally, with several countries offering unsolicited commentary and advice on India’s military decisions. Addressing the Indian diaspora, Jaishankar sought to contextualize these responses, underscoring what he saw as a lack of nuanced understanding and selective concern.

“Countries that are miles away often express worry about tensions in our region, yet rarely introspect about the risks in their own neighborhoods,” Jaishankar said, according to news agency ANI. He stressed that nations must differentiate between partners who act in good faith and those who adopt strategies similar to hostile actors like Pakistan. “So those who are willing to work with us and be helpful, positive, we have to deal with them in that way. Those who do the kind of things which Pakistan does, we have to deal with it in a different way,” he added.

The minister’s comments carried a subtle critique of Western posturing, implying that much of the advice or caution extended by distant countries during India’s counterterror measures lacked thoughtful engagement with the realities on the ground. Jaishankar observed that external commentary often arrives without consideration for local context, strategic imperatives, or the sacrifices involved. “People sitting far away will say things, sometimes with application of mind, sometimes not, sometimes with self-interest, sometimes carelessly,” he remarked.

In emphasizing this point, Jaishankar highlighted the inherent self-interest that shapes global diplomacy, noting that nations generally act in ways that directly benefit them rather than out of altruistic concern for global peace. He said, “In this day and age, countries will do things only if it is of direct benefit to them. They’ll offer you free advice. If something happens, they say, ‘No, please don’t do that. It worries us if there is tension.’” His remarks suggested that India’s foreign policy must balance external sensitivities with domestic imperatives and security priorities, underscoring the importance of strategic autonomy in decision-making.

Jaishankar recounted the specific example of Operation Sindoor to illustrate the point. During the operation, several countries communicated concerns to India about the possible escalation of tensions and urged caution in handling the strikes. While India acknowledged these viewpoints as part of the global diplomatic environment, the minister noted that the country proceeded with its decisions based on its own strategic assessment. “Sometimes you hear people say, like it happened during Operation Sindoor. Now if you ask them, ‘Oh really, you’re worried, why don’t you look at your own region?’ And ask yourself, what are the levels of violence there, how many risks have been taken, how much worry the rest of us have about what you are doing,” Jaishankar said, reflecting on the selective nature of global concern.

The broader message he conveyed was one of realpolitik and pragmatism: nations must navigate international opinion without compromising their own security or strategic interests. He noted that while external feedback is inevitable in an interconnected world, it often comes with inherent biases or limited understanding of the complexities involved. India’s response to such commentary, according to Jaishankar, has been to acknowledge the perspective but act independently, ensuring that the nation’s security and sovereignty remain paramount.

Apart from discussing global reactions to military operations, Jaishankar also highlighted the role of strategic communication in shaping international perceptions. By contextualizing India’s actions in terms of defense imperatives and counterterrorism responsibilities, he argued that the country can manage diplomatic fallout without compromising operational effectiveness. He emphasized that this requires both patience and clarity in interacting with foreign governments, as well as firm adherence to national interests.

In addition to his remarks on international diplomacy, Jaishankar held a series of bilateral meetings aimed at strengthening India-Luxembourg ties. According to ANI, he met with Luxembourg Prime Minister Luc Frieden to discuss growing cooperation in areas including finance, investment, and technology. Furthermore, the minister conducted delegation-level talks with Xavier Bettel, the Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Luxembourg, to explore avenues for enhanced collaboration in trade, infrastructure, and digital innovation. These discussions underscored India’s broader diplomatic objectives of expanding economic partnerships while asserting its voice on matters of security and global governance.

Jaishankar’s remarks in Luxembourg also carried symbolic significance for the Indian diaspora, who often view engagement with their homeland as a matter of national pride and security consciousness. By framing Operation Sindoor as a necessary response to terrorism and critiquing selective foreign commentary, he reinforced the narrative that India must act decisively in safeguarding its citizens while simultaneously navigating complex international dynamics.

Political analysts observing the minister’s statements noted that they reflect a continuing emphasis on India’s strategic autonomy, a theme central to the country’s foreign policy under the current government. The approach signals to both domestic and international audiences that India will evaluate threats and opportunities on its own terms, without being overly influenced by distant powers or advisory pressures that may not align with ground realities.

Operation Sindoor, in this context, emerges as both a tactical and symbolic event, representing India’s willingness to take firm, calibrated actions in response to cross-border terrorism. Jaishankar’s comments highlighted the dual challenge of conducting such operations while managing international perceptions, a balancing act that has become increasingly relevant in an era of rapid information dissemination and globalized scrutiny.

In conclusion, Jaishankar’s address in Luxembourg served multiple purposes. It was a critique of perceived Western double standards, a reaffirmation of India’s right to independent strategic action, and a communication to the diaspora that the nation remains vigilant and assertive in matters of security. His discussions with Luxembourg’s leadership further highlighted India’s commitment to deepening bilateral ties and economic cooperation while navigating a complex and often critical global environment. As India continues to assert its role on the international stage, Jaishankar’s observations underscore a foreign policy approach grounded in pragmatism, sovereignty, and careful engagement with the world, particularly when responding to threats that directly affect national security.