UK-Based Research Firm Says Pakistan Held Military and Diplomatic Edge in ‘Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos’ Report
Islamabad: A UK-based research and strategic communications organization, Pakistan Playbook, has released a report claiming that Pakistan maintained both military and diplomatic superiority during what it referred to as the “Battle of Truth” (Operation Bunyan-un-Marsoos).
According to the report, several Indian military aircraft, including Rafale fighter jets, were destroyed during the conflict. It further claimed that U.S. and French intelligence officials, India’s Chief of Defence Staff, and Indian defence attachés had acknowledged the losses suffered by India.
The report states that Pakistan’s defensive strategy prevented Indian strikes from achieving their objectives, while the country’s integrated air defence system effectively countered hostile drones. It also claims that satellite imagery showed no Pakistani fighter aircraft were damaged during the conflict.
According to the findings, Pakistan strengthened its diplomatic engagement with the United States and several other countries following the operation. The report describes the role of Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir as significant in enhancing Pakistan’s international diplomatic outreach.
The report further claims that despite having comparatively limited resources, Pakistan achieved a clear military advantage, while India incurred substantial financial losses during the conflict.
It also asserts that Pakistan’s relations with the European Union and other international organizations improved after the operation, enhancing the country’s diplomatic standing and drawing international recognition for its role in promoting regional peace.
The report concludes that success in modern warfare depends not only on defence spending but also on effective leadership, professional military capability, and sound strategic planning.
The report’s findings and claims represent the assessment of Pakistan Playbook and have not been independently verified. India has publicly presented its own account of the conflict, which differs from several of the report’s conclusions.
