Control of land decided India’s wars, Kargil to Dhaka. Op Sindoor doesn’t change that

That conclusion rests on too narrow a conception of what territory means in war. Strategic thought has never equated the importance of territory with its permanent annexation. The more relevant concept is control: the ability to use territory to impose a favourable outcome. Also Read: From 1965 to Kargil and Sindoor, India’s wars show why land isn’t the only measure of victory Territory is the most consequential marker of military victory In several of India’s wars, control of ground was central to the military conditions through which the political outcome was secured. Let me take only two examples. The Kargil…