Why Pakistan should be applauded for denying surgical strikes by India

[link to m.firstpost.com]


A very good piece -

Now let's come to the question at the centre of it all. Why is Pakistan denying the operation and taking reactionary steps at the same time? The answer is multi-layered and incumbent on various factors. The first among these is a conundrum. If Pakistan were to admit that the strike indeed has taken place, it would be forced to concede two crucial points.
One, that well-laid out terror infrastructure exists in Pok, a position that it has flatly and consistently denied in the past. That would be a telling blow to its Kashmir narrative because the fulcrum of its complaint is that the "Kashmir rebellion is home-grown" and all Indian accusation of cross-border incitement is false. Pakistan Army cannot afford to confirm its own lies.
Two, any admission of Indian surgical strikes would be a humiliating kick in the face of its supposedly "invincible" army led by the larger-than-life macho General Raheel Sharif. That would be a bigger existential crisis, more critical than point No.1.
Consider the improbability of an admission. India says that it carried out a cross-LoC incursion and brought "significant damage" to Pakistan's terror factories. And all of this supposedly happened when Pakistan Army was at an advanced stage of battle-readiness with regular reports of "thundering F-16s landing on civilian airstrips".


Less than 50%