OPINION | Army as Protector: What the 2016 Surgical Strikes Meant for Border Communities

by Ashu Maan

The 2016 surgical strikes carried out by the Indian Army across the Line of Control (LoC) marked a decisive shift in India’s counter-terrorism posture. To military analysts, they were a demonstration of precision and professionalism; to policymakers, an assertion of escalation dominance. But for residents of villages along the LoC, it carried a more intimate meaning: reassurance that the Army was not only guarding territory but protecting lives.

Fear and Uncertainty Before 2016

For decades, life along the LoC has been lived in the shadow of cross-border shelling, infiltration attempts, and the ever-present fear of Pakistan-sponsored militancy. Civilians often bore the brunt of this undeclared conflict. Nights were punctuated by artillery fire, families fled to temporary shelters during escalations, and villagers lived with the anxiety that armed militants could slip across at any time to strike homes, schools, or security outposts.

Even the Uri attack in September 2016, which claimed the lives of 19 Indian soldiers, was felt most acutely by border communities who knew they could be the next target. For them, there was a growing sense of helplessness. The pressing question was simple: could the state protect them from Pakistan’s proxy war?

A Message Beyond Strategy

On 29 September 2016, when India’s Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) announced that the Army had conducted precise, coordinated strikes against terrorist launch pads across the LoC, it was more than a message to Islamabad. It was a signal to villagers on India’s frontline that the military would act preemptively to neutralise threats before they reached civilian doorsteps.

The strikes projected the Army as more than a defensive shield. They demonstrated a willingness to cross boundaries when necessary to protect soldiers and civilians alike. For residents who had endured decades of uncertainty, this was a morale boost and a reminder that their vulnerability had not been ignored.

Shaping Narratives in Kashmir

India carefully framed the strikes in both Kashmiri and national media as operations designed to protect civilians rather than escalate conflict. By emphasising that the targets were launch pads, staging grounds for militants preparing to infiltrate populated areas, the Army reinforced its image as a shield rather than a sword.

This framing was crucial in countering Pakistan’s propaganda that painted India as the aggressor. Instead, India positioned itself as the victim of terrorism, acting decisively to safeguard its people, including those in Jammu and Kashmir. The communication strategy was designed to reassure Kashmiris that these operations aimed to prevent another Uri-like tragedy, not to unleash more violence in their backyards.

Psychological Reassurance and Deterrence

The psychological effect on border communities was profound. For the first time in decades, villagers witnessed an outward assertion of military resolve that went beyond retaliatory fire. This visible show of strength reassured civilians that the state had their back.

At the same time, the strikes altered the calculus for militants and their handlers across the border. Even though infiltration attempts continued, the uncertainty injected into Pakistan’s strategy had its own deterrent value. For villagers, that unpredictability was vital; it meant the Army could disrupt the cycle rather than merely absorb its consequences.

The Army’s Human-Centric Role

The strikes also reframed how residents perceived the Army’s role. Soldiers were not only guarding boundary lines; they were actively safeguarding villages, families, and livelihoods. In the months following the operation, Army units expanded outreach through medical camps, relief during shelling, and community engagement. Combined with the strikes, these efforts reinforced the Army’s image as protector, not only of the nation, but of the people living at its edge.

A Lasting Legacy

Nearly a decade later, the 2016 surgical strikes remain etched in collective memory as more than a strategic milestone. For border residents, they symbolised a shift in the Army’s posture: from passively holding the line to proactively preventing threats from reaching their homes.

The message that the Army shields civilians from Pakistan’s proxies still resonates. It validated the legitimacy of military action in the eyes of those living under constant threat and underscored the dual nature of India’s armed forces: projecting deterrence outward while offering protection inward.

For the people of the LoC, the Army’s protector role had never been clearer than in the aftermath of the surgical strikes.

---

About Author

Ashu Mann is an Associate Fellow at the Centre for Land Warfare Studies. He was awarded the Vice Chief of the Army Staff Commendation card on Army Day 2025. He is pursuing a PhD in Defence and Strategic Studies at Amity University, Noida. His research focuses include the India-China territorial dispute, great power rivalry, and Chinese foreign policy.