India, July 18 -- Moments of national crisis often unify a country, prompting collective grief, introspection, and institutional learning. In the aftermath of Operation Sindoor, India stood at such a juncture. While the courage and professionalism of our armed forces are beyond question and deserve the nation's deepest gratitude, the conduct of our political leadership has raised serious concerns about transparency, accountability, and responsibility in matters of national security. It is now confirmed that India lost fighter aircraft during Operation Sindoor. However, this critical information was not disclosed by the political leadership. There was no formal statement in Parliament either: Instead, the information emerged through veiled references and fragmented admissions. On May 6-7, Air Marshal AK Bharti, director general air operations, made the first indirect acknowledgment. "We are in a combat situation and losses are a part of combat," he said. On May 31, Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Anil Chauhan confirmed the loss of aircraft at the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, adding that it was not as important to ask how many jets fell, but why they did. That "why" matters deeply, especially given what reportedly went down. Several accounts suggest that India has lost an undisclosed number of Rafale fighter jets during Operation Sindoor. Now, with the crown-jewels of IAF reportedly downed in combat, the silence from the political leadership is a matter of concern. On June 29, Captain Shiv Kumar, India's defence attache to Indonesia, while speaking at a seminar, claimed that India lost "some" jets to Pakistan and that the Indian Air Force incurred losses during Operation Sindoor because of constraints imposed by the political leadership. The implication was that the political leadership imposed operational limits that compromised mission effectiveness and exposed our pilots to greater risk. The Indian Embassy in Jakarta issued a clarification, claiming the comments had been misrepresented. But, notably, the government has not denied the core of Captain Kumar's remarks. On July 4, Lt. General Rahul R Singh, DCOAS, said that 21 targets had been identified in Pakistan but at the last hour of the operation, it was decided that the defence forces will engage with nine targets. Whose decision was it to reduce the scope of potential targets in Pakistan? Was this constraint imposed by the political leadership? Could India have avoided loss of aircraft if the scope of targets had not been reduced? Unfortunately, we don't have answers to these questions because the government has refused to face Parliament on this matter. In retrospect, however, it becomes clear that the government would never have convened a special session of Parliament. It is not that there has been no precedence. The Congress government under Jawaharlal Nehru held a special session of Parliament on November 8, 1962 in the backdrop of the Sino-India war after a delegation headed by then Jana Sangh leader, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, demanded it. By contrast, the present government has avoided accountability. They know they've compromised national security, and they're worried what the Congress will expose before the people of India. In this context, the words of our defence personnel will echo long because they make visible what the nation deserves to know but the government so desperately wants to erase; they said what Delhi's political managers and TV generals could not: Indian pilots were sent into hostile airspace with their hands tied. This is troubling because civilian control over the military is a cornerstone of our democracy, built on trust that the political leadership will act with strategic foresight and responsibility. That trust is shattered when national security becomes part of a publicity campaign, and strategy is replaced by optics. From Pulwama to Balakot to Operation Sindoor and rallies in Bihar, this government has repeatedly used the military for electoral mileage. Martyrs' photographs have been displayed at rallies. Yet when Operation Sindoor leaves serious unanswered questions in its trail, those same soldiers are quietly erased from the narrative. This points to the central contradiction of the regime: it wants the glory, but not the grief; the applause, but never the accounting. India does not need more metaphors of war in campaign speeches. It needs truth in service. Leadership is not about how loudly one performs from a podium or in slogans. It is about wisdom, character, and empathy, in the quiet truths told to the nation, to the victims of war. The military has done its duty. Now it is time for the government to face the questions....