By crippling key Pakistani airbases and assets, Operation Sindoor made cross-border terror an economically costly gamble for Islamabad
Image Source: Getty Images
Military engagements, even sharp and swift ones, have economic ramifications. Operation Sindoor entailed high economic costs for both nations. Precision strikes involving missiles, drones, and high‑value weapons incurred expenses ranging from system replacements to repairing damaged airbases and aircraft. While the operation was not costless for India, Pakistan suffered serious losses with massive infrastructure damage, radar and aircraft losses. The operation achieved both its objectives: destroying terror infrastructure in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir and Pakistan signalling India’s resolve against cross‑border terrorism. This article focuses on estimating these costs- precision missile strikes, aircraft losses, military infrastructure damage, and artillery exchanges, offering a new perspective into the economics that underpinned this operation.
Operation Sindoor transformed cross-border terrorism from a political tool into an economically unsustainable gamble for Pakistan.
Among the most striking features of Operation Sindoor was both nations deploying their arsenal of precision-guided missiles. The Indian Air Force employed a wide range of missiles during the operation for strikes across the Line of Control (LoC) and in territories deep within Pakistan. These included the SCALP, BrahMos cruise missiles, Crystal Maze ballistic missiles, Akash, and the S-400 interceptor missiles. The SCALP and the Crystal Maze missiles were used on the first day of the operation, targeting the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) headquarters. According to reports, Markaz-e-Taiba in Muridke was hit by approximately 4-5 crystal maze missiles, and Markaz-e-Subhan Allah in Bahawalpur was hit by 6 SCALP missiles. SCALP missiles, estimated at US$1 million each, with an implicit cost of approximately US$6 million. While the cost of Crystal Maze missiles is undisclosed, a US$60 million India–Israel deal for 30 units places the per-unit cost at roughly US$2 million, indicating an expenditure of about US$10 million for five missiles. Between 8 and 10 May, India targeted 11 Pakistani airbases, including key air stations at Nur Khan, Jacobabad, and Sargodha. In these attacks, India employed a combination of SCALP and BrahMos missiles. Estimates suggest that about 19 BrahMos missiles were fired at the airbases, with a speculation that an equal number of SCALP missiles were also deployed. The average cost of a BrahMos missile is about US$4.75 million; therefore, its usage during the operation cost India about US$90.25 million. India also deployed Akash and S-400 air defence systems to counter Pakistani aerial threats. The S-400 was used 11 times to intercept missiles and shoot down aircraft, while Akash successfully intercepted a Fatah-2 missile. Each Akash Short-Range Surface-to-Air Missile (SRSAM) costs about US$500,000.
India also employed Israeli-origin Spike anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs) to destroy Pakistani positions across the LoC. Estimates indicate that during their 2019 deployment at forward posts, five ATGMs were fired, each costing approximately US$200,000, resulting in a total expenditure of US$1 million.
While India absorbed the financial shock of precision warfare, Pakistan absorbed the strategic shock of losing irreplaceable airpower and surveillance assets.
Pakistan deployed their own set of missiles during the conflict, with the key one being the Fatah-2 long-range ballistic missile that was fired towards Delhi but shot down over Sirsa in Haryana. The average cost Pakistan incurred for this was about US$100,000. Furthermore, Pakistan also fired 2 PL-15E (Chinese missiles) long-range BVR missiles, which were intercepted in Punjab by India’s air defence systems. The average cost of these missiles is approximately US$1 million, totalling around US$2 million for Pakistan. Pakistan also reportedly fired 2 CM-400AKG supersonic missiles at Indian airbases. The cost of one missile is about US$1.67 million; therefore, the total cost of the two missiles that Pakistan bore would be about US$3.35 million.
While India spent a lot more than Pakistan on the missiles used, the difference is that while Indian missiles got the bang for the buck, Pakistan did not succeed in getting any bang for the bucks they spent on their missiles.
Air engagements marked a crucial phase in the conflict. The Indian Air Force has the proof of destroying 2 JF-17 and 1 F-16 fighter jets on the ground and in the air. The estimated cost of 1 JF-17 Block-2 variant Pakistan’s air force predominantly uses is about US$25 million, therefore amounting to US$50 million in Pakistani losses. Moreover, the average cost of an F-16 is between US$40 million and US$70 million.
The repair and replacement costs of the aircraft for Pakistan are substantial. In addition to their fighter jet losses, Pakistan also lost one of its C-130J medium-lift aircraft, which cost about US$180 million. One Surface-to-Air (SAB)-2000 airborne early warning system was also destroyed by the S-400 systems targeting deep inside Pakistan, costing about US$70 million - US$80 million. If Pakistan replaces this aircraft, the estimated replacement cost would be approximately US$160.5 million. This figure is derived from a 2020 SAB-2000 deal with an undisclosed buyer.
Every destroyed radar, drone hangar, and fighter jet translated India’s deterrence from doctrine into demonstrable cost.
As admitted by India’s Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) and Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), India’s losses were limited but inevitable in a high-intensity conflict.
India’s airstrikes on Pakistan’s airbases caused severe damage. At the Nur Khan airbase in Rawalpindi, satellite imagery revealed the destruction of a large complex and significant damage to hangars. Critical assets, including two NG-MMCCs jointly built with Türkiye and equipped with Artificial Intelligence (AI)‑based decision-support tools, were destroyed; these high‑tech systems are considered extremely costly.
Damage at the Nur Khan Airbase, Source- NDTV
Hangars housing Turkish Bayraktar TB-2 drones were also hit, with Pakistan losing around 50 TB-2s, amounting to US$300 million in damages. An open-source intelligence report further confirmed that at least one IL-78 tanker was rendered inoperable, costing US$25–50 million, underscoring the large-scale destruction at one of Pakistan’s most secure bases.
The Murid airbase in Chakwal, Pakistan’s main combat drone hub, is a key forward operational base. Satellite imagery shows a 3 m-wide crater near the entrance of a guarded underground facility, likely used to store specialised equipment. The strike also damaged a hangar housing Chinese Wing Loong drones, destroying about 10 Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles (UCAVs) worth an estimated US$10 million.
Damage at the Murid Airbase, Source- Hindustan Times
The Bholari airbase in Karachi, hosting JF-17s, F-16s, and a SAB-2000 AEW&C system, was hit in a cruise missile strike that destroyed a Swedish-origin AEW&C aircraft. A retired Pakistani Air Marshal stated the hangar housing the aircraft was struck by four Brahmos missiles, with the loss valued at about US$300 million.
Damage at the Bholari Airbase in Karachi, Source- The Economic Times
The Jacobabad airbase saw a hardened hangar hit, with reports suggesting damage to three Jordanian F-16s. While their exact cost is unknown, a Romania–Portugal deal priced refurbished F-16s at US$253 million for 12 units, or US$18 million each. Assuming a similar cost, Pakistan’s loss for three aircraft totals about US$54 million.
Damage to the Jacobabad airbase, Source- Indian Express
Rahim Yar Khan, a key forward base for UAV and jet deployment, suffered the most severe runway damage. The damage grounded all PAF aircraft at the base, significantly reducing its operational capabilities.
Damage at Rahim Yar Khan Airbase, Source- Indian Express
Besides infrastructure damage, India also destroyed multiple air defence radar sites across Pakistan, including one at Pasrur airfield in Punjab, confirmed by satellite imagery. Three more sites were hit at Arifwala airbase, Chunian radar, and Sukkur airfield.
Damage at Arifwala Air base, Source- NDTV
Damage at Chunian Air base, Source- NDTV
Damage at Pasrur Air base, Source- NDTV
Damage at Sukkur Air base, Source- Indian Express
Damage at Sargodha Air base, Source- NDTV
At Chunian airbase in central Punjab, India destroyed a Chinese YLC-8E anti-stealth radar, valued at an estimated US$15–20 million. Other neutralised systems included a Chinese LY-80 fire radar (US$70 million) hit by a HARPY drone in Lahore, two US-made AN/TPQ-43 tracking radars worth US$25 million each, and one fire unit of China’s HQ-9 system valued at US$100–200 million. During Suppression of Enemy Air Defences (SEAD) operations, reportedly about 30 Harop drones - 20 percent of India’s 154-drone arsenal - were deployed, costing roughly US$300 million.
Heavy artillery exchanges along the Line of Control (LoC) followed India’s operation. Using a conservative average of 2,000 shells per day, India likely fired around 8,000 shells and Pakistan 6,000, a figure corroborated by Financial Express.
The true success of Operation Sindoor lies not only in the targets hit, but in the long-term financial strain it imposed on Pakistan’s war-fighting capability.
India deployed M-777 howitzers with precision-guided Excalibur rounds to destroy Pakistan’s tier-2 defences, alongside Bofors guns and Polish-made loitering munitions for precision strikes. A 155mm Bofors shell costs about US$1,100, while an Excalibur round costs roughly US$100,000, so shells fired were conventional “dumb” rounds, with expensive precision munitions reserved for high-value targets.
Operation Sindoor redefined India’s strategic posture on terrorism, inflicting a crippling economic blow on Pakistan’s military and terror infrastructure. In terms of total costs, India is estimated to have incurred about US$407.75 million during the four-day conflict ensuing after Operation Sindoor. On the other hand, Pakistan suffered a high economic cost of about US$1.5 billion. While both countries incurred substantial expenses, the economic burden on Pakistan is disproportionately greater than on India, given the relative size of their economies. India’s GDP is roughly 10 times that of Pakistan’s, making the economic costs of replacements and repairs substantially more manageable for India. By contrast, Pakistan faces severe strain in replenishing advanced aircraft such as F-16s and Saab AEW&C, further weakening its defence posture. It is important to note that the costs discussed here pertain solely to the kinetic military operations. Other significant economic impacts, such as airline disruptions, airspace closures, and associated commercial losses, have not been included in this analysis.
Samarveer Singh is an Intern at the Observer Research Foundation.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
PREV
