Rattan Singh Gill
The Centre’s decision to resume the daily Beating Retreat Ceremony at the Attari-Wagah border has ignited a firestorm of criticism across the country, with military veterans, former diplomats, and prominent public figures decrying the move as ill-timed, strategically incoherent, and deeply insensitive—coming just weeks after the Pahalgam terrorist attack that claimed 26 civilian lives.
At a time when national sentiment is steeped in grief and anger, and the government has vowed to isolate Pakistan diplomatically and militarily, resuming a daily symbolic coordination with the same state sends confusing signals—both to citizens and to the international community.
Patriotism Cannot Be a Spectacle When Security Resolves are at Stake
The government maintains that the altered format of the ceremony reflects heightened security and is meant to foster pride and border awareness. But to a growing section of Indian society, the decision seems not just ill-timed, but a betrayal of national sentiment—a moment when symbolism should have stepped aside for substance.
The Home Ministry claims the ceremony is a “poignant emblem of national security and patriotism”—but this is precisely the problem. Conflating security rituals with public spectacle blurs the line between serious national defence and artificial performative nationalism. After the Pahalgam attack, the core issue isn’t whether people feel patriotic—it’s whether the state is acting decisively against terrorism. Restarting a military drill for civilian consumption risks trivializing the real sacrifices of innocents and defenceless civilians and Indian soldiers in the line of duty.
The resumption of the ceremony, seen by many as a relic of Cold War-era showmanship, is being slammed as an act of misplaced optics at a time when Operation Sindoor remains still active, and military and diplomatic hostilities with Pakistan are far from de-escalated.
Quoting how the war veterans, diplomats and journalists reacted to this hasty and untimely optics:
“I don’t understand this strange compulsion. Is there a commercial angle beyond potato wafers and cheap souvenirs? This is why nobody takes us seriously,”
— journalist Rahul Pandita, summing up the public mood.
Symbolism vs Strategy: A Contradiction in Policy
Critics argue that India’s diplomatic and military posture toward Pakistan in recent months has been one of deliberate hardening—suspending visa issuance, downgrading diplomatic ties, revoking water-sharing cooperation and even launching targeted strikes across the Line of Control.
Against that backdrop, resuming a coordinated military display with Pakistani Rangers at a highly symbolic venue appears deeply contradictory.
“We have bombed Pakistani terror hubs and taken real punitive steps, but continue mock battles and mock defiance at the border. What for?”
— Kanwal Sibal, former Foreign Secretary of India.
The ceremony, which was suspended following the April 22 Pahalgam attack, has now been reinstated with modified protocols: no handshakes, no sweet exchanges, and border gates will remain shut. However, spectator attendance has been allowed, raising questions about whether the ceremony’s primary function now is tourism, not national honor.
Military Veterans: ‘Not the Time for Peacetime Spectacles’
Voices from the armed forces have joined the chorus of dissent, arguing that the ceremony’s symbolism is inappropriate when Indian soldiers are still engaged in active operations and high alert continues along the border.
“Since Operation Sindoor is still ongoing, there is no place for this. These are peacetime ceremonies—not for the middle of conflict,”
— Lt. Gen. KJS Dhillon (Retd), on X (formerly Twitter).
“Timing, optics, and messaging—not a good decision. With forces still deployed, this is not normalcy,”
— Air Marshal Sanjeev Kapoor (Retd).
Scrap the Ceremony Altogether
Some public intellectuals have gone beyond criticism of the timing, questioning the very relevance of the ceremony itself in today’s security climate.
“PM Narendra Modi Sir, please have this abolished. Why are we giving a terrorist nation so much bhav?”
— Mohandas Pai, former Infosys CFO.
Critics argue that the ceremonial show of bravado, dating back to 1959, may once have served as a morale-booster and border theatre—but today, it undercuts India’s claim of treating Pakistan as a terror state. Continuing it in any form, they say, weakens both public messaging and strategic resolve.
