Chief of defence staff Anil Chauhan’s admission that India lost combat jets because of a “tactical mistake” during Operation Sindoor has led retired generals and the Congress to ask why the revelation was made on foreign soil and describe the development as “embarrassing”.

Several security experts on Sunday asserted that the disclosure being made in Singapore was “poor public diplomacy” and had handed Pakistan a propaganda victory.

The Congress said the disclosure should have come at an all-party meeting in India, accused the government of misleading the nation on the conflict, and demanded a review of the country’s defence preparedness by independent experts.

Chauhan, India’s top military general, also faced a backlash on social media, with some users asking whether his remarks had government sanction.

Until Chauhan’s statement on Saturday, India had neither confirmed nor denied losing aircraft during the May 7-10 military offensive.

“Poor public diplomacy. The Modi government needlessly dispatched India’s CDS to a forum in Singapore, where he handed a propaganda victory to Pakistan by acknowledging Indian warplane losses,” security expert Brahma Chellaney said in a post on X.

“Such admissions should have been made from Indian soil, accompanied by India’s own estimates of the damage inflicted on Pakistan in the brief war.”

That Pakistan’s chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, too, attended the Singapore event — the annual Shangri-La Dialogue, an inter-governmental security conference — had served to further hyphenate India with Pakistan, many said.

A former major general told The Telegraph that it was “embarrassing” for the CDS to choose a foreign country to admit losses, that too a full three weeks after the operation.

“The government and the armed forces should have made a detailed statement before the domestic media. I don’t understand who briefed him and whether he was briefed at all,” the retired general said.

The retired general added: “There is absolutely nothing wrong with acknowledging losses as it always happens in combat. The delay in admitting it had already led to enough speculation about our losses. The more pressing question is, why did the admission finally come in Singapore and not in India? What was the compulsion?”

A former lieutenant general, however, defended Chauhan saying he had only made a statement of fact.

“Of course, there was a setback but India won the psychological battle and that’s the measure of success,” he told this newspaper.

“Military men are not used to talking to the press; he spoke from the heart, unlike politicians.”

Asked why the CDS would have chosen to make the revelation on foreign soil, the retired lieutenant general blamed India’s government and media.

“The media in India has long forgotten to ask questions. So, he replied to the specific questions posed by the foreign media,” the veteran said.

“I think the Indian government should have admitted it initially, but it did not want to – it was busy telling its domestic audience, ‘We have not lost anything’.”

The government and the armed forces, he said, should now clear the air on the “tactical mistakes” that led to the losses.

Sources in the defence ministry on Sunday declined comment when asked whether Chauhan’s disclosure had government clearance and what he had meant by “tactical mistakes”. Ministry sources have not been willing to reveal how many jets India lost, either.

Chauhan had in interviews to Bloomberg TV and Reuters in Singapore said India had lost fighter jets on the opening day of Operation Sindoor but had swiftly rectified its tactical mistakes and launched further attacks to “hit deep inside Pakistan” on subsequent days.

He had dismissed Pakistan’s claim that it had shot down six Indian fighter jets as “absolutely incorrect”, but did not say how many planes India lost.

“What is important is not the jet being down, but why they were being down…. The good part is that we are able to understand the tactical mistake which we made, remedy it, rectify it, and then implement it again after two days and flew all our jets, again targeting at long range with assets,” Chauhan had said.

Defence expert Pravin Sawhney said in a post on X: “What Anil Chauhan is saying is that for two days (the) IAF fleet was grounded. This is enough reason for him to resign -- making light of a serious matter.

“When for two days out of four, the IAF (which will be the key determinant of war outcome) is not in the air, it needs some guts to say that India did well in Operation Sindoor.”

Mallikarjun Kharge, Congress president and leader of the Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, tried to corner the government on the admission of losses, its venue and timing, and its implications for the country’s defence preparedness.

“Congress party demands a comprehensive review of our defence preparedness by an independent expert committee, on the lines of the Kargil Review Committee,” Kharge said in a statement on X.

“These can only be asked if a special session of the parliament is immediately convened. The Modi Govt has misled the nation. The fog of war is now clearing. Our IAF pilots were risking their lives fighting the enemy. We have suffered some losses, but our pilots were safe.”

Kharge also demanded answers on US President Donald Trump’s repeated claims of having brokered a “ceasefire” between India and Pakistan. India has steadfastly denied any third-party mediation behind the understanding with Pakistan to “stop the firing and military action”.

“Instead of clarifying Mr. Trump’s repeated assertions... PM Modi is on an election blitz, taking personal credit for the valour of our armed forces, hiding behind their bravery and dodging the contours of the agreed ceasefire, which the foreign secretary announced on May 10 after Mr Trump’s tweet,” Kharge said.

“Is India and Pakistan now again hyphenated? What are the conditions of the ceasefire agreement?”

Congress leader Jairam Ramesh said defence minister Rajnath Singh should have informed the all-party meeting held after Operation Sindoor about the jet losses before a military official revealed them abroad.

“Why did we have to wait for statements from Singapore? We are supposed to be the mother of democracy,” he said.

“The issues that Gen Chauhan raised are critical and they impinge not just on military strategy but also on foreign policy, economic policy, and diplomatic strategy.”