The reported drone strikes on October 20, 2025, at Khammoi village in Eastern Konyak Region, allegedly carried out by Indian armed forces, mark a controversial chapter in the evolving dynamics of counter-insurgency in the northeast.
Several media outlets have reported that the drone strikes targeted key insurgent positions, resulting in the deaths of at least five militants, including a senior NSCN-K(YA) leader. While neither the Indian government nor the Myanmar military has issued an official statement, multiple reports have attributed the operation to Indian forces acting across the border. The strike is believed to have been a retaliatory response to a recent series of attacks on Indian security installations in the northeastern region.
In contrast, Naga civil society organizations have reported that two civilians, an eight-year-old girl and a young student leader, lost their lives in the operation. Private properties, including the village church, were also reportedly damaged, prompting strong criticism from Naga civil society groups.
These events expose the persistent tension between strategic objectives and humanitarian cost. While Indian forces have every right to safeguard national security, the loss of civilian lives underscores the challenges of precision in modern warfare. The alleged deployment of drones, including kamikaze drones and Heron unmanned aerial vehicles, represents a major shift in India’s counter-insurgency strategy, moving operations beyond conventional borders into high-risk, cross-border environments.
The Khammoi incident raises multiple questions. Was there adequate intelligence to avoid collateral damage? Could diplomatic engagement with Myanmar have mitigated the risk to civilians? The possibility of the Myanmar military’s tacit awareness complicates the geopolitical dimension.
Drone technology is redefining modern warfare. Its accessibility and adaptability make it a force multiplier. Rebel groups in Myanmar are known to have exploited low-cost drones to significant effect. The recent strike, although aimed at “insurgents,” highlights the broader risks of using such technology in areas populated by civilians. It needs to be remembered that drone warfare could very well be waged by any well-organized armed group anywhere.
Also, as India modernizes its defense strategies, it must not lose sight of the human cost of operations. Civilian protection, transparent communication, and adherence to international norms should remain paramount. Security imperatives must be pursued with precision and restraint. Otherwise, strategic gains may be overshadowed by moral and humanitarian setbacks.
