Pakistan Spent ₹45 Crore on US Lobbying During Op Sindoor, Records Show

Documents filed in the United States have shed light on extensive lobbying efforts by both Pakistan and India during Operation Sindoor, the brief but intense military standoff in May 2025. The disclosures, submitted under America's Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), indicate that Islamabad focused on stopping Indian military action, while New Delhi concentrated on maintaining diplomatic channels and advancing trade-related discussions with the Trump administration.

The filings show that Pakistan committed close to ₹45 crore to hire six US lobbying firms in the aftermath of the Pahalgam terror attack in April 2025. The aim was to quickly reach influential decision-makers in Washington and push for a pause in India's military operation. Pakistani diplomats in the US ramped up engagement with senior officials, lawmakers, defence establishments and the State Department as the fighting unfolded.

According to the records, Pakistan's outreach was sustained and wide-ranging. From late April through the end of Operation Sindoor, officials relied on emails, phone calls and in-person meetings to argue for a ceasefire. One filing noted that Pakistan's leadership made dozens of appeals to US authorities, highlighting repeated attempts to draw Washington into pressing for a halt to the operation.

Among the firms listed was Sidley Law LLP, which disclosed that it assisted Pakistan during the period of heightened tensions. The firm said its role included supporting Pakistan's economic engagement with the US, alongside advisory work linked to the evolving India-Pakistan situation.

The FARA documents also detail lobbying efforts by the Indian Embassy in Washington. India engaged SHW Partners LLC under an agreement covering April to December 2025. The firm's mandate, according to the filings, was to facilitate dialogue between Indian officials and senior members of the US administration, with particular attention to trade negotiations and communication during the Operation Sindoor period.

On May 10, SHW Partners helped coordinate interactions with key US officials, including White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, Trade Representative Jamison Greer and National Security Council official Ricky Gill. These discussions touched on the proposed India-US trade agreement and the way Operation Sindoor was being portrayed in the media. The filings also refer to efforts to arrange meetings between an Indian parliamentary delegation and Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Officials in New Delhi responded to the disclosures by underlining that lobbying in the United States is a routine and lawful diplomatic practice. The Ministry of External Affairs said India's use of such firms has been documented for decades and complies fully with US law. Embassy sources stressed that many governments, companies and institutions rely on registered lobbyists in Washington to ensure access and communication with policymakers.

They also dismissed claims that the lobbying suggested any formal mediation role for the United States in Operation Sindoor. According to these officials, the filings simply reflect standard diplomatic engagement rather than external intervention in India's military decisions.

Operation Sindoor followed the Pahalgam terror attack and involved Indian strikes across the Line of Control on the night of May 6-7, 2025. Official accounts said the operation destroyed nine terrorist hideouts in a matter of minutes.

The release of the US filings has fuelled political debate in India. The Congress party has questioned the sequence of diplomatic developments on May 10, the day the US first publicly stated that the operation had been halted. Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh pointed to the timing of a statement by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, arguing that it warranted closer scrutiny.

Other opposition leaders have noted that senior trade officials in Washington were among those contacted that day, raising questions about whether economic considerations intersected with diplomatic discussions. The episode has since prompted wider debate on military decision-making, diplomacy and the role of information warfare in modern conflicts.