In the early years of Indian tennis, there was a figure known as the non-playing captain. He wore the team blazer, sat courtside, and made decisions from the sidelines—who played singles, who partnered in the doubles. But he never stepped onto the court himself. He didn’t face the pressure of match point, nor carry the weight of every shot in a high-stakes rally. It sometimes led to confusion, as the captain’s perception of the game diverged from the reality experienced by the players actually on court.

That old metaphor has returned to us in a far more serious setting. Once again, we find ourselves surrounded by armchair commentary, this time not in sport but in the sensitive arena of national security. In the wake of another provocation from across the border, with the familiar pattern of state-sponsored terrorism playing out from Pakistani soil, tensions are understandably high.

India has lived with this challenge for decades—an exhausting cycle of attacks, denials, diplomatic theatrics, and the quiet burden of strategic restraint. It takes maturity to respond without provocation and courage to act without spectacle.

But this is precisely why we, as citizens, must understand our role. And more importantly, understand its limits.

Ours is a democratic republic—vigorous, noisy, often disagreeing—but built on institutions that are more resilient than we give them credit for. Political authority rests with our elected representatives. Strategic decision-making lies with those entrusted by law and experience to carry it out. The military, intelligence, and security establishments operate within frameworks that are agile, layered, and responsive to the complex pressures of geopolitics, defence, and domestic impact. These are not off-the-cuff responses but deliberated moves shaped by information and judgement few of us outside the system have access to. However........

© Free Press Journal