More than two months after officials in New Delhi dismissed widespread claims of a strike on Pakistan’s highly sensitive Kirana Hills, satellite imagery from Google Earth—now publicly analyzed by geo-intelligence expert Damien Symon—has confirmed what many suspected: India indeed launched a targeted missile strike deep within Pakistani territory, directly hitting the nuclear-linked facility in May 2025 during Operation Sindoor.
This revelation not only challenges India’s initial denials but also reshapes the security dynamics of South Asia. The satellite visuals, captured in June 2025, clearly display missile impact craters at Kirana Hills and repaired runways at the adjacent Sargodha airbase, indicating a coordinated and high-stakes operation that struck at the heart of Pakistan’s strategic deterrent infrastructure.
Kirana Hills, located in Pakistan’s Sargodha district, is not just a patch of rocky terrain—it is a historic site tied directly to Islamabad’s nuclear journey. Between 1983 and 1990, Pakistan is believed to have conducted a series of nuclear “cold tests” in this area. These tests, which simulated the detonation of nuclear warheads without the use of fissile material, played a crucial role in the development and validation of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons.
Though Pakistan’s actual nuclear tests in 1998 were conducted in Balochistan’s Chagai Hills, Kirana Hills retained strategic relevance. Intelligence reports and analyses over the years have consistently suggested that the site could still serve as a storage or emergency backup facility for Pakistan’s nuclear program.
On July 18, 2025, renowned open-source intelligence analyst Damien Symon posted a series of annotated satellite images on X (formerly Twitter), confirming a missile strike at Kirana Hills. The images were sourced from commercial satellites and processed using geolocation, multispectral analysis, and comparative study techniques.
“Imagery update from Google Earth of the Sargodha region, Pakistan, captured in June 2025, shows—1. The impact location of India’s strike on Kirana Hills in May 2025; 2. Repaired runways at Sargodha airbase post-India’s strikes,” Symon wrote in his viral post.
His analysis points to a precise missile impact zone within the Kirana Hills and visible damage to infrastructure at Sargodha Airbase, which has since undergone rapid repair—clear signs of a high-intensity precision strike.
India’s Operation Sindoor took place amid a sharp escalation in India-Pakistan tensions following a terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir in April 2025. Within a matter of weeks, Indian forces launched what was initially believed to be a limited retaliatory strike. However, the scale of Operation Sindoor now appears far broader.
According to regional military sources, at least 15 BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles were used in the operation. With a range of up to 500 kilometers, pinpoint accuracy, and the ability to evade radar systems, BrahMos missiles represent one of the most lethal conventional stand-off strike capabilities in the Indian arsenal.
The choice of targets suggests more than mere retaliation: India appears to have systematically targeted 11 out of Pakistan’s 13 operational airbases, including radar nodes, hardened aircraft shelters, and command-and-control facilities. The aim, analysts now argue, was to cripple Pakistan’s ability to respond or escalate—both conventionally and strategically.
The satellite-confirmed strike at Kirana Hills is especially significant because of its legacy association with nuclear R&D. But the simultaneous targeting of the Sargodha airbase, located just a few kilometers away, underscores the operation’s deeper strategic intent.
Sargodha is home to Pakistan’s Shaheen-series ballistic missiles, believed to be dual-capable platforms, and JF-17 Block III aircraft configured for strategic missions. Damaging this base sends a powerful message: India’s strike was not just a show of force but a deliberate move to degrade Pakistan’s second-strike capability—its ability to retaliate in the event of a nuclear attack.
In the days and weeks following the operation, both India and Pakistan denied any such strike had occurred at Kirana Hills. Pakistan’s Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) issued a firm rebuttal:
“Any suggestion of a missile strike on Kirana Hills is completely untrue and part of a malicious disinformation campaign.”
India’s Air Marshal A.K. Bharti, Director General of Air Operations, responded with a sarcastic deflection:
“Thank you for telling us that Kirana Hills houses some nuclear installation. We did not know about it. And we have not hit Kirana Hills, whatever is there.”
These denials, now discredited by public-domain satellite data, appear to have served diplomatic and strategic purposes. According to South Asia expert Dr. Meera Thapar, this ambiguity reflects a policy of “covert assertiveness”:
“India seeks to maintain escalation control while delivering targeted, high-impact strikes. Ambiguity shields them from global diplomatic blowback while allowing them to set new red lines.”
Pakistan’s continued silence in the face of confirmed damage raises serious questions. By not publicly acknowledging the strike on a nuclear-linked facility, Islamabad avoids both domestic panic and international concern about the safety of its nuclear arsenal.
However, the silence may also be strategic. Acknowledging a successful enemy strike on its nuclear infrastructure would severely undermine the Pakistani military’s credibility and deterrent posture. Moreover, any retaliation risks triggering full-scale escalation, a scenario both nations—nuclear-armed and historically adversarial—have long sought to avoid.
Dr. Ayesha Ali, a former Pakistani diplomat, noted:
“Admitting that a nuclear-related site was struck invites questions from the IAEA and foreign powers. The stakes are too high. Islamabad’s silence is as much about face-saving as it is about preserving strategic stability.”
Operation Sindoor has also highlighted a significant transformation in how modern conflict is documented, verified, and perceived. Commercial satellite imagery—once the domain of governments—is now accessible to analysts and journalists, creating a new era of open-source accountability.
Where once denials could shield military operations from scrutiny, today’s wars are tracked pixel by pixel in near-real-time. The emergence of analysts like Damien Symon, who use geospatial technology and open platforms to verify events, marks a seismic shift in information warfare.
As Dr. Anil Padgaonkar, a retired Indian intelligence official, put it:
“In the 1990s, such a strike would have gone unnoticed or unprovable. Today, it’s impossible to hide.”
By striking a facility associated—however historically—with Pakistan’s nuclear program, India has breached a longstanding unspoken understanding between the two powers. Until now, even during major confrontations like the Kargil War (1999) or Balakot strikes (2019), nuclear-linked sites were considered off-limits, largely due to fears of escalation.
Operation Sindoor shatters that taboo.
India has signaled that even high-value nuclear-linked targets are fair game if they are seen as threats. This represents a doctrinal shift from deterrence by punishment to deterrence by denial—preemptively neutralizing an adversary’s key capabilities before they can be used.
It also raises uncomfortable questions for the international community: What happens when nuclear sites become acceptable targets in conventional warfare? Does this lower the threshold for nuclear escalation or simply redefine the terms of strategic engagement?
For India, Operation Sindoor represents technological maturation, operational confidence, and strategic clarity. With systems like BrahMos, Nirbhay, and indigenous drones, New Delhi now possesses the tools for precise, long-range strikes that bypass traditional warfighting templates.
For Pakistan, the strike is a wake-up call—a demonstration that sanctuaries no longer exist in modern warfare. If even Kirana Hills is vulnerable, the entire architecture of deterrence must be reassessed.
For the region and the world, this development underscores the urgency of renewed diplomatic engagement between the two nuclear neighbors, along with updated norms governing the targeting of strategic infrastructure.
