Chinese support to Pakistan during Op Sindoor
With more information now available, it can be concluded that China provided critical military and strategic support to Pakistan during the four-day India-Pakistan conflict from May 7 to May 10, 2025 (Operation Sindoor). This assistance encompassed advanced weaponry, intelligence sharing, and influence operations for narrative building, favouring Pakistan. John Spencer has rightly stated that Pakistan fought as a proxy force, using Chinese weapons and systems, which failed, exposing the strategic hollowness of Islamabad.
There are several credible inputs on the Chinese support to Pakistan. First, a Pakistani ex-army officer, Adil Raja, revealed that Munir ordered the Pahalgam attack after receiving the nod from China.
Second, China's arms/systems were used in the operations. China is the largest source of Pakistani weapons (about 81%). The PL-15E missile landed in a village in Hoshiarpur without hitting its target, reflecting that they did not perform well. JF-17 fired Chinese CM-401 hypersonic missiles, which were used to strike Indian logistical depots and mechanised brigades near Pathankot and Gurdaspur. These were also neutralised by the Indian air defence system. Pakistan employed Chinese-made CH-4 drones for reconnaissance and precision strikes. Despite their capabilities, these drones were largely neutralised by India's advanced air defence systems, including the S-400.
Third, China placed five satellites for exclusive use in observing Indian military assets. Reports suggest that China provided real-time battlefield surveillance support and advice to Pakistan and coordinates ground and air-level military operations. An Indian research group found out that China assisted Pakistan in optimising its defence systems to better detect the Indian Army's troop movements and deployments during the four-day conflict. It included reorganising Pakistan's radars and air defence systems and adjusting satellite coverage over India.
Fourth, the detection of a banned Huawei satellite phone, with messaging services connected to China's Beidou satellite navigation system in Pahalgam after the terror attacks, revealed a close nexus between the Pak Army/terrorists and the Chinese armed forces. The above inputs indicated that Beijing's involvement was far more extensive than originally assessed.
Fifth, China actively engaged in information warfare to support Pakistan's narrative. Chinese state media outlets echoed Pakistan's denials of involvement in the Pahalgam attack and suggested alternative narratives, including labelling the attack as a potential 'false flag' operation by India. Chinese-controlled social media platforms disseminated unverified claims of Pakistani military successes, such as the downing of Indian Rafale jets, aiming to undermine India's military reputation and promote Chinese weaponry. Chinese bloggers and wumao soldiers (5 cents) provided massive support to Pakistan in spreading disinformation and psychological warfare. They were receiving inputs directly from Pakistan's Inter-Services Public Relations. They exaggerated Indian losses, thereby helping to bolster the Pakistani narrative. They portrayed India as an aggressor.
Sixth, China provided comprehensive diplomatic support to Pakistan at the UN Security Council, coordinating with Turkey and Bangladesh. At the UN Security Council committee 1267 on counter-terrorism, China blocked any mention of The Resistance Force (TRF), an offshoot of the Lashkar-e-Tayiba, that initially took responsibility for the Pahalgam terror attacks.
In sum, despite China's extensive support, Pakistan's military efforts during Operation Sindoor were largely unsuccessful. Indian forces effectively countered Pakistani offensives, dominating the escalation ladder, and India's indigenous defence technologies outperformed Chinese-supplied systems. India achieved its stated objective of destroying terrorist camps at nine places. Now, some details are available on the losses of aircraft by Pakistan during the operations. In the operation, the IAF destroyed at least six Pakistani fighter jets, two high-value surveillance aircraft, and one C-130 military transport aircraft. More than ten armed drones (UCAVs), several cruise missiles, and radar sites were also taken out during India's operation. Chinese HQ 9 and HQ 16 systems were destroyed by India's missiles.
Interestingly, while India claimed to have hit 11 places in Pakistan, the latter now says India attacked at 19 places. Perhaps to project itself as a victim of India's action aimed at the civilian population. The Chinese platforms and defence systems were for the first time put to a real combat test. Their underperformance must be unsettling to China. Pakistan's losses of China's aircraft and air defence systems raise questions about the reliability of its defence equipment in real-world combat scenarios. This will have an impact on the Chinese export of weapons and systems.
China is using Pakistan as a tool for its hegemonic and expansionist designs. Pakistan occupies the central position in the Chinese geopolitical calculus for two reasons. First, Pakistan's antipathy towards India allows China to use it as its proxy to keep pressure on India, which it considers an obstacle to achieving its regional ambitions. Second, Pakistan constitutes an important country in the Chinese string of pearls around India. Pakistan's geographical position allows it to have access to the Indian Ocean and thereby overcome its Malacca choke point problem. Besides, China may have viewed India's economic growth as a threat to its dwindling economy. The plan of some manufacturing units moving from China to India must have been unnerving. Hence, China may have asked Pakistan to escalate terror attacks in India to project that this country is not safe for investments.
Given the above, China is likely to continue to provide support to Pakistan, which will encourage Pakistan to continue with its policy of bleeding India through a thousand cuts. India has done well by announcing its policy that it will react strongly in case of any terrorist attack, and would not differentiate between the state sponsors and terrorists and would not accept the nuclear bluff. India must maintain its firm retaliatory policy and continue to enhance global narrative building efforts.
India needs to pay urgent attention to the dimension of cognitive warfare. This is a process to weaponise public opinion of targets and drive them to act in the initiator's interest. The victims of this process start supporting the adversary's narrative after their minds are manipulated. This can undermine national resilience. A comprehensive study should be made to develop a robust strategy to counter this menace.
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer
Views expressed above are the author's own.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
6 minutes ago
- Indian Express
A reminder for Trump: US wanted India to buy Russian crude to keep oil market stable, prices in check
US President Donald Trump seems frustrated with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin over the war in Ukraine, clearly wanting the over three-and-half-year-old war to end, while Putin appears unyielding. The American president, meanwhile, believes he has a lever the he can use to push Putin's buttons. That lever is India's significant oil imports from Russia. Trump has been berating India over its Russian oil imports and pressuring New Delhi into cutting down on imports from Moscow in the hope that threatening or penalising a key trade partner would force the Kremlin's hand into ending the war in Ukraine. While Trump evidently finds it convenient to go after India on the issue at a time when New Delhi and Washington are locked in tense trade pact negotiations, it is worth noting that the US had a major role to play in India ramping up oil imports from Russia, for which New Delhi is now being vilified by Trump and his administration. Over the course of the war in Ukraine, US officials have publicly stated that India's purchase of Russian oil had Washington's endorsement, at least implicitly. In his latest salvo, Trump on Monday said that threatened that he will 'substantially' raise tariffs on New Delhi for profiting from exporting fuels derived from Russian oil. Trump's latest attack came just days after he announced 25 per cent tariffs and an unspecified 'penalty' on India for its defence and energy imports from Russia. Responding sharply to Trump's remarks, India said that while it has been targeted by the US and the European Union for importing oil from Russia, these imports began as its traditional supplies were diverted to Europe, and the US at that time 'actively encouraged such imports by India for strengthening global energy markets stability'. When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2024, Moscow's share in New Delhi's oil imports was less than 2 per cent. The reasons were obvious: Russia was a far-away geography and already had established markets where a bulk of its crude was exported. India, on the other hand, depended significantly on West Asian suppliers like Iraq and Saudi Arabia, which are located close by. With much of the West shunning Russian crude following the invasion, Russia began offering discounts on its oil to willing buyers. Indian refiners were quick to avail the opportunity, leading to Russia—earlier a peripheral supplier of oil to India—emerging as India's biggest source of crude within a matter of months, displacing the traditional West Asian suppliers. Russia now accounts for 35-40 per cent of India's total oil imports by volume. As Europe decided to stop the import of refined petroleum fuels from Russia, Indian refiners increased fuel exports to the continent. Apart from alleging that India was helping fund the war in Ukraine by buying Russian oil, critics of India's oil and fuel trade argued that the country's refiners were facilitating a backdoor entry into Europe for fuels made from Russian crude. There was, however, nothing illegitimate about this trade as there was no specific ban on fuel imports from countries that were buying Russian oil. That ban has now been announced by the EU, and is slated to take effect from January 2026. Despite the noise from sections of the West against India over the country's hefty purchases of Russian crude, this shift in oil and petroleum product trade had Washington's blessings, as the US wanted energy markets to remain stable and well-supplied. In a recent interaction with CNBC International, global energy expert and Rapidan Energy Group President Bob McNally said that it was the Biden administration that 'begged' India to buy Russian crude to keep global energy prices in check. 'The Indians must be having some confusion (due to Trump's stance) because Joe Biden went to India after the invasion of Russia and begged them to take Russian oil…they begged India, 'Please take the oil', so that crude prices would remain low, and they did. Now we're flipping around, saying, 'What are you doing taking all this Russian oil?' The point is Trump is serious…he is frustrated with Putin,' said McNally, who served as the Special Assistant to the President on the White House National Economic Council and Senior Director for International Energy on the National Security Council during George W Bush's first term as US President. India's actions in line with US policy: Biden era officials Various US government officials during the Biden presidency also publicly acknowledged that India's actions helped balance the international oil market, and were in line with what the US wanted in order to keep the global market well-supplied. Had most of the Russian oil gone off the market—as happened with Iran and Venezuela—international oil prices would have shot up, which would have hit the global economy that was still fragile coming out of the pandemic. At an event in May 2024, the then US Ambassador to India Eric Garcetti said, 'Actually, they (India) bought Russian oil because we wanted somebody to buy Russian oil at a price cap. That was not a violation or anything. It was actually the design of the policy because as a commodity we didn't want oil prices going up, and they fulfilled that.' Garcetti was correct, as Rusian oil was and continues to be sanction-free, and only a price cap of $60 per barrel was introduced in December 2022 on seaborne Russian crude by the US and its allies. The cap prohibits export of Russian seaborne crude at over $60 per barrel if the trade involves Western shipping or insurance services. Oil importers like India, which are not part of the price cap coalition comprising G7 countries and their allies, are not bound by the price cap as long as their purchase of Russian oil does not involve any shipping or insurance service from providers in the coalition countries. In April last year, senior US officials had said at a New Delhi event that the US neither expected India to reduce its oil imports from Russia and had not even requested it to do so. The then US Treasury Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy Eric Van Nostrand had said that the objective of the sanctions and G7 price cap regime was not to push Russian crude out of the market, but to keep it flowing while limiting Kremlin's revenue from oil exports, which in turn impaired Russia's ability to fund the war in Ukraine. 'The price cap is designed to leave Russia with only bad options…We want him (Putin) to choose between three bad things: selling with coalition services under the price cap, selling outside the price cap, or shutting his oil in and not putting it to market. With a strong and robust price cap regime, Putin is going to prefer to sell as much as he can outside the price cap. But in order to maximise his sales outside the price cap, when a large part of the global coalition is already involved in the price cap, he is going to have to offer it cheaper,' Nostrand said. Anna Morris, the then US Assistant Secretary for Terrorist Financing and Financial Crime, said at the same event that from a technical standpoint, Russian oil once refined into petroleum fuels and products could no longer be considered of Russian origin, dismissing the argument that India refiners were facilitating Russian petroleum's entry into Europe. 'I also want to specify that once Russian oil is refined, from a technical perspective it is no longer Russian oil…If it is refined in a country and then sent forward, from a sanctions perspective that is an import from the country of purchase, it is not an import from Russia,' Morris said. While the Biden administration seemed satisfied with the price cap, while letting Russian oil flow, Trump has taken a much more aggressive stance, threatening financial costs on importers of Russian energy. Sukalp Sharma is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express and writes on a host of subjects and sectors, notably energy and aviation. He has over 13 years of experience in journalism with a body of work spanning areas like politics, development, equity markets, corporates, trade, and economic policy. He considers himself an above-average photographer, which goes well with his love for travel. ... Read More
India.com
6 minutes ago
- India.com
'Will raise tariffs on India substantially in...': US Presidents threatens India days after imposing 25% tariff
(Image: Reuters) Washington: US President Donald Trump on Tuesday said that he is going to further raise tariffs on India in the next 24 hours, after announcing 25 per cent tariffs from August 7. In an interview with CNBC, Trump said he will raise tariffs on India, revising the earlier settled rate of 25 per cent. 'India has the highest tariffs. We do very little business with India. We settled on 25 per cent, but I think I am going to raise that substantially within the next 24 hours,' the US President was quoted as saying. He claimed that India is buying Russian oil and fuelling the Russian war machine. This comes a day after the US President stated that he will 'substantially' raise US tariffs on India, accusing it of buying massive amounts of Russian oil and selling it for big profits. New Delhi has called the threat of additional tariffs 'unjustified and unreasonable.' Russia also responded strongly on Tuesday, labelling such US pressure tactics as 'illegitimate'. It backed India and, while criticising Trump over his threats to increase tariffs on New Delhi for buying oil from Moscow, contended that 'sovereign nations must have the right to choose their trading partners'. 'Russia notes US threats against India but does not consider such statements to be legitimate. Sovereign countries must have and have the right to choose their own trading partners, partners in trade and economic cooperation, and to choose those trade and economic cooperation regimes that are in the interests of a particular country,' the Russian President's spokesman Dmitri Peskov was quoted as saying by Russia's state-owned news agency TASS. After Trump threatened to impose hefty tariffs on New Delhi, the Indian government on Monday said that the targeting of the country by the US over Russian oil purchase is unjustified and unreasonable. A statement released by the Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) spokesperson said that like any major economy, 'India will take all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security'. According to the government, India has been targeted by the United States and the European Union for importing oil from Russia after the commencement of the Ukraine conflict. 'In fact, India began importing from Russia because traditional supplies were diverted to Europe after the outbreak of the conflict. The United States at that time actively encouraged such imports by India for strengthening global energy markets' stability,' it emphasised. –
Mint
6 minutes ago
- Mint
Deloitte revises India's FY26 growth forecast citing trade tensions
New Delhi: Deloitte India on Tuesday revised the lower band of its FY26 growth forecast, citing rising trade tensions and geopolitical uncertainty. The consultancy now expects the economy to grow between 6.4% and 6.7%, down from its earlier projection of 6.5% to 6.7% made in May. 'The recent regional conflict and restrictions on critical minerals and specialised fertilizers are likely to affect the growth outlook,' Deloitte's latest India Economy Outlook noted. 'India's growth story will be driven by a combination of robust domestic fundamentals and expanding global opportunities, amid uncertainties.' The revision follows the US President Donald Trump's decision last month to impose a 25% tariff on Indian exports, alongside the threat of additional trade measures, casting fresh doubt over bilateral trade flows and increasing pressure on Indian exporters. Deloitte joins global institutions that have revised estimates for India's growth. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) raised its FY26 projection to 6.4% from 6.2%, citing sustained domestic strength and a relatively stable external environment. However, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), which initially estimated 6.7% growth in February, pared its forecast to 6.5% in April, citing growing trade and tariff risks. Moody's and S&P Global have both pegged growth at the same levelat 6.5%. The last Economic Survey, released by the finance ministry, projected growth between 6.3% and 6.8% in FY26, balancing optimism with caution. The Asian Development Bank, however, trimmed its estimate to 6.5% from 6.7%, citing similar concerns over US tariffs and softening trade momentum. Despite these headwinds, Deloitte highlighted India's relative strength in a volatile global landscape, noting that many peer emerging economies continue to struggle for stability. 'At the heart of India's growth is its consumption-led economy. Private final consumption accounted for over 61% of GDP in FY 2024–25,' the report said. "With nearly 100 million middle- and high-income households expected to be added by 2030, India is on track to become one of the world's largest consumer markets." India's capital markets, it noted, remain a bright spot. By December 2024, the market cap-to-GDP ratio had climbed to 136%, among the highest globally, it said. The report also pointed to India's growing talent advantage, with high artificial intelligence (AI) skill penetration and the addition of 2.5 million STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) graduates annually. Over 1,700 global capability centres now anchor India's role in digital and knowledge services. 'India's economic trajectory stands out in a turbulent global landscape. Our momentum is driven by a virtuous trifecta, resilient capital markets, a dynamicconsumer base and a globally competitive workforce," said Rumki Majumdar, economist, Deloitte India. 'As trade relations evolve, strategic trade negotiations, notably with the UK in May and the ongoing talks with the US, and the highly anticipated deal with the European Union by the end of the year, will likely act as powerful multipliers of income, jobs, market access and domestic demand,' she said.
