India again admits jet losses in Pakistan clash
An Indian defence official has admitted that the country's air force did "lose some aircraft" on the night of May 7 when they launched an unprovoked attack on civilian sites in Pakistan during the recent 86-hour war between the two nuclear powers.
Captain Shiv Kumar, an Indian defence attache, made the statement while speaking at a seminar, 'Analysis of the Pakistan — India Air Battle and Indonesia's Anticipatory Strategies from the Perspective of Air Power' organised by Universitas Dirgantara Marsekal Suryadarma in Indonesia, reported Indian media.
Kumar blamed the losses suffered by the Indian Air Force (IAF) on the constraints imposed by the political leadership in New Delhi. He claimed that the Indian aircraft were under orders not to attack Pakistan military assets, to avoid an escalation.
Earlier, Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan confirmed the loss fighter jets during the May clashes with Pakistan, marking the first official acknowledgment of air losses in the ongoing conflict. He disclosed the information in an interview with Bloomberg Television, during the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore.
However, he denied Pakistan's tally of six Indian jets being shot down, choosing not to specify the exact number of aircraft lost. "What is important is not the jet being down, but why they were being down," Chauhan said. "Numbers are not important."
On May 30, Senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy admitted that Pakistan downed five Indian fighter jets, including Rafale aircraft. However, the military circles of India are always tight-lipped about the numbers of fighter jets loss by PAF.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Pak, India exchange prisoner lists
Despite simmering tensions, Pakistan and India adhered to the bilateral agreement on Consular Access, as the two nuclear-armed neighbours, through diplomatic channels, on Tuesday exchanged lists of prisoners in each other's custody. As part of the agreement signed in 2008, Pakistan and India exchange list of prisoners twice a year on 1st January and 1st July. Given the ongoing tensions, the latest exchange of lists was seen as significant. Many bilateral arrangements between Pakistan and India are under threat after the Pahalgam attack that brought the two countries almost close to a catastrophic war. India before launching strikes inside Pakistan unilaterally suspended the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty. Pakistan, meanwhile, threatened to walk away from the 1972 Shimla Accord, though no final decision was taken yet. Against this backdrop, the two countries, however, implemented their understanding on Consular Access. "Today (Tuesday), Pakistan and India exchanged, through diplomatic channels, the lists of prisoners in each other's custody. The exchange of lists took place in pursuance of the Agreement on Consular Access, 2008," read a statement issued here by the foreign office. The Agreement requires both sides to share the lists of prisoners in each other's custody on 1st January and 1st July, every year. The Indian External Affairs Ministry also issued a similar statement. The Foreign Office read out said the Government of Pakistan handed over a list of 246 Indian or believed-to-be-Indian prisoners (53 civilian prisoners and 193 fishermen) to a representative of the Indian High Commission, Islamabad. Simultaneously, the Government of India shared a list of 463 Pakistani or believed-to-be-Pakistani prisoners (382 civilian prisoners and 81 fishermen) to a diplomat from the High Commission for Pakistan, New Delhi. It said the Government of Pakistan called for immediate release and repatriation of all those Pakistani prisoners and fishermen, who have completed their respective sentence and whose national status stands confirmed. "A request for special consular access has also been made for all believed-to-be-Pakistani prisoners, including the physically- and mentally-challenged prisoners for expeditious confirmation of their national status, "according to the statement. The Government of India has been urged to provide consular access to all those prisoners to whom consular access is still awaited. The Indian side has also been urged to ensure safety, security, and well-being of all Pakistani prisoners in Indian custody. "The Government of Pakistan remains committed to addressing humanitarian matters as a priority. It will continue its endeavors to ensure early return of all Pakistani prisoners in Indian jails," it said.
Express Tribune
5 hours ago
- Express Tribune
The Hague vindication
Listen to article Pakistan's lawfare stance on water for arbitration has got a shot in the arm. The Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) at The Hague stood behind the lower riparian state, and categorically pronounced that it has the due and legitimate authority to 'adjudicate' in any dispute between the two countries over the Indus Water Treaty (1960). It went a step ahead to rule that Pakistan's concerns on India holding the treaty in 'abeyance' and the threats of "weaponising water" are "not hypothetical", and go on to actively undermine the treaty obligations. This is the second endorsement to come from the international fora after the World Bank that attributed Delhi's unilateral withdrawal from the commitment as unlawful. The legal perspective emerged as the PCA was deliberating the Pakistan-India dispute over Kishenganga and Ratle hydroelectric projects, whose final decision is due in summer this year. The court seized the opportunity to announce a supplemental award on June 27, 2025, wherein the PCA held high its discretion to adjudicate that went on to reinforce Islamabad's stance that the IWT is fully operational and cannot be set aside by India through unilateral declarations. The Foreign Office was quick to call on Delhi to see reason in global legal decorum and immediately restore water supply to Pakistan. Nonetheless, the Hindutva-led dispensation's adamant attitude to reject the PCA testimony, and continue with its illegal action must instantly drive retribution. Islamabad's case was preeminent and all the three of its points laid down before the PCA were upheld by the jurists. They pertained to weaponisation of water politics by India; and included: interruption of water supply used for downstream irrigation through the filling of reservoirs; the opening of dam gates to release stored water in excessive volumes in a manner that causes flooding downstream; and the rapid, mass release of sediment impacting rivers, land, infrastructure and people living downstream. This nod from PCA must serve as an awakening call for India, and the least option it has is to submit to the will of International Law and uphold its stature as a responsible state.
Express Tribune
5 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Pivoting between geopolitics and geo-economics
Listen to article When Field Marshal Asim Munir walked out of the White House after the recent luncheon with President Trump, it was apparent that the Pak-US relationship was taking another tactical shift. This relationship has seen numerous highs and lows in the past. However, the recent war-like situation between Pakistan and India and President Donald Trump's role in the ceasefire have unfolded events unexpectedly. Lately, Pakistan seems to have navigated its relations well with both the US and China. The country now stands at a crossroads: whether to continue with a familiar path of transactional geopolitics or commit to geo-economics as mentioned in the National Security Policy (2022-2026). Not long ago, Pakistan was almost written off for its strategic importance by the policymakers in Washington, DC, after the fall of Kabul. From being a close ally, Pakistan had overnight become almost insignificant for the Biden administration to give a call back to the Pakistani authorities or even to get a mention in the US's National Security Strategy. So much so that Pakistan had to go through tougher conditions while seeking bailout packages from the IMF and was subject to harsher rhetoric. Nevertheless, the situation has changed significantly after the Indo-Pak military clash of May 2025. On April 22, 2025, a terrorist incident resulted in 26 tourists losing their lives in Pahalgam. Reports also claim that this attack was religiously motivated. Such a tragedy deserves utmost condemnation, and those responsible must be punished for their brutal actions. India's knee-jerk response was that Pakistan was somehow behind this attack, and therefore, the decades-long Indus Water Treaty, which had survived through the worst of the Indo-Pak relations, was suspended. Subsequently, India also launched a series of attacks on several Pakistani cities on the pretext of targeting the terrorist hideouts only. For the next two days, the situation between India and Pakistan remained extremely tense. Both attacked each other's multiple military facilities and neutralised drone incursions, while Pakistan, with the help of Chinese technology, downed multiple Indian fighter jets. Eventually, mediated by the US, both countries reached a ceasefire agreement, but the threat still looms as PM Modi has insisted that Operation Sindoor will continue if there is any other terrorist attack in India. Whether keeping South Asian peace a hostage with such statements is good or bad, one thing is clear: after the ceasefire, Pakistan's profile on the international political front has witnessed a significant rise, something totally against New Delhi's policy of isolating Pakistan internationally. Post-ceasefire, Pakistan's relations with China have reached new highs. For Pakistan, China has emerged as one dependable partner. China, on the other hand, fully supported Pakistan's retaliation against Indian attacks. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi reiterated that Pakistan is an "ironclad friend" and vowed to deepen the "all-weather strategic cooperative partnership." It must also be noted that the use of Chinese defence technology appeared as free marketing, since after the ceasefire, China's defense stocks have surged. Presently, what still remains a matter of concern for both is the security of Chinese personnel and investments in CPEC. Pakistan, therefore, must ameliorate threats from sub-nationalist movements. Pakistan's relations with the US have also taken a stark turnabout. President Trump has taken the credit for the ceasefire a number of times, although India, the US's most allied ally in South Asia, has refuted such claims repeatedly. He then offered to mediate for the long-overdue Kashmir issue, again upsetting India. And lately, the US Department of State issued a travel advisory to "exercise increased caution in India due to crime and terrorism." All these developments, along with President Trump's invitation to Field Marshal Asim Munir, have left the Indian side quite disgruntled. Many argue that the lunch meeting was also crucial because of the Israel-Iran conflict, but whatever the reason may be, Pakistan must be in a state of euphoria over these happenings. One must also recall that Pakistan has served as US strategic partner in the past. During the Cold War, Pakistan was an active member of the capitalist camp against communism in South Asia; it played a crucial role against the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan; and it was the US strategic partner during the war on terror. But as denoted appropriately, the Pak-US relationship has remained 'transactional' in nature, and Pakistan has repeatedly complained of being abandoned as soon as US interests change. Following the same pattern, Pakistan was cast off after the fall of Kabul in 2021, too. Hence, it must remain wary in the future as well. Considering the post-ceasefire events, Pakistan may again be lured to find solutions to its internal and external crises in forming strategic partnerships, especially with the US. Previously, Pakistan has leveraged its geographical location for geopolitical gains, but apart from temporary relief, it has only guided towards much deep-rooted problems. The country gravely suffers from growing poverty, economic inequality, policy discontinuity, unemployment, poor education and healthcare facilities, etc. The current situation presents Pakistan with a dilemma: whether it would keep using its strategic advantage for temporary gains or realise the vision of geo-economics that the country's National Security Policy introduced in January 2022. Becoming a melting pot for global economic interests through strengthening regional connectivity and development partnerships will help Pakistan address its structural problems related to non-traditional security aspects. Additionally, it will also ensure that the country has enough resources in the pool to improve its traditional security apparatus. Certainly, now this is more important because Operation Sindoor is not over yet. Pakistan needs to build its economic muscle against India, which is reportedly set to become the fourth-largest economy in the world. It is also arguably correct that the path to geo-economics will be long, and considering the world today, which has almost become a war theater, Pakistan will have additional hindrances when anchoring geographic location for economic benefits. Nonetheless, with the alternate strategy, Pakistan has tried and failed again and again, and not changing the approach will not help address the deep-rooted structural issues the country has been suffering from since its inception in 1947.
