Latest news with #DassaultRafales
New Indian Express
08-07-2025
- Business
- New Indian Express
One IAF Rafale lost, but not shot by Pakistan: Dassault CEO
NEW DELHI: The protracted debate on loss of Indian Air Force's Rafale combat jets with Pakistan claiming to have shot was debunked by the CEO of Dassault company which manufactures the said fighter jets. Dassault Aviation Chairman and CEO Eric Trappier was quoted saying no Rafale was shot down in combat, but India had lost one jet due to technical failure, and a probe into the incident is currently on. Trappier said, French website Avion De Chasse reported, there was no enemy engagement involved in the incident. The incident 'occurred at an altitude of over 12,000 metres during an extended training mission, with no enemy involvement or hostile radar contact,' the report said. Speaking specifically on Pakistan's allegations that three Indian Dassault Rafales were reportedly shot down during Operation Sindoor, Eric Trappier said these allegations were 'inaccurate and unfounded'. Trappier took on Pakistan for false claims in a press conference held on June 15, which Avion De Chasse reported.
Asia News Network
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Asia News Network
Indian defence attache claims Pakistan downed fighter jets due to ‘political leadership's constraints'
June 30, 2025 ISLAMABAD – An Indian defence attache has claimed that the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) shot down six Indian Air Force (IAF) fighter aircraft 'only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack the military establishment or their air defences', Indian news outlet The Wire reported on Sunday. Earlier this month, the PAF confirmed that six IAF jets were shot down late on the night of May 7, after India launched missiles at six Pakistani sites, including in Sialkot and Bahawalpur, as well as Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Three of the downed fighters were French-made Dassault Rafales. This military confrontation took place after New Delhi, without evidence, blamed Islamabad for backing terrorists who killed 26 tourists in occupied Kashmir's Pahalgam in April — an allegation that Islamabad denied. According to The Wire, India's defence attache to Indonesia, Indian Navy Captain Shiv Kumar, while speaking at a seminar in Indonesia last month, acknowledged that the PAF downed the Indian fighters. During his presentation at the event, Kumar acknowledged the loss of Indian planes, though he said he 'may not agree [with an earlier Indonesian speaker's claim] that we lost so many aircraft'. 'After the loss, we changed our tactics and we went for the military installations. So, we first achieved suppression of enemy air defences and then that's why all our attacks could easily go through using Brahmos missiles,' the Indian defence attache added, referring to Indian missile strikes on Pakistani bases on the night of May 9 and 10. According to Kumar, IAF fighter jets were 'operating under strict political orders from the Modi government not to target Pakistani military installations or air defence systems', The Wire reported. 'This self-imposed limitation by the government was intended to prevent escalation of conflict in a nuclear environment,' the outlet added, quoting the Indian officer. 'It was possibly based on the premise that the Pakistan military would not target Indian fighter aircraft flying in the Indian airspace, when India was not hitting any Pakistani military targets.' Kumar inferred that the restrictions imposed by New Delhi led to the loss of IAF jets since Pakistan 'refused to impose any such limitations'. 'The political directions had meant that IAF had to carry out their missions while deliberately avoiding the most threatening enemy assets, which are typically prioritised in air campaigns to secure air superiority,' The Wire reported. The Wire also reported that the Indian Embassy in Jakarta said Captain Kumar's remarks had been 'taken out of context' in a statement. 'We have seen media reports regarding a presentation made by the defence attache at a seminar. His remarks have been quoted out of context and the media reports are a misrepresentation of the intention and thrust of the presentation made by the speaker,' The Wire wrote. 'The presentation conveyed that the Indian Armed Forces serve under civilian political leadership, unlike some other countries in our neighbourhood,' the outlet continued. 'It was also explained that the objective of Operation Sindoor was to target terrorist infrastructure, and the Indian response was non-escalatory.'
Express Tribune
02-06-2025
- Politics
- Express Tribune
South Asia's David vs Goliath
The recent Indo-Pak duel was an indicator of a worsening security dilemma in South Asia. Since 2016, New Delhi has adopted a policy of cost imposition on Islamabad for their support of the Kashmir cause. For Pakistan, the Kashmir cause is tied to its national fabric; for India, it remains a constant security concern. This issue is likely to persist despite India's show of military and conventional capability in 2019 and again in the early hours of May 7, 2025. The calculus among Indian strategists appears to be shifting towards a mix of vertical and horizontal escalation, designed to pressure Pakistan into accepting India's political, diplomatic and military primacy in the region. However, Pakistan's strategic culture is unlikely to shift, and in the case of direct confrontation, both countries are unlikely to back down. This increases the likelihood of more focus on hard security and balance-of-power politics in the region. Around 1:30 AM on May 7, reports emerged of multiple strikes on locations in mainland Pakistan. An Indian PIB press release later confirmed the strikes were part of Operation Sindoor, a retaliatory mission following an insurgent attack in Pahalgam. The Indian media framed the operation in two ways: as a political victory for Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and as a display of India's rising military influence. The strikes were conducted using Indian Air Force aerial assets, targeting nine locations with precision munitions, launched from within Indian airspace. As the attack was underway, Pakistan reportedly initiated defensive measures, resulting in an air-to-air engagement between the PAF and IAF. Pakistan's ISPR claimed six Indian aircraft were downed. Even critical voices like Christine Fair considered it likely that at least two Dassault Rafales had been lost. This not only marked the loss of high-value equipment but also hurt India's military image. Operation Sindoor, which was likely meant to be a strategic warning to Pakistan and a symbolic flex to Beijing, ended up escalating risks in the region. The seriousness of the situation became clear when Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif called a meeting of NCA - the body overseeing nuclear weapons policy. As tensions climbed, so began UAV-based surveillance missions from both sides to probe air-defence systems. Hours before Pakistan's anticipated response, the IAF launched another wave of strikes targeting airbases, including Nur Khan near Islamabad. On May 10, Pakistan launched Operation Bunyanum Marsoos i.e. an unbreakable barrier. It targeted 27 locations inside India, three times the number hit by Operation Sindoor. The strike package included Fatah-1 short-range ballistic missiles, PAF aircraft, loitering munitions and cyber assets. The goal was to reject any idea of a "new normal" and re-establish strategic balance with India. This response was calculated, rapid, and likely met its intended signal. The skirmish ended just as quickly as it escalated, with both sides claiming that the other had called for a ceasefire. This confrontation was a focal event in South Asian security and Indo-Pak relations. It introduced new elements of escalation: drones, cyberattacks and long-range standoff munitions. Both sides revealed parts of their strategic calculus. Operation Sindoor was disproportionate in scale for a response to a localised insurgent attack. Pakistan's retaliation, however, denied India any clear advantage and pushed back against claims of conventional superiority. Pakistan asserted it had downed six aircraft, destroyed an S-400 battery, and struck an Indian military HQ in Kashmir and a BrahMos facility. While such claims are debated, India's missteps were clear: underestimating Pakistan's willingness to respond; misreading its civil-military resolve; and believing further escalation would serve as deterrence. For policymakers in Pakistan, the answer to Indian aggression may not lie only in conventional or nuclear means. Like David against Goliath, Pakistan must strike the sensors that give India an edge. Building electronic warfare, cyber tools and AI-enabled systems should be a priority. Pakistan also needs an information warfare strategy to counter Indian propaganda and project its own narrative clearly and credibly.
