A version of this story appeared in the daily Threat Status newsletter from The Washington Times. Click here to receive Threat Status delivered directly to your inbox each weekday.
SEOUL, South Korea — Deciding which nation “won” the recent India-Pakistan conflict is no easy call, but China has earned a bonanza of bragging rights thanks to the apparent successes of its equipment sold to Pakistan.
Alarms are sounding.
On a recent Washington Times panel, Sen. Tim Sheehy, Montana Republican and former Navy SEAL, said, “Pakistan appears to have won every engagement so far with Chinese technology against the largely Western technology used by India. … That’s not good for us.”
One expert suggested that early analyses are simplistic. India also fields Russian fighters and S-400 air defense systems, which appear to have been effective.
The expert suggested that Pakistan’s claimed kills of advanced Western fighters with Chinese kit may have resulted from speedy escalation rather than technical superiority.
Regardless, Pakistan said Chinese-made fighters and air-to-air missiles shot down five Indian aircraft, including three Rafale jets by French arms manufacturer Dassault. Publicity of the claim granted kudos to Beijing’s arms makers.
Chinese forces had not been tested in combat since 1988, so Beijing armorers could not claim their products were battle-proven. They can now, and more may be coming.
The four-day clash between the nuclear powers has ended, but sources said pundits should keep an eye on New Delhi, which is likely to use a similar strike model going forward.
Battle in subcontinental skies
After Islamic militants killed 26 people in India-controlled Kashmir on April 22, New Delhi accused Islamabad of having links to the terrorists. Islamabad denied it.
On May 7, India unleashed aerial attacks on what it said were nine terrorist-linked sites inside Pakistan. Pakistan responded and said its jets shot down five or six Indian fighters, both French and Russian models.
With India silent on losses, multiple leaks suggested that three Indian airframes were likely downed. Social media images of debris in India indicated that at least one Indian Rafale had crashed.
Cross-border clashes with artillery, drones and missiles continued until both sides pulled back from the brink on May 10 after U.S. diplomatic intervention.
All indications were that jets from each side fired from their own airspace, meaning crash debris and ejecting pilots would land on friendly territory. Pakistan has been unable to show identifiable remains of crashed Indian fighters.
Pakistan deployed, among other assets, Chinese-made J-10C “Furious Dragon” fighters armed with long-range PL-15 air-to-air missiles.
Neither the J-10C nor the Rafale is a fifth-generation fighter like the U.S. F-35 and the Chinese J-20. Stealth models are more survivable than fourth-generation fighters. Even so, fourth-generation models — including the J-10, Rafale, Eurofighter Typhoon, Russia’s MIG-29 and U.S. F-16 — are sophisticated machines.
Beyond ground control, training and pilot skill set, one question is whether Chinese equipment was superior or whether cautious Indian doctrine enabled Pakistani successes in the conflict’s early hours.
A source familiar with defense matters, who spoke anonymously because he lacked permission to speak to media, suggested that speed of escalation, rather than technical excellence in airframes, avionics and missile range, may have been central.
“Pakistan fired on Indian aircraft and seemed to catch them by surprise,” the source said. “In the initial stages of the operation, the Indians targeted terrorist training camps; they did not try and attrite military targets.”
That and India’s non-suppression of Pakistani air defenses indicate tight rules of engagement.
“Were they instructed they could not fire on Pakistani aircraft that they had tracked?” the person asked. “If that’s the case, Pakistan won via ROE escalation.”
Even so, the source said, “If a J-10 fired at a Rafale and downed it, it was an effective kill shot.”
“I think India sought to demonstrate restraint,” said Alex Neill, a security expert with Pacific Forum. “What was interesting is both sides demonstrated escalation management.”
With Pakistani forces engaged, India expanded its strikes and hit air bases and Rawalpindi, the site of the Pakistani military headquarters and close to the capital, Islamabad.
Beijing’s ‘watershed moment’
China has the world’s largest armed forces and a massive military-industrial complex. It was the world’s fourth-largest arms exporter from 2020 to 2024, per data site Statista, behind the U.S., France and Russia.
However, it has not fought a war since 1979, when a botched, bloody intervention against Vietnam showcased tactical shortfalls. It has not fired a shot in anger since 1988, when it won a limited air-sea clash in the South China Sea, again against Vietnam.
That may partly explain why, according to Statista, China sells only 5.9% of global arms, while the U.S. sells 43%.
In closed-door discussions, at arms markets and in brochure copy, American, European, Iranian, Russian and even North Korean arms makers can truthfully say their kit is “combat tested.”
China could not until now.
The J-10 is a “fighter of national pride,” state media Global Times wrote Monday. Comparing technological innovations in aerospace, quantum computing and high-speed trains with China’s earlier, low-tech exports, it said, “The world has witnessed the transformation of ‘Made in China’ to ‘Intelligent Manufacturing in China.’”
“It represents a watershed movement: China’s military-industrial base has produced something that can defeat something produced by the West,” said Mr. Neill. “Obviously, there are caveats in terms of command and control, training and all that, but … China can demonstrate that it produces goods that are genuinely competitive in global defense markets.”
Mr. Neill said China often exports arms in packages and noted that the Pakistani air force has trained with Chinese pilots. It is unclear whether China will leverage the publicity wave.
“It’s a win for the Chinese defense industry: They can demonstrate reliability and efficiency, which a number of potential buyers around the world demand,” he said. “It will ultimately be controlled by Central Military Commission and the Poltiburo Standing Committee as to how they wield this potential win in markets.”
Looking ahead, a senior Indian naval officer said tactical aerial strikes without ground intervention provided a model that could be repeated in the event of terrorist actions linked to Islamabad.
The anonymous source agreed that Indo-Pakistani air clashes could become a “new normal.” Meanwhile, combat data and data from “sensor fusion,” or combining ground and air assets to create a single picture for air defense, hold important lessons for others facing Chinese weapons, such as Taiwan.
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.