Using a homegrown datalink (Link-17) communication system, Pakistan has integrated its ground radars with a variety of fighter jets and airborne early warning aircraft (Swedish Erieye AWACS) to achieve high level of situational awareness in the battlefield, according to experts familiar with the technology developed and deployed by the Pakistan Air Force. This integration allows quick execution of a "kill chain" to target and destroy enemy aircraft, according to experts. This capability was demonstrated recently in the India-Pakistan aerial battle of May 7-8 that resulted in the downing of several Indian fighter jets, including the French-made Rafale.
 |
| Pakistan PAF's Homegrown Link-17. Source: Secret Projects |
Pakistan Air Force (PAF) pilots flying Chinese-made J10C fighter jets fired the Chinese PL-15 air-to-air missiles and shot down at least two Indian Air Force's French-made Rafale jets in history's largest ever aerial battle, according to multiple media and intelligence reports. India had 72 warplanes on the attack and Pakistan responded with 42 of its own, according to the Pakistani military.
Speaking on a recent podcast, Michael Dahm, a senior fellow at AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, said the kill chain may have started with a Pakistani ground radar—“maybe a surface-to-air missile system, or some other type of radar system”—which “illuminated the Indian target.” Then, a Pakistani J-10C fighter “launched its missiles, probably at range, and finally, an airborne early warning and control aircraft used a midcourse datalink to update and guide the missile to the Indian fighter.” “The Pakistani Air Force deployed …’ A’ launched by ‘B’ and guided by ‘C’” and hit the target, he added.
 |
| PAF Kill Chain During Op Sindoor. Source: Blackbird |
Link-17 enables secure and jam-resistant voice and data exchanges between connected assets. Combined with electronic warfare, it allows the Pakistani military to control the electromagnetic spectrum, giving access to the enemy communications and denying them access to their own. It also enables networked participants to view in real-time each other’s sensor feeds, which could come from radars, sonars, electro-optical (EO) systems such as cameras, and others. Link-17 has given the PAF a network protocol that it can use with a wide range of aerial assets, especially domestically driven programs, such as the JF-17 Thunder.
Military aviation analysts conclude from the results of the air battle that the Chinese technology is as good, if not better than, the western technology. However, it must be understood that the way the technology is actually deployed in the battlefield is as important in achieving good results as the technology itself. Also, the men count as much, if not more than, the machines. The legendary US Air Force pilot Chuck Yeager called Pakistan Air Force pilots "the best in the world". In another tweet in 2015, Yeager said "they (PAF pilots) kicked the Indians butt".
Related Links:
Haq's Musings
South Asia Investor Review
Pakistan Downs India's French Rafale Jets in a Major Aerial Battle
Has Modi Succeeded Diplomatically or Militarily Against Pakistan After Pahalgam?
Has Pakistan Destroyed India's S-400 ADS?
Pakistan's Aircraft Exports
Pakistan Navy Modernization
West's Technological Edge in Geopolitical Competition
Modi's India: A Paper Elephant?
Pahalgam Attack: Why is the Indian Media Not Asking Hard Questions?
Ukraine's Lesson For Pakistan: Never Give Up Nukes!
Pakistan Economy Nears Trillion Dollars
Pakistan's Sea-Based Second Strike Capability
Riaz Haq Youtube Channel
VPOS Youtube Channel
Excellent!
ReplyDeleteWell researched article. Very educational and interesting. Thanks Riaz!
Sushant Singh
ReplyDelete@SushantSin
As per CDS's (Chief of Defense Staff Gen Anil Chauhan's) interview to Bloomberg, the IAF didn't fly for two days after the losses on the 7th night. Whether he refers only to Rafale isn't clear.
“we made, remedy it, rectify it, and then implement it again after two days and flew all our jets again, targeting at long range”
https://x.com/SushantSin/status/1928737490740859039
ReplyDeletePravin Sawhney
@PravinSawhney
What this fellow Anil Chauhan is saying is that for two days IAF fleet was grounded. This is enough reason for him to resign - making light of a serious matter.
When for two days out of four, the IAF (which will be the key determinant of war outcome) is not in the air, it needs some guts to say that India did well in #OperationSindoor!
https://x.com/PravinSawhney/status/1929004953353466183
Google AI Overview of Pakistan Navy small but high tech
ReplyDeleteWhile the Pakistan Navy might be smaller in size compared to some regional counterparts, it is actively pursuing technological advancements and modernization to enhance its capabilities.
Here's a breakdown of aspects related to the Pakistan Navy's size and technological focus:
1. Size and Context:
Smaller Fleet: Compared to the Indian Navy, for instance, the Pakistan Navy has a smaller fleet size, according to Warpower: Pakistan.
Resource Constraints: The Pakistan Navy operates within a resource-constrained environment.
2. Technological Advancements:
Modernization Efforts: The Pakistan Navy is actively engaged in modernizing its fleet with new acquisitions and indigenous development.
Focus on Technology: The Navy is emphasizing the use of technology and innovation to improve its combat readiness and address evolving threats.
Key Areas of Advancement:
Submarines: Acquiring modern submarines with air-independent propulsion (AIP).
Frigates: Inducting advanced frigates like the MILGEM-class corvettes.
Unmanned Systems: Investing in unmanned technologies, including drones and remotely operated vehicles.
Air Defense Systems: Strengthening air defense capabilities with new systems.
Maritime Patrol Aircraft: Upgrading its maritime patrol aircraft capabilities.
Indigenous Capabilities: Pakistan is also focusing on developing indigenous naval capabilities and shipbuilding.
3. Strategic Considerations:
Defensive Posture: The Pakistan Navy's strategy is primarily defensive, focused on protecting its coastline and maritime interests.
Regional Dynamics: The Navy operates within the context of regional naval power dynamics, particularly with India.
In Conclusion:
The Pakistan Navy might be smaller than some of its regional counterparts, but it's focused on enhancing its capabilities through technological advancements, modernization, and indigenous development efforts.
Munim 🍁
ReplyDelete@Munimusing
India may suffer billions in damages and a permanent blow to its blue-water ambitions – and the world will finally settle its debate on the satellite imagery of Pakistan’s early bet on niche, smart-tech asymmetry. The Pakistan Navy’s high-tech, pack-hunting midget submarines – fitted with modular, mission-specific pods for ISR, ASW, and strike – were designed for such a moment. Surgical, quiet, and lethal.
Yet this moment of reckoning wasn’t born of strategy; it was scripted by domestic politics. Indian leadership – obsessed with optics – pushed its military into theatrical deployments for electoral headlines. That recklessness has now imperilled the entire Indo-Pacific balance. If Delhi continues to demand visible retaliation or salvaging of prestige, it risks provoking preemptive shifts in both Chinese and Pakistani nuclear postures. Strategic restraint cannot survive repeated tampering by political amateurs. What begins as showmanship may spiral into full-spectrum escalation – beyond the control of any regional actor.
Unlike India’s overstretched and accident-prone underwater fleet, Pakistan has played a precise, quiet game at sea. Between 2016 and 2022, PN detected and filmed four Indian submarine intrusions – in 2016, 2019, 2021, and most critically, on 1 March 2022. The 2022 interception exposed India’s most advanced underwater asset: a Kalvari-class Scorpène. By tracking it inside operational waters, PN burned its acoustic profile – permanently compromising its stealth. It cannot be risked in high-threat zones again. For submarines, that is a kill without firing a shot.
This isn’t new. The Pakistan Navy has a history of overperformance under constraints – from striking Dwarka in 1965 to sinking INS Khukri in 1971, it has always punched above its weight. That doctrine of disruption remains alive in every officer today.
Apart from that, India’s submarine force has suffered chronic readiness failures and basic seamanship issues. In 2018, India’s $2.9 billion SSBN INS Arihant was out of commission for nearly a year due to flooding from a hatch left open while docked. Let that sink in!
In 2017, its leased nuclear attack sub INS Chakra was damaged entering Visakhapatnam. In 2024, a Kalvari-class Scorpène submarine collided with a fishing vessel northwest of Goa, resulting in two deaths. Even India’s legacy boats have fared no better – with the Sindhughosh colliding with a civilian boat in 2015.
This is more evident in India’s aircraft carriers. Vikramaditya and INS Vikrant are 70s-era concepts re-skinned with vulnerable tech. The GE LM2500 propulsion system is cyber-prone. The Shakti EW suite is rudimentary. L-band radars are inadequate for strike projection and can hardly protect, and the MiG-29Ks onboard offer little beyond visual-range optics. These are not instruments of deterrence – they are $6 billion liabilities.
In contrast, Pak Navy’s air-sea integration has matured in parallel. Pakistan’s legacy P-3C Orions, despite their age, have outperformed Indian Poseidons in actual detection and engagement theatres. Multiple PN’s AIP submarines have silently breached Indian waters undetected – and these are the same class of subs that routinely shadow US supercarriers in exercises. Indian Navy stands no chance.
Pakistani naval officers were reportedly hoping India’s carriers would enter their predefined kill web rehearsed for a decisive hit. Now famed CM-400AKG – PAF spec’d and OEM produced – was envisaged to destroy carriers actually and it was a tweaked version that destroyed Indian S-400s. Publicly listed at 240–290 km range, its true envelope remains classified. Its quasi-ballistic profile and terminal hypersonic velocity were designed from the outset to defeat moving carrier targets. There’s nothing in whole Indian inventory to counter that. Let the Indian Navy make its move, and the genius behind that design will be fully realised.
https://x.com/Munimusing/status/1928795359540621666
Munim 🍁
ReplyDelete@Munimusing
This isn’t about symbolism. It’s about hard, technical overmatch. Pakistan’s naval deterrent has been calibrated, integrated, and field-proven. India has exposed its best assets – and lost them – to a quieter, faster, more adaptive doctrine.
Platforms don’t win wars. Doctrine does. Discipline does. Integration does.
And the Pakistan Navy will run the same script the PAF ran: precise, humiliating, and irreversible.
https://x.com/Munimusing/status/1928795359540621666
The data-link divide in modern warfare: Pakistan vs India
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thenews.com.pk/print/1315714-the-data-link-divide-in-modern-warfare-pakistan-vs-india
Modern warfare is no longer just about who has the most advanced jets or the biggest missiles. The real game-changer lies in information dominance-the ability to share real-time battlefield data across fighters, airborne early warning systems (AWACS), and surface-to-air missile (SAM) batteries. In this new era of combat, Pakistan and India present a stark contrast - one has embraced seamless digital integration, while the other struggles with technological fragmentation.
What is a data-link, and why does it matter?
A data-link is a secure, high-speed communication system that allows military assets to exchange critical information in real time. Think of it as a battlefield group chat - jets share enemy positions, missile warnings, and targeting coordinates instantly. For example, the U.S. military’s Link-16 allows an F-35 stealth fighter to transmit target data to a naval destroyer, which can then launch a missile without delay. Without such systems, pilots and ground forces operate in isolation-effectively blind in a high-speed, high-stakes environment.
The security risks behind the divide
Why don’t all militaries use the same data-links? Because sharing them means exposing vulnerabilities. Different military ecosystems speak different data-link “languages.” NATO’s Link-16, Russia’s TKS-2, and China’s proprietary systems are incompatible by design - to prevent adversaries from reverse-engineering stealth technology or electronic warfare capabilities.
Turkey, a NATO member, purchased Russia’s S-400 missile system, which operates on the TKS-2 data-link. The problem? NATO’s F-35 stealth jets use Link-16. The S-400’s radars could have collected F-35 stealth signatures, potentially exposing them to Russia. The U.S. kicked Turkey out of the F-35 program, costing Ankara billions. This clash underscores the risks of mixing rival defense ecosystems.
India’s Rafale jets (French) are among the most advanced in the region, equipped with: AESA radars (superior detection), Meteor missiles (200 km range, beyond-visual-range lethality), but they cannot digitally communicate with: Su-30MKIs (Russian, using TKS-2), S-400 missile systems (Russian), and Netra AWACS (Indian, custom data-link). France refuses to share the Rafale’s source code, preventing India from integrating it with Russian or indigenous systems.
What are the consequences?
No real-time data-sharing between Rafales and Su-30s, S-400 missiles cannot receive instant targeting updates from Rafales, manual radio relays slow down response times (10-30 seconds vs. milliseconds), and in a dogfight where jets move at 1 km per second, these delays are fatal.
In contrast, Pakistan has developed Link-17, a homemade, encrypted data-link that connects: JF-17 & 35 Thunder fighters, ZDK-03 AWACS (Chinese), HQ-9 SAMs (Chinese equivalent of S-300), and PL-15 (Chinese). During the Balakot crisis, Pakistan’s integrated network proved decisive: AWACS tracked Indian jets and relayed data to JF-17s, JF-17s launched SD-10 missiles, while SAMs stood ready, no friendly fire incidents - everything was synchronized. This real-time coordination allowed Pakistan to execute surgical strikes with precision.
The data-link divide in modern warfare: Pakistan vs India
ReplyDeletehttps://www.thenews.com.pk/print/1315714-the-data-link-divide-in-modern-warfare-pakistan-vs-india
Why fighters must talk to SAMs (Like the S-400)?
India’s S-400 is a formidable system (400 km range, tracks 80 targets). But without data-link integration, its potential is crippled. Rafale spots an enemy at 200 km - but cannot digitally transmit coordinates to the S-400. S-400 must wait for its own radar (600 km range) to detect the threat - wasting precious seconds.
Can’t they just use radio?
Yes, but: Voice relays take 10-30 seconds - manual inputs introduce errors. Data-links transmit in milliseconds, error-free. In modern combat, those seconds decide victory or defeat.
The deadly cost of fragmentation: India’s Mi-17 friendly fire (2019).
During the 2019 Balakot tensions, India’s own SPYDER missile system shot down an Mi-17 helicopter, a deadly fratricide killing six. Why? No data-link integration between IAF fighters and air defense. SPYDER operators misidentified the helicopter as hostile. This tragic incident highlights the dangers of a disconnected military.
In a hypothetical battle scenario: Pakistan vs. India
Let’s imagine a future clash: Pakistan’s Networked Approach: AWACS detects Indian jets 300 km away. Data instantly shared via Link-17 to JF-17s and HQ-9 SAMs. JF-17s fire SD-10 missiles; SAMs finish the job. India’s Disjointed Response: Rafale spots Pakistani jets but cannot digitally alert Su-30s or S-400. Su-30s rely on voice radio - delays, confusion. S-400 fires late - enemy escapes or strikes first.
Integration wins over raw firepower.
Who’s ahead?
Pakistan’s Link-17 provides a unified, real-time kill chain. India’s Rafales and S-400s are superior individually, but fragmentation weakens them. India lacks a universal data-link (like Link-17) to bridge French, Russian, and Indian systems. India would request France or Russia for source-code access - or risk obsolescence- which the French would never accept.
In the age of information warfare, network cohesion trumps standalone superiority. Pakistan has adapted better to this reality. India is struggling with fixing its data-link divide; and its risks of losing the next battle before it even begins continue.
Are Pakistan Navy assets networked with Pakistan Air Force?
ReplyDeleteSearch Labs | AI Overview
Yes, Pakistan Navy assets are networked with the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) as part of their efforts to achieve inter-services integration and enhance interoperability.
Evidence of Networking:
Joint Exercises: The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and Pakistan Navy (PN) conduct joint exercises like "Sea Spark" and "RIBAT-2018" to validate war fighting concepts and enhance interoperability between naval and air assets.
Networking of Key Assets: There is evidence that Pakistan has an objective of integrating key assets such as AEW&C (Airborne Early Warning and Control) aircraft and surface warships through networking.
Data Link System: Pakistan has developed a homegrown data link system known as "Link-17" to facilitate data-link connectivity between the Army, Navy, and Air Force. This suggests an effort towards achieving tactical operational benefits through integrated communication.
Air Support and Interoperability: The Pakistan Air Force provides essential air support to the Pakistan Navy to cover aerial threats, especially for the PN which lacks a credible medium-to-long-range anti-air warfare capability from its surface fleet. Joint exercises like RIBAT-2018 contribute to improving interoperability between the two services.
JF-17 Integration: The PAF's JF-17 fighter aircraft have been tested and equipped to deploy anti-ship missiles like the C-802AK. This further indicates integration and coordination between the two services.
In summary, the Pakistan Armed Forces, including the Navy and Air Force, have taken steps towards greater integration and networking of their assets, conducting joint exercises and developing data link systems to enhance interoperability and operational effectiveness.
The Biggest News from India-Pakistan Air Battle: the Kill Chain
ReplyDeletehttps://www.airandspaceforces.com/india-pakistan-air-battle-kill-chain/
May 19, 2025 | By John A. Tirpak
The most important element of an air-to-air engagement in the recent India-Pakistan conflict may be how Pakistan integrated its Chinese-origin weapons and air defenses to shoot down at least one Indian Rafale fighter, an expert on the Chinese military said.
The effectiveness of the kill chain may have been more important than the capabilities of the specific fighters, said Michael Dahm, a senior fellow at AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, who is an expert on Chinese military affairs.
Pakistan can “integrate ground radars with fighter jets and airborne early warning aircraft,” said Dahm. “The Pakistani Air Force deployed …’ A’ launched by ‘B’ and guided by ‘C’” and hit the target, he added, citing a May 12 report from China Space News, a Chinese defense industry magazine.
Speaking on a recent podcast, Dahm said the chain may have started with a Pakistani ground radar—“maybe a surface-to-air missile system, or some other type of radar system”—which “illuminated the Indian target.” Then, a Pakistani J-10C fighter “launched its missiles, probably at range, and finally, an airborne early warning and control aircraft used a midcourse datalink to update and guide the missile to the Indian fighter.”
It was a “long-range shot, beyond visual range,” likely using the export version of China’s PL-15 air-to-air missile, which Dahm said has an 80 nautical mile range.
The kill chain is the same kind the U.S. is attempting to create within and between its services through the Combined Joint All Domain Command and Control (CJADC2) concept.
“When, and if, we do find out more about the details of the engagement, this may tell a story, more about systems integration and how well Pakistan has done systems integration, versus how well India has done systems integration,” Dahm said.
No details are available about where the Rafale was when it was hit, although Pakistani news agencies showed wreckage that may or may not have been the remains of an Indian Rafale on Pakistani territory. Pakistan claimed after the engagement that it had shot down five Indian aircraft—four fighters and a drone—which conducted an airstrike in Pakistan.
Pakistan seems to have very recently converted several Chinese airborne early warning and control aircraft into electronic warfare aircraft, Dahm said, but it’s unknown whether those aircraft were manipulating the electromagnetic environment. Pakistan’s radar systems and the J-10 are also Chinese in origin.
“What does this say about Chinese technology versus Western technology? Probably not a whole lot, but it probably says a lot more about systems of systems, about training, about tactics … about all of those difficult-to-quantify things,” rather than the relative capabilities of the J-10 versus the Rafale, Dahm said.
He also noted that while India’s air force is bigger than Pakistan’s, it includes “a hodgepodge” of Western, Israeli, Russian, and Indian-produced technology, which makes systems integration much more difficult.
Dahm said that while many news outlets are playing up the angle of the fourth-generation J-10C shooting down a fourth-and-a-half generation Rafale, the comparison of aircraft “probably tells us absolutely nothing.” It’s not known whether the Rafale was departing the target area or whether it had fired any missiles at the Pakistani aircraft, he said.
The Rafale was sold to India with the Meteor missile, which Dahm described as “a beast”—a solid-fueled ramjet missile with a top speed of Mach 4 and a range of 108 nautical miles—with a “wicked … no-escape zone.”
Black__Bird
ReplyDelete@Blaxk__Bird
Shooter-Illuminator Kill Chain: Networked Air Combat in Action
Modern air warfare has evolved far beyond dogfights and radar duels. Today’s air combat is driven by real-time data sharing, electronic warfare, and multi-platform coordination. Among the most advanced tactical doctrines in this realm are the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC), Shooter-Illuminator (Remote Shooter) tactic, Offboard Targeting, and Mid-Course Missile Guidance. These concepts prioritize survivability, precision, and tactical deception.
Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) allows multiple platforms like fighter jets, AEW&C aircraft, and ground stations to operate as a single integrated combat system. One platform may detect a threat, another may provide guidance, and a third may fire the missile. The entire system functions through secure datalinks, removing the need for each platform to work in isolation.
The Shooter-Illuminator concept, also called Remote Shooter, adds a strategic layer to engagements. One jet acts as the shooter and flies closer to the threat with its radar off, staying hidden. Another platform, often a second fighter or AWACS, acts as the illuminator and actively tracks the enemy. The shooter launches missiles based on this offboard targeting data without ever alerting enemy radar warning systems.
This feeds into Offboard or Third-Party Targeting, where the missile is fired by a platform that never locked onto the target itself. The targeting data is streamed from a separate asset over datalink. During the missile’s flight, it receives mid-course updates from the radar platform until its own seeker activates in the final approach. This significantly increases hit probability while keeping the launching platform safe.
On the night of 6–7 May 2025, these doctrines were put into action by the Pakistan Air Force in response to India’s Operation SINDOOR. This was a standoff strike operation where the Indian Air Force launched over 70 aircraft to fire long-range munitions at civilian infrastructure in Pakistan, all while remaining within Indian airspace.
Pakistan did not initiate any offensive action but responded with a defensive counter-air operation. J-10C and JF-17 Block III fighters were launched, supported by Saab 2000 Erieye AEW&C aircraft. All platforms were linked through Pakistan’s secure LINK-17 datalink, ensuring real-time coordination across the battlespace.
In each engagement cell, one PAF fighter approached the threat zone in EMCON mode, with its radar off to remain undetectable. A second fighter at standoff distance, or the Erieye, maintained active radar tracking and sent target data over LINK-17 to the forward jet. When the timing was right, the forward jet launched PL-15 long-range air-to-air missiles without ever emitting a radar signal.
The Erieye provided mid-course guidance updates to the PL-15s, ensuring precision tracking throughout the missile’s flight. The missiles only activated their own seekers in the terminal phase, giving Indian aircraft minimal warning and time to react. While IAF jets were focused on their standoff strike mission, they were caught off-guard by missiles they never saw coming.
Despite being numerically outmatched, the PAF executed a flawless defensive mission. Six Indian aircraft were downed inside Indian airspace, including Rafale, Su-30MKI, Mirage 2000, and MiG-29 fighters. Not a single PAF aircraft crossed the border or was lost. The entire operation was managed through networked warfare, electromagnetic discipline, and real-time data fusion.
This engagement wasn’t just a battlefield success. It was a demonstration of how modern air forces must fight: through connectivity, coordination, and electronic dominance. The use of offboard targeting, remote shooters, and mid-course guidance allowed PAF to turn India’s numerical advantage into a tactical vulnerability. In doing so, PAF redefined defensive air superiority in the digital age.
https://x.com/Blaxk__Bird/status/1930159222567702618
Baqir Sajjad
ReplyDelete@baqirsajjad
PAF has formally credited its Cobras (15th Squadron) for downing 6 IAF jets in 5/7 showdown. J-10Cs assigned to squadron brought down Rafales with help of PL15s exposing Indian "game-changers" as myths. Cobras asserted Pakistan's skies, Pakistan's rules.
https://x.com/baqirsajjad/status/1930852548358844685
-------------
Air force credits Cobras with ‘six IAF kills’
https://www.dawn.com/news/1915722/air-force-credits-cobras-with-six-iaf-kills
ISLAMABAD: Just past midnight on May 7, a low hum of tension filled the Combat Operations Centre at Pakistan Air Force (PAF) Headquarters in Islamabad.
On radar screens, dozens of Indian Air Force (IAF) fighters began clustering to the north, maneuvering with unmistakable intent.
Within minutes, Pakistan’s skies were alive with scrambling fighter jets — including the most recently inducted J-10C aircraft, flown by one of its most storied units: No. 15 Squadron, the “Cobras.”
Nearly a month later, the PAF formally acknowledged what many had speculated — that it was the Kamra-based 15 Squadron that led the charge in shooting down six Indian Air Force (IAF) jets during what’s now considered one of the largest air-to-air engagement in South Asia in more than half a century.
Eighteen of the squadron’s 20 J-10C aircraft took part in the mission, executing a high-risk intercept against a large-scale Indian formation as part of Pakistan’s defensive response.
In a post released by the PAF’s media directorate, the Cobras were hailed for their legacy and professionalism: “From heroic air battles in the 1965 war, where Flt Lt Imtiaz Bhatti downed two Indian Vampires, to Cold War-era vigilance during the Soviet-Afghan War, the squadron has always remained combat-ready… Now equipped with J-10C 4.5+ generation fighters, the Cobras continue to embody precision, courage, and aerial dominance.”
The May 7 confrontation — triggered by India’s launch of Operation Sindoor following a deadly attack in Pahalgam — saw more than 120 aircraft take to the skies from both sides.
According to the Pakistani military’s official account, the six Indian aircraft downed included three Rafales, a MiG-29, a Mirage-2000, and a Su-30MKI — all hit by PL-15 BVR missiles fired from PAF J-10C fighters. Each launch was executed by pilots from the 15 Squadron, who are expected to be publicly named and decorated at a formal ceremony later this month.
A senior PAF official, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter, confirmed: “The pilots involved in the operation will be honoured soon. These are some of the finest aviators in our ranks — and their performance speaks for itself”.
The engagement, insiders say, was the result of a calculated bait-and-counter strategy. With credible intelligence of an impending Indian incursion, the PAF deployed four defensive counter-air formations and monitored over 60 Indian aircraft using its electromagnetic spectrum management systems.
“We fought the battle on our terms,” the official added. “Our kill chain was fully active. When the command shifted, while aircraft were airborne, from ‘Deter’ to ‘Assure Kill, Deny Own Loss,’ the Cobras carried out their mission with precision and control.”
Among the targets prioritised were the Rafales — the pride of the IAF since their induction in 2019. “The Indians expected the Rafales to be game chan-gers,” the official said. “So we made them our first target.”
The Indian response was initially evasive. On May 11, IAF Director General of Air Operations, Air Marshal A.K. Bharti, downplayed the situation, merely stating that “losses are a part of combat” and insisting all pilots had returned safely.
But the facade cracked during the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on May 31, when India’s Chief of Defence Staff, Gen Anil Chauhan, was compelled to admit the losses, attributing them to “tactical errors.”
The admission triggered a storm of criticism back home. In a bid to contain the fallout, Gen Chauhan resorted to baffling cricket metaphors to explain away the embarrassment.
China Offers Pakistan J-35A Stealth Fighters, KJ-500 AWACS, and HQ-19 Air Defense Systems
ReplyDeletehttps://defensetalks.com/china-offers-pakistan-j-35a-stealth-fighters-kj-500-awacs-and-hq-19-air-defense-systems/
The Government of Pakistan has officially confirmed that it has received an offer from China for a major defense package aimed at enhancing the country’s airpower and strategic defense capabilities. The announcement was made through the government’s official X (formerly Twitter) account earlier today.
According to the statement, the proposed package includes:
• 40 J-35A fifth-generation stealth fighter jets
• An undisclosed number of KJ-500 Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) aircraft
• An undisclosed number of HQ-19 long-range air and missile defense systems
The J-35A, developed by Shenyang Aircraft Corporation, represents a major leap in low-observable multirole air combat capabilities. Featuring stealth design, internal weapon bays, and advanced avionics, it is expected to significantly strengthen Pakistan’s deterrence posture and regional air superiority ambitions.
The KJ-500 AEW&C aircraft will provide 360-degree battlefield surveillance, airspace monitoring, and enhanced command and control capabilities, key to supporting high-intensity aerial operations in contested environments.
The inclusion of the HQ-19 — a theater-level ballistic missile defense platform — signals Pakistan’s focus on developing a multi-layered air defense shield. Designed to intercept high-speed threats, including ballistic and cruise missiles, the HQ-19 would represent the most advanced surface-to-air missile system in Pakistan’s arsenal.
Officials noted that the offer is currently under review by relevant defense and procurement authorities, with discussions underway on cost, delivery timelines, and localized support.
The announcement comes amid ongoing efforts by the Pakistan Air Force to modernize its combat fleet and integrated defense systems. It also builds upon recent operational success with the Chinese-supplied J-10CE fighters, which have proven effective in recent deployments.
This proposed defense package, if finalized, could reshape the regional balance of power and mark a significant milestone in the deepening strategic partnership between China and Pakistan.
-------
Thomas Keith
@iwasnevrhere_
Diplomacy was the soft shell; the core revealed Pakistan’s splice into China’s 5th‑generation lattice. Forty J‑35 stealth fighters lock Rawalpindi onto the same firmware branch Beijing uses to police the Taiwan Strait, turning every sortie over Kashmir into a live performance of Delhi’s irrelevance.
KJ‑500 radars and HQ‑19 interceptors stitch radar, tracking, and exo‑atmospheric kill space into one loop, downgrading India’s S‑400s to parade props while giving Pakistan clean anti‑satellite reach that Mumbai can only watch on STRATFOR infographics.
$3.7 billion in deferred Chinese debt isn’t charity, it’s a timer wired to strategic concessions, buying Islamabad oxygen while keeping Delhi guessing which concession point triggers first.
https://x.com/iwasnevrhere_/status/1931019017998786842
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
ReplyDelete@zhao_dashuai
These game changing weapons will be sold to Pakistan, along with the J-35AE as a package.
What are they?
And how can Pakistan use them innovatively to utterly cripple India's ability to wage war in the future?
https://x.com/zhao_dashuai/status/1931698829717655735
--------------
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
@zhao_dashuai
The first weapon is the famous PL-15E. The difference is, this new version will have folded fins.
Allowing the J-35AE to carry 6 PL-15E internally.
This newer version will come with improved sensor suite as well as a more efficiently structure dual-pulse rocket engine.
------------------
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
@zhao_dashuai
No one if any, are talking about J-35AE's air to ground capabilities.
It is highly likely, that a 500kg class bunker busting glide bomb will be part of the J-35AE sales package.
The details are yet to be confirmed, but we do know that it will be based on the YL-V501 glide bomb.
-------------
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
@zhao_dashuai
The internal weapons bay of the J-35AE can carry 4 of these deep penetration bombs.
The wings and tail fins are foldable, to fit inside the J-35AE.
What are it capabilities? And why it's no-par as a game changer as the PL-15E if used innovatively?
---------------
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
@zhao_dashuai
*Note, the images shown are the base variant of the YL-V501 from the Zhuhai airshow.
The YL-V501 comes with a modular multi-mode guidance system, the base variant has an IIR sensor/ camera that allows AI enabled image recognition.
-----------
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
@zhao_dashuai
So if the bomb is ordered to hit the left wing of a parked aircraft, it'll know not to hit the right.
Depending on the release altitude, it has a range of up to 120km.
In cases where India is planning for a major operation, their forward staging ground will be vulnerable.
--------------
See new posts
Conversation
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
@zhao_dashuai
·
14h
No one if any, are talking about J-35AE's air to ground capabilities.
It is highly likely, that a 500kg class bunker busting glide bomb will be part of the J-35AE sales package.
The details are yet to be confirmed, but we do know that it will be based on the YL-V501 glide bomb.
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
@zhao_dashuai
·
14h
The internal weapons bay of the J-35AE can carry 4 of these deep penetration bombs.
The wings and tail fins are foldable, to fit inside the J-35AE.
What are it capabilities? And why it's no-par as a game changer as the PL-15E if used innovatively?
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
@zhao_dashuai
·
14h
*Note, the images shown are the base variant of the YL-V501 from the Zhuhai airshow.
The YL-V501 comes with a modular multi-mode guidance system, the base variant has an IIR sensor/ camera that allows AI enabled image recognition.
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
@zhao_dashuai
·
14h
So if the bomb is ordered to hit the left wing of a parked aircraft, it'll know not to hit the right.
Depending on the release altitude, it has a range of up to 120km.
In cases where India is planning for a major operation, their forward staging ground will be vulnerable.
Zhao DaShuai 东北进修🇨🇳
@zhao_dashuai
The stealth capabilities of the J-35AE, allow it to penetrate deep into Indian airspace.
Wrecking havoc on Indian logistics and hardened shelters for fighters, even underground command posts.
The J-35AE can fly to New Delhi and pay Modi's underground bunker a visit.
Salam Sir
ReplyDeleteIndian media and Indian public was asking for evidences which could prove that PAF has indeed shot down Rafael and other fighter planes of IAF ( Indian Airforce).
Sir their was no dog fight between PAF and IAF, the air to air combat that took place between IAF and PAF was taking place at a long distance from each other using HER( Beyond Visual Range).
Both IAF and PAF aircrafts were within their own countries airspace and
The Airforce pilots of IAF and PAF were not able to see each other with their eyes as they were both at great distance, they used BVR technology to view each other and fire missiles at each other.
Now taking this fact under consideration as PAF shot down Indian fighter planes including RAFAEL so obviously if they were within the INDIAN AIRSPACE, after being shot down, they must have fallen or crashed within their own territory and their are greater chances for that.
The question is that on what basis is Indian media and Indian public asking people of Pakistan to prove that their Indian fighter planes have been shot down as the evidences are with them in the form of crashed rafeal and other Indian jets whose bodies and wreckages are lying within their own territory.
Sir isn't this a valid point?
Thanks
Thomas Keith
ReplyDelete@iwasnevrhere_
Denial Geometry: Pakistan’s Maritime Doctrine in the Age of Cognitive Navies
India’s naval posture stretches like glass across a basin of sonar. Pakistan doesn’t match it. It shapes the water around it, distorting returns, masking emissions, absorbing thrust. Where Delhi parades a carrier group bloated with Western telemetry, Pakistan sculpts the seafloor and spectrum to sever perception from presence. To the naked eye it’s deterrence, in reality it’s epistemic collapse, engineered.
The hardened layer begins where most doctrine ends: cable depth. The Gwadar–Ormara–Karachi fiber spine, routed as part of the China–Pakistan Information Corridor, carries more than civilian throughput. Segments are reinforced, buried deeper, and isolated from international BGP pathways, terminating at Huawei-backed terrestrial nodes under direct SSG and ISI oversight. Satellite uplinks at Gwadar, paired with BeiDou sync via ground augmenters and PAKSAT-1R, allow sub-200ms C2 from node to vessel. These cables aren’t just resistant to tap, they form part of the denial mesh itself. Brillouin-based acoustic sensing detects pressure variance from subsurface displacement. Every cable becomes a sensor. The ocean floor begins to listen.
Karachi’s landing of SEA-ME-WE-5, operated through PTCL with Huawei switching gear, grants Pakistan access to a civilian-military choke valve. During escalation windows, portions of the bandwidth are rerouted, cloaked, or packet-shaped using programmable flow tables. Unlike India, whose reliance on Western IXPs creates foreign-observable metadata trails, Pakistan’s routing stays interiorized. It controls the fiber, the relay, the routing protocol, and the fallback uplink.
Above the floor, the AIS spectrum war plays out. Pakistan’s spoofing grid, anchored near Pasni, Jiwani, and the Makran coast, injects false telemetry into both orbital feeds and regional surveillance networks. Class-B AIS transponders aboard fishing trawlers and drone motherships emit ghost signals timed to match orbital passes by satellite AIS providers like exactEarth and ORBCOMM. Tracks are designed to simulate merchant movement patterns, bulk carriers, tankers, or off-pattern oilers, mirroring Chinese South China Sea tactics. This is a naval hallucination field. It draws enemy ISR into predictable reaction loops, diverts threat analysis teams, and forces signal saturation.
Signals are injected via CETC-sourced SDR arrays, using directional antennas synced to coastal BeiDou timestamps. VHF Channel 70 spoofing overwhelms legitimate Class-A emissions in the area, particularly targeting India’s reliance on open-transponder maritime surveillance. Symbol timing is fine-tuned to bleed into time-division multiplexing slots, crafting illusions that bleed into maritime fusion centers. Repeated SAR-AIS mismatches logged near Gwadar in 2024 and early 2025 are not artifacts, but operational byproducts of a denial mesh tuned for misrecognition.
The passive radar arc strung along the coast from Ormara to the Indus Delta leverages ambient S-band emissions, including India’s own radar pulses. These nodes, likely sourced from China’s CETC 38th Institute, require no transmission. They collect reflected RF from Indian platforms like P-8I aircraft and Talwar-class frigates, allowing Pakistan to track movement in real time without announcing its own presence. These systems are triangulated using synchronized BeiDou clocks and networked across fiber, forming an invisible net through which no emission passes unnoticed.
https://x.com/iwasnevrhere_/status/1932275495552385363
Thomas Keith
ReplyDelete@iwasnevrhere_
Absolute clown take. These guys see a 200-jet precision raid backed by decades of U.S. air supremacy, stealth platforms, and total electronic warfare integration, and think Delhi could just copy-paste it across the Himalayas into Pakistani airspace, like it's a sandbox sim.
Newsflash: Pakistan already knocked India’s teeth out in May, No. 24 Squadron ran EW rings around their entire northern command, Rafales got lit up on open comms, and not a single PAF bird was scratched while Indian radars went blind.
You want to “do what Israel did to Iran”? Try penetrating PAF airspace first without losing an AWACS or triggering Chinese over-the-shoulder coverage. Try pushing a strike package past Ormara without BeiDou spoofing your targeting mid-flight. Try not getting your ports jammed and your markets spooked before the first sortie.
Bharat isn’t Israel, and Pakistan isn’t Iran. The last time Delhi tried to play empire, it got clocked across 3 domains before it could even write the press release. Keep talking, the next round won’t be a rehearsal.
https://x.com/iwasnevrhere_/status/1933536629236387879
------------
Thomas Keith
@iwasnevrhere_
When these doomer posts say “Pakistan is next,” they’re importing a framework that doesn’t apply. The Zionist and Indian obsession with “next” collapses under the reality that Pakistan is not a soft target, it’s a fused-state deterrent node with second-strike clarity, digital redundancy, and real-time uplink to a Eurasian shield.
The correct framing isn’t “Pakistan is next.” It’s: They tried, and Pakistan was ready. Anyone reading the May air war knows: Pakistan isn’t Iran’s sequel. It’s a firewall they couldn’t breach.
https://x.com/iwasnevrhere_/status/1933541177757728991
China’s war lessons after India-Pakistan conflict prioritise integrated systems | South China Morning Post
ReplyDeletehttps://www.scmp.com/news/china/military/article/3316623/chinas-war-lessons-after-india-pakistan-conflict-prioritise-integrated-systems
Amber Wangin Beijing
Systemic warfare and surprise attacks will be key to winning future wars, according to a Study Times commentary published this week that appeared to be based on lessons drawn from the India-Pakistan conflict of early May.
“Recent real-world combat experience from regional conflicts has profoundly revealed the core logic of modern warfare: the contest of individual weapon performance has been replaced by systemic operations,” it said.
--
According to the commentary, a seemingly weaker force leveraged an imported combat system – “combining data links, early warning aircraft, air defence systems, and coordinated fighter jets” – to overwhelm its opponent’s mishmash of weapons from different countries.
During the four-day skirmish, which began on May 7, Pakistan deployed a combination of Chinese-made weapons against Indian forces equipped with arms from Russia and several Western countries.
Islamabad also reported that JF-17 fighter jets – co-developed with Chinese defence contractors – and China’s PL-15E air-to-air missile, which has a range of 145km (90 miles), played a role in its skirmish with India.
Other Chinese systems in Pakistan’s armoury include the ZDK-03 Karakoram Eagle airborne early warning and control aircraft and the HQ-9 air defence system, although there has been no official confirmation by Pakistan that these were deployed in combat.
India has acknowledged that it suffered an unspecified number of fighter jet losses and said that it destroyed one of Pakistan’s HQ-9P systems. Both New Delhi and Islamabad separately claimed victory.
The Study Times article offered a rare glimpse into Beijing’s perspective on the fighting, as China has refrained from commenting publicly on the reported debut of its weapons in the combat between its nuclear-armed neighbours.
The confrontation was a significant opportunity to assess the capabilities of Chinese weapon systems, especially since China has not fought a war since the late 1970s. There are also long-term implications for Beijing’s ambitions in the Western-dominated global arms market.
The article’s appearance suggests that China is not only closely observing its weapons’ performance but also the evolving combat tactics emerging from regional conflicts to inform its own warfare preparations.
The commentary stressed the importance of maximising key strengths – a concept it described as the “long board effect” – by enhancing core capabilities to make one’s strongest advantages even stronger.
These strengths “can often produce decisive or even game-changing effects during certain phases or types of operations”, it said.
The article also noted the critical role played by “surprise strikes” in achieving unexpected victories through “silent and unpredictable” actions. These could not rely on a single weapon or unit, but rather on the tight integration of systems, it said.
“From the moment an enemy aircraft takes off, our early warning aircraft must immediately detect it, guiding air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles to strike before the pilot even realises the danger.”
The commentary argued that traditional physical surprise attacks were becoming less effective. In their place were multi-domain coordinated operations spanning the physical, informational, cognitive and social domains.
These involved a combination of electronic deception, cyberattacks, cognitive interference, and cross-domain strikes – all aimed at creating confusion and misjudgment for the enemy, it said.
The article emphasised the strategic value of striking key nodes in an adversary’s operational system – including command centres, early warning systems, communication hubs and network infrastructure.
Salman Masood
ReplyDelete@salmanmasood
Inside high tech war rooms and drone labs, Pakistan’s Air Force offered a rare look at how it now fights in the digital age.
Cyber strikes, live radar maps, and AI drones—plus a replay of May’s air battle with India.
Read more in this piece:
https://x.com/salmanmasood/status/1940354397210550524
----------
Inside PAF’s high-tech command centre after May’s India clash
Air Chief Zaheer Ahmed Baber Sidhu’s sweeping tech integration tilted May’s air battle against India
https://www.nation.com.pk/26-Jun-2025/inside-paf-s-high-tech-command-centre-after-may-s-india-clash
ISLAMABAD - Rows of cobalt-lit screens flickered like an electronic horizon as the Pakistan Air Force opened doors that normally stay bolted for outsiders. Over one tightly choreographed day, a small press pool was steered through the National Aerospace Science and Technology Park (NASTP) in Rawalpindi, the corridors of Pakistan Air Force (PAF) Air Headquarters, and the Cyber Command center tucked inside Islamabad’s military district.
The exercise was more than a guided tour. By offering a curated look at command posts and data-fusion suites seldom seen by outsiders, the PAF aimed to be seen as technologically advanced, strategically mature, and capable of defending itself in a fast-moving regional theater.
Inside Air Headquarters, the reporters entered operations rooms whose walls form a single wrap-around display. Live radar sweeps glowed lime green, satellite imagery refreshed every few seconds, and coded call signs drifted across a map of South Asia. It was here, briefers said, that Air Chief Marshal Zaheer Ahmed Baber Sidhu personally directed May’s air battle with India. The full war orbit map was displayed, enabling him to make immediate decisions about airstrikes, targeting, and operational adjustments in real time. The briefing made clear how the Air Chief directed the battle personally from that room, leveraging live data feeds and digital command tools.
Trump administration threatens legal action against CNN for coverage of app to track immigration officers
A senior air commodore—identity withheld for security reasons—tapped a console and replayed the clash in granular detail. Icons for Pakistani F-16s, Chinese-built J-10Cs, JF-17 Block IIIs and Indian Rafales traced looping arcs over the Line of Control. Pausing the feed, the officer explained how Air Chief Marshal Sidhu vectored patrols northward to lure Indian fighters into a predefined “Kill Box,” then sanctioned precise strikes before disengaging.
“As soon as we detected India’s war intent, we proactively targeted the Rafale jets,” another senior official said. The Air Force Chief had specifically directed his commanders that the Rafales and the S-400 system were to be treated as top-priority targets for elimination.
Although there were conflicting reports about the precise location of the S-400 battery, the Pakistani Air Force eventually confirmed it was positioned at Adampur and was able to successfully target it, officials claimed.
Officials also disclosed India’s primary target during its retaliatory strike—an HQ-9 air defense system at Nur Khan Airbase—which had already been relocated, thwarting India’s plan.
Since taking command in March 2021, Air Chief Marshal Zaheer Ahmed Baber Sidhu has earned a dual reputation as designer and disciplinarian. Subordinates describe a style that marries relentless data audits with an almost aesthetic fixation: cables are hidden, floors gleam like a drone factory, and even presentation fonts follow strict templates. Early skeptics worried form might smother function. Those doubts have faded, several officers said, after two years of uninterrupted upgrades—and a headline encounter with India that many here regard as a proof of concept.
Inside PAF’s high-tech command centre after May’s India clash
ReplyDeleteAir Chief Zaheer Ahmed Baber Sidhu’s sweeping tech integration tilted May’s air battle against India
https://www.nation.com.pk/26-Jun-2025/inside-paf-s-high-tech-command-centre-after-may-s-india-clash
NASTP, the most visible product of that push, sits beside Nur Khan Air Base and looks more like a tech campus than a hangar. Glass bridges link labs for quantum-resistant encryption, additive manufacturing, and drone prototyping. During the tour, engineers rolled out two unmanned aircraft: a Turkish Bayraktar TB2, its wings folded gull-like for carrier use, and a locally built Shahpar-III whose nose houses an AI-driven target-identification suite. Officials say both can loiter for hours and autonomously flag threats before a human green-lights any shot.
Officers at the Cyber Command in Islamabad underscored the other half of the equation: blinding the opponent’s nervous system. Seated at long desks, mostly twenty-somethings tracked social-media chatter, packet flows, and open-source imagery (OSINT). During the May clash, they said, teams spoofed navigation data, knocked routers offline, and tinkered with the Indian national energy grid. Independent verification is scant, yet the officers insist those digital feints synchronized with the kinetic fight overhead.
“Our Chief’s vision was instrumental. The swift and smart integration of technology was a game changer,” an air commodore remarked respectfully.
Doctrine, the briefers argued, is the real edge. Senior planners call it “seamless warfighting”—a lattice binding pilots, drones, air-defense crews, and cyber units. Conceived early in Air Chief Sidhu’s tenure, the concept stresses reversible force: strike fast, strike proportionally, leave an off-ramp. In May it meant pinprick attacks on high-value systems rather than deep raids.
The Indian Air Force has not publicly confirmed damage to its Rafales or the S-400 battery reportedly stationed near Adampur, but Pakistan has claimed to have downed six Indian jets, including three Rafales including an Israeli built multimillion $ Heron UAV.
While both air forces engaged in one of the largest air battles in recent military history, PAF officials pointed at limits. “Neither side wants to climb the whole ladder,” a senior officer said, borrowing the escalation metaphor. He maintained that Air Chief Sidhu’s aggressive planning, superior technology integration, and decisive leadership provided PAF with a clear advantage.
Notably, both sides made conscious efforts to avoid full escalation. While Pakistan engaged in what officials acknowledged as “aggressive retaliation,” there was restraint. “The Indians didn’t want a war of attrition—and neither did we,” the officer said.
While China has provided critical technology, Pakistani officials stressed their independent handling of integration and deployment.
One officer joked that Beijing should give Pakistan a “bulk discount” on future arms and tech purchases because the recent dogfight doubled as live-fire advertising for Chinese avionics. Dependence on foreign vendors, he added, diminishes each time local coders rewrite firmware to fit PAF doctrine.
The day’s disclosures targeted two audiences. Domestic viewers see reassurance that national air defense can keep pace with a larger neighbor. Abroad—especially in New Delhi—the message is sharper. Pakistan will contest every domain at once. For now, inside rooms bathed in simulated starlight, PAF planners appear convinced they remain a step ahead.
Inside PAF’s high-tech command centre after May’s India clash
Kaz 🇵🇰
ReplyDelete@kozamli
Former Air Chief Sohail Aman on the importance of Indigenization and Link 17 - Pakistan’s local TDL (tactical data link) system which allows for secure, jam-resistant voice and data sharing between aerial and ground assets for better coordination and situational awareness.
https://x.com/kozamli/status/1940768028284870765
---------
Mansoor Ahmed Qureshi
@MansurQr
Ex-PAF Chief:
We knew where every IAF jet was.
We broke their datalinks.
Their Rafales returned to dark runways.
34 bases hit.
May 7–10 wasn’t war. It was domination. 🇵🇰
https://x.com/MansurQr/status/1940650007390191688
-----------
Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar has disclosed that US Vice President JD Vance warned Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the night of May 9 about a possible large-scale attack by Pakistan, urging India to consider "certain things" to avoid escalation.
Speaking in an interview with the US media outlet, Jaishankar said the warning was issued during a direct phone call between Vice President Vance and PM Modi.
"I was in the room when the US vice president spoke to Prime Minister Modi on the night of May 9, warning that the Pakistanis would launch a very massive assault on India if we did not accept certain things," he said.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/amp/1326048-us-warned-modi-of-major-pakistani-attack-if-india-didnt-accept-certain-things-jaishankar
"That night, Pakistan did launch a large-scale attack," Jaishankar stated.
Recently, the strategic group "Quad" consisting of the United States, India, Japan and Australia chose not to name Pakistan in a joint statement condemning Pahalgam attack in IIOJK.
The US State Department issued a joint statement by the foreign ministers of the grouping, who met in Washington, but stopped short of naming Pakistan or blaming Islamabad.
Last month, Pakistan and India engaged in the military confrontation triggered by April's Pahalgam attack in IIOJK.
In response to the Indian aggression, Pakistan's armed forces launched a large-scale retaliatory military action, named "Operation Bunyan-um-Marsoos", and targeted several Indian military targets across multiple regions.
Pakistan downed its six fighter jets, including three Rafales, and dozens of drones. After at least 87 hours, the war between the two nuclear-armed nations ended on May 10 with a ceasefire agreement brokered by the US.
The ceasefire was first announced by US President Donald Trump on social media after Washington held talks with both sides, but India has differed with Trump's claims that it resulted from his intervention and threats to sever trade talks.
However, Pakistan has acknowledged Trump's efforts and formally recommended him for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize, citing his role in defusing tensions between Pakistan and India last month.
Tejasswi Prakash
ReplyDelete@Tiju0Prakash
"Pakistan was in the front, with China providing all possible support...Turkey also played a key role. During DGMO-level talks, Pakistan had live updates of our key vectors from China,"
Deputy Chief of the Indian Army
Our Army is now compelled to publicly speak about its defence requirements, as the current political leadership seems too preoccupied with photo ops and optics to pay any real attention to national security.
#OperationSindoor
https://x.com/Tiju0Prakash/status/1941079746781094292
-----------------
The STRATCOM Bureau
@OSPSF
India’s Deputy Army Chief, Lieutenant General Rahul Singh shocked by Pakistan’s ISR reach into India.
He says that during DGMO deescalation talks Pakistan had live tracking of Indian assets preparing to launch missions, which would be responded to immediately if not called back:
https://x.com/OSPSF/status/1941088112702316951
Indian General Making Excuses for Losing to Pakistan
ReplyDeleteBy AK Chishti
You know who keeps justifying losses again and again? Losers. Just like the Indian Deputy Chief’s briefing more about calming their own people than facing reality. Pakistan didn’t just hit hard, we hit their morale. #OperationSindoor tunrns Tandoor!
-----------
Syed Talat Hussain
@TalatHussain12
His stutters and stammers aside, what he is telling you is a) how I'll-prepared India was b) how bad was their war strategy c) how poorly they anticipated the adversary's capabilities d) how vulnerable their various flanks were in the combat zone. In so many poorly-strung sentences, he is saying: we were roasted.
https://x.com/TalatHussain12/status/1941185551127777530
--------------
FJ
@Natsecjeff
"We were not fighting one adversary but three: Pakistan, China and Turkey"
Based on that logic, Pakistan could argue the same with India using weapons platforms from France, Israel and Russia.
https://x.com/Natsecjeff/status/1941141295080362318
------------
Post
See new posts
Conversation
Rabia Akhtar
@Rabs_AA
Imagine fearing an adversary so much, you convince yourself it wasn’t them but their friends that beat you. When a military starts believing that its adversary’s strength lies solely in foreign support, it stops preparing for the adversary itself. And underestimating an opponent by outsourcing their strength to others may soothe national ego but it is a dangerous way to lose the next war.
Lt Gen Rahul Singh’s statement is less a reflection of battlefield realities and more a projection of post-crisis insecurities. Yes, Pakistan absorbed hits and we took some damage. But what matters is what happened next. When the dust settled in May 2025, it wasn’t China or Turkey that forced India into DGMO-level talks, it was Pakistan’s calibrated, multi-domain response that exposed critical vulnerabilities in Indian assumptions.
The narrative that Pakistan acted as a 'front' and China 'tested weapons' is a convenient deflection from India’s own overreach and intelligence lapses. If 81% of Pakistani hardware is Chinese, then perhaps it's time to ask why India’s Israeli, American, Russian, and French-supplied systems still failed to prevent deep penetration strikes, drone swarms, and jamming of critical vectors.
Referring to Pakistan as a ‘live lab’ for Chinese weapons not only demeans Pakistan’s sovereign military capabilities, but also undermines India’s own credibility as a serious power if it believes its adversary's strength depends entirely on another's support.
If China is gaining operational feedback, that is a separate strategic reality. But the core issue remains: India initiated escalation, misread the deterrence ladder, and now wants to outsource blame. If anything, the May 2025 crisis exposed that imported hardware is no substitute for indigenous competence, India’s underperformance made that abundantly clear.
Next time, before India imagines hitting population centers, it might want to review the wreckage of May 2025, both literal and reputational. Strategic miscalculation is more an Indian mindset problem than a technology gap.
https://x.com/Rabs_AA/status/1941199617099444292