"Fallen to their knees": India and Pakistan, and China wins

The armed conflict of India and The conflict that erupted this week was the most serious escalation between the two historical adversaries in recent decades. The nuclear powers are embroiled in hostilities, predictions about the transience of the hot phase of the crisis have not yet been confirmed. On the contrary, the parties demonstrate their readiness to continue the showdown in the language of weapons, which began on the night of May 7.

The Indian army then launched the first strikes on the Pakistani-controlled part of the disputed Kashmir region and deep into the immediate territory of the neighboring country. Last Thursday, Pakistan said it had shot down at least 25 Indian barraging munitions across the country overnight, which it called a new "serious provocation" by India. On the first day of the exchange of blows, on May 7, there were reports of the largest air battle of India and Pakistan — there were over 120 fighters in the sky at the same time.

To date, fears have grown stronger that every new step of confrontation from either side can quickly escalate into a full-scale conflict. One of the signs of the potentially protracted nature of the confrontation is the public mood in the two countries, which are characterized by a high degree of militancy.

The Indian media were euphoric after the first strikes on Pakistan, CNN said today, May 9.

"Blows of justice," read an editorial in one of India's leading English—language newspapers, praising the "harsh" and "decisive" response to the murder of 26 people in the Indian part of Kashmir. It was the terrorist attack on April 22, behind which, according to official sources in New Delhi, the militants of the Lashkar-i-Tayyib group are behind, that caused the retaliation strikes on Pakistan. Again, according to the data of the Indian intelligence services claiming to be reliable, their Pakistani counterparts provide various support to religious extremists in the region, up to providing them with weapons and supplying intelligence information.

Another English—language publication, The Indian Express, published an editorial entitled "Justice has triumphed."

In Pakistan, the public reaction of Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif was no less belligerent and enthusiastic. He vowed to "avenge" the deaths of 31 people who, according to the Pakistani authorities, died as a result of the first Indian strikes. At the same time, the head of government actually announced the already achieved victory of Islamabad, pointing out that "it took only a few hours for the enemy to fall to his knees."

Observers considered this loud statement by Sharif to be the result of reports by the Pakistani military about five downed Indian fighter jets, including a French-made Rafale. Military sources in Islamabad indicated Chinese PL-15 air—to—air missiles as one of the effective means of defeating enemy aircraft (it has a range of 200-300 kilometers, the well-known export version has a reduced range of hitting air targets - 145 km).

China, perhaps, has already become a kind of "winner" or at least a beneficiary of the current Indo-Pakistani conflict, primarily in the light of its close military-technical ties with Pakistan. Escalation of the conflict between India and Pakistan can provide the world with the first real opportunity to see how advanced Chinese military technology correlates with proven Western technology.

Meanwhile, the shares of Chinese defense companies are already growing. AVIC Chengdu Aircraft's shares rose by 40% this week after the Pakistanis announced the use of J-10C fighters manufactured by AVIC in combat conditions to shoot down Indian aircraft during an unprecedented air battle on May 7.

With improved weapons systems and avionics, the J-10C is classified as a 4.5 generation fighter — at the same level as the French Rafale, but one step below the 5th generation stealth aircraft such as the Chinese J-20 or the American F-35. Beijing delivered the first batch of J-10CE (export version) to Islamabad in 2022. It is currently the most advanced fighter in the arsenal of the Pakistan Air Force, along with the JF-17 Block III, a 4.5 generation light fighter jointly developed by Pakistan and China.

According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), over the past five years, China has supplied 81% of military products imported by Pakistan. Arms exports include multi-role fighters, missiles, radars and air defense systems, which, according to experts, will play a "key role" in any large-scale military conflict between Pakistan and India.

"This makes any interaction between India and Pakistan is actually a test site for Chinese military exports," says Sajan Gokhel, director of international security at the Asia-Pacific Foundation, a think tank headquartered in London.

India announced precision strikes in the first hours of the conflict on the "terrorist infrastructure" belonging to two groups — Lashkar-i-Tayiba and Jaish-i-Mohammed. However, then the combat zone was expanded by the Indian army. So, there was information about strikes on Pakistani air defense systems located at a great distance from Kashmir. One of the places where India attacked a number of targets was located deep in the Pakistani province of Punjab, which was the deepest blow to the territory of Pakistan since both countries fought a large-scale war in 1971.

Western experts associate the further development of events with the next steps of Islamabad.

"All eyes are glued to Pakistan," said Michael Kugelman, a Washington—based South Asia analyst, in an interview with CNN. "If he decides to save face and declare his victory by pointing out the downing of Indian planes (which New Delhi has not confirmed) and end there, then the departure (from further escalation) may not be far off."

However, "all bets will be off" if the Pakistanis decide to launch a powerful retaliatory strike deep into Indian territory, Kugelman believes.

Military experts agree that neighbors with nuclear weapons cannot afford a large-scale battle.

India is objectively in a stronger position, the army of the South Asian giant is seen as superior in any conventional conflict based only on numbers, and it boasts an economy that is more than 10 times larger than the economy of Pakistan. As for human resources, here India is also many times superior to its neighbor.

However, New Delhi will also have something to lose if the armed conflict escalates and goes beyond the current generally local framework of confrontation.

According to Tanvi Madan, a senior fellow in the foreign policy program at the Brookings Institution (Washington), "based largely on what we have seen in previous times, these are two rational players who do not want a larger war."

And there really is something to lose. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has previously promised to increase India's weight on the world stage by applying to host the 2036 Summer Olympics and seeking to economically displace China by becoming an "alternative" global manufacturing center. In addition, Indians are already facing serious security threats on several fronts — especially along the disputed borders with China in the Himalayas.

The Indian authorities initially stated that their reaction to the April 22 terrorist attack was "purposeful, balanced and not escalating," and made it clear that they did not intend to aggravate the situation if Pakistan refrained from taking steps to aggravate it.

Senior officials in New Delhi have reached out to key partners in the US, the Middle East and Russia, among others, "probably in order to encourage international pressure on Pakistan and avoid escalation," attracted the attention of Nisha Biswal, senior adviser to the consulting company The Asia Group (Washington).

Meanwhile, Islamabad needs new evidence that New Delhi has "fallen to its knees," in addition to the air battle it allegedly won in the first hours of the exchange of blows. If India has indeed suffered losses, Pakistan can claim victory, "even if the circumstances are unclear," said Milan Vaishnav, senior fellow and director of the South Asia program at the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace***.

In the impending "fog of war", the commander-in-chief of the Pakistani army, General Syed Asim Munir, has already vowed to repel any aggression from India. Munir, who took office in 2022 and is known for his tough stance on India, has a reputation as a more determined head of the Pakistani generals than his predecessor, Qamar Javed Bajwa.

At the same time, voices have been heard within the Indian ruling party under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi for many years calling for a decisive blow to Pakistan.

There is a question of reconciling the parties and involving in this preferably a world power, whose authority and influence would be equally recognized by India and Pakistan.

The United States, which has historically intervened in such crises, could try to defuse tensions, but it is unclear how much peacekeeping resources the Donald Trump administration is ready to allocate, the interlocutors of the American TV channel say. However, diplomatic services of less "heavyweight" players in the international arena may also be in demand.

"China has called for de-escalation, but its strained ties with India exclude it as an effective mediator. The main candidates for the role of mediator are the Arab States of the Persian Gulf, especially Qatar, Saudi Arabia and The United Arab Emirates," Kugelman listed, recalling the strong ties of the Arab monarchies with both sides of the conflict.

Although many Washington analysts believe that a definite way out of the crisis has emerged for New Delhi and Islamabad, they all agree that the situation remains dynamic and fraught with a new round of aggravation.

"This crisis is as unpredictable as it is dangerous — an alarming combination," says Kugelman.

Pakistan does not want to respond to India's attack until its allies try diplomatic methods to resolve the conflict, a senior source in the Pakistani government told CNN this Friday morning.

"Pakistan gives a place to diplomacy," he stressed.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had telephone conversations with the Foreign Minister of India and the Prime Minister of Pakistan the day before. The head of American diplomacy expressed Washington's support for a "direct dialogue" between New Delhi and Islamabad and "called for continued efforts to improve (negotiation) communications."

Meanwhile, a CNN source said that there are still no direct contacts between Pakistan and There was no India, and the information between them is transmitted through "roundabout channels".

*An organization performing the functions of a foreign agent

**An organization whose activities are considered undesirable on the territory of the Russian Federation