Pakistan-India Standoff: Case Study Analysis

Submitted by: Mahzad Sareer

Submitted to: Mr. Mehr M. Bakhsh
Key Events Timeline: India-Pakistan Conflict (May 6-10, 2025)
May 6, 2025
 Evening: Final preparations for India's "Operation Sindoor" underway
 [Link] India's Cabinet Committee on Security meets for final approval of strikes
May 7, 2025
 01:00-[Link] India launches "Operation Sindoor," a series of 14 missile strikes targeting
nine locations in Pakistani-administered Kashmir and Pakistan's Punjab province
 [Link] First reports of explosions in Muzaffarabad, the capital of Pakistan-administered
Kashmir
 [Link] Smoke reported rising from Bilal Mosque in Muzaffarabad after Indian strike
 [Link] Pakistan reports civilian casualties, including children, from Indian strikes
 [Link] Pakistan scrambles fighter jets including Chinese-made J-10C aircraft
 04:30-[Link] Major aerial engagement occurs between Indian and Pakistani aircraft
 [Link] Pakistan claims to have shot down five Indian aircraft (three Rafales, one MiG-29,
and one Su-30MKI)
 [Link] First images of aircraft wreckage in Indian-administered Kashmir appear on social
media
 [Link] Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi briefs President Droupadi Murmu on
Operation Sindoor
 [Link] Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and President Asif Ali Zardari attend
funeral of 7-year-old son of Lt. Col. Zaheer Abbas Turi killed in Indian strikes
 [Link] Pakistan Defense Minister Khawaja Asif announces Pakistan will respond but only
target military installations
 [Link] U.S. President Donald Trump comments on the situation, calling it "a shame" and
hoping "it ends quickly"
 [Link] UN calls for "maximum military restraint," warning of risks of nuclear conflict
 [Link] Pakistan reports death toll at 31 civilians, with 46 wounded from Indian strikes
May 8, 2025
 [Link] Pakistan Chief of Army Staff General Asim Munir holds emergency meeting with
top military commanders
 [Link] Pakistan launches first wave of drone strikes on Indian military installations
 [Link] India reports intercepting and destroying multiple Pakistani drones
  [Link] Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh claims at least 100 militants killed in
Sindoor operation
 [Link] Pakistan states it shot down 25 Indian drones overnight
 [Link] India acknowledges targeting Pakistani air defense systems
 [Link] U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks with security officials from both
countries urging restraint
 [Link] Cross-border artillery exchanges intensify along Line of Control
 [Link] Heavy shelling reported in Poonch district, resulting in civilian casualties
 [Link] India imposes nighttime blackouts in border regions
 [Link] Reports of additional drone activity over Lahore and Karachi
May 9, 2025
 [Link] India claims Pakistan targeted 36 sites with 300-400 drones; Pakistan denies this
claim
 [Link] Indian military official Vyomika Singh reports drone intrusions "from Leh to Sir
Creek"
 [Link] G7 nations issue joint statement calling for "immediate de-escalation"
 [Link] Pakistani military spokesperson Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry holds press briefing
disputing Indian claims
 [Link] India confirms Commissioner of Rajouri, Raj Kumar Thapa, killed by Pakistani
shelling
 [Link] UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy speaks with counterparts from both countries
 [Link] Pakistan claims India launched missiles at key military bases, including one near
Islamabad
 [Link] Pakistan announces planning for retaliatory operation
 [Link] Both sides report continued cross-border firing and drone activity
 [Link] Explosions reported in Jammu; air defense systems activated
 [Link] Pakistan states Prime Minister has called meeting of National Command Authority
(nuclear command)
May 10, 2025
 [Link] Indian forces on high alert along western border
 [Link] Pakistan closes its airspace to all air traffic
 [Link] Pakistan officially launches "Operation Bunyan al-Marsus," targeting Indian
military and intelligence facilities
  [Link] Heavy exchanges of missile fire reported between both countries
 [Link] Pakistan reportedly launches cyberattacks against Indian government websites
 [Link] Multiple explosions heard in Srinagar and Jammu
 [Link] U.S. President Donald Trump announces India and Pakistan have agreed to a
ceasefire after "a long night of talks mediated by the United States"
 [Link] Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar confirms ceasefire agreement
 [Link] Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri announces that chiefs of military operations
have agreed to stop all firing at 17:00 IST
 16:30/[Link] Ceasefire officially comes into effect (16:30 PKT/17:00 IST)
 [Link] Reports of explosions in Kashmir despite ceasefire; both sides accuse each other of
violations
 [Link] Omar Abdullah, Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir, posts on social media:
"What the hell just happened to the ceasefire? Explosions heard across Srinagar!!!" Later
found to be a false alarm as defense system was triggered in response to drones of India
that were sent earlier. Similar events in Peshawar as well.
 [Link] Indian Foreign Secretary accuses Pakistan of violating ceasefire; Pakistan denies
 [Link] Pakistani Prime Minister claims "victory" and announces "Yaum-e-Tashakur" (Day
of Gratitude) celebration holiday for May 11

Further Analysis
Documented Military Losses in the India-Pakistan Conflict (May 2025)
Pakistan's military said at least 31 people were killed and 57 injured in the strikes on Tuesday
night. India's army said at least 15 civilians were killed and 43 injured by Pakistani shelling on its
side of the de facto border (BBC News, 2025).
Pakistan’s military said 31 people were killed in India’s attacks. According to a senior Indian
defense source, shelling by Pakistan killed at least 12 people on the Indian side of the de facto
border that divides Kashmir (CNN, 2025).

Aircraft Losses

Indian Air Force Losses

 3-5 fighter jets reportedly lost, including:
o At least one Rafale fighter confirmed by a French intelligence official to CNN
(CNN, May 7, 2025)
 o Two Indian fighter jets shot down according to a U.S. official assessment with "high
confidence" (Reuters, May 8, 2025)

o Washington Post claimed to have identified 3 crash sites in India from May 7,
identifying two as belonging to a Dassault Rafale and a Dassault Mirage 2000
(Wikipedia, citing Washington Post)
o India confirmed the loss of 5 personnel but did not specify aircraft types
(Wikipedia, 2025 India-Pakistan conflict page)

Pakistani Air Force Losses

 No confirmed Pakistani aircraft losses reported in available sources

Drone Losses
Indian Drone Losses
 Pakistan claimed to have shot down 77 Israeli-made Harop drones (Wikipedia, 2025 India-
Pakistan conflict page)
 At least one Indian UAV confirmed shot down

Pakistani Drone Losses

 Multiple Pakistani drones shot down by India using "kinetic and non-kinetic means"
according to Wing Commander Vyomika Singh (PBS News, May 2025)

Missile Deployments and Interceptions

 India launched a series of 14 attacks using SCALP missiles and AASM Hammer glide
bombs (Wikipedia, 2025 India-Pakistan conflict page)

 India reportedly used BrahMos cruise missiles and SkyStriker loitering munitions
(Wikipedia)
 Pakistan deployed Turkish-Asisguard Songar drones targeting 36 sites (Wikipedia)

 India's S-400 missile system reportedly intercepted 8 Pakistani missiles targeting Jammu
district (Wikipedia)

Personnel Casualties

Military Personnel
 5 Indian military personnel: Officially confirmed by India (Wikipedia, 2025 India-
Pakistan conflict page)

 35-40 Pakistani military personnel: Claimed by Indian military (Wikipedia)

  Both sides claimed higher casualty figures for the opposing forces, but these remain
unverified

Military Infrastructure Damage

 India struck 9 locations in Pakistani-administered Kashmir and Pakistan's Punjab province
(Reuters, May 8, 2025)

 Reported targets included Bahawalpur, Muridke, Gulpur, Bhimber, Chak Amru, Bagh,
Kotli, Sialkot, and Muzaffarabad (Wikipedia)
 At least one Pakistani air defense radar reportedly destroyed by Indian drone (Wikipedia)

 Damage reported at Nur Khan air base near Pakistan's Army headquarters in Rawalpindi
(CNN, May 9, 2025)

Direct Military Operation Costs

 India's Operation Sindoor: Estimated at $80,000 per sortie with approximately 100 sorties
per day at peak operations ([Link], May 10, 2025)
 Pakistan's military operations: Estimated at $25 million daily for combat air patrols
([Link], May 10, 2025)

 Precision-guided munitions costs: $100,000 to $1.1 million per unit ([Link], May 10, 2025)

Aviation Disruption
 27 Indian airports closed until May 10, resulting in cancellation of over 430 flights
(Wikipedia)
 Pakistani airspace closed for 48 hours with all flights canceled (Wikipedia)

 Major airlines including Air India, IndiGo, SpiceJet, Lufthansa, KLM, Singapore Airlines,
and Thai Airways affected (Wikipedia)
These figures represent the documented military losses and costs directly attributable to combat
operations during the May 2025 conflict, based on the most reliable sources available. Due to the
nature of military conflicts, there are significant discrepancies between claims made by both sides,
and independent verification remains challenging.

Q 1. Impact on Pakistan's Deterrence: Undermined or Enhanced?

Pakistan's nuclear deterrence position appears to have been tested but ultimately enhanced during
the April-May 2025 conflict with India. This crisis represented the most serious military
confrontation between the nuclear-armed neighbors since their 1971 war.
Pakistan's use of J-10C fighter jets to reportedly shoot down Indian aircraft, including advanced
French-made Rafale fighters, represents a dramatic demonstration of capability that has
transformed regional deterrence calculations. Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar explicitly confirmed that
Chinese J-10C jets were used to engage Indian aircraft, constituting a real-world test of Chinese
military exports against Western technology.
The reported downing of Rafale jets (confirmed by unnamed French officials but denied by India)
demonstrates that Pakistan possesses counter-capabilities to India's most advanced systems. This
effectively neutralizes the qualitative advantage India believed it had secured through Western
arms purchases.
At the beginning of the crisis, Pakistan's defensive posture was clearly articulated by Defense
Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif, who stated that Pakistan would only use its nuclear weapons
if "there is a direct threat to our existence." This statement established clear red lines while
demonstrating restraint. Despite this measured approach, Pakistan maintained high alert status and
reinforced its forces in anticipation of Indian military action.
When India launched "Operation Sindoor" on May 7, 2025, targeting what it claimed were terrorist
camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, Pakistan responded with a measured yet
significant counterstrike called "Operation Bunyan al-Marsus" on May 10. This operation
specifically targeted Indian military installations and S-400 defense systems, demonstrating
Pakistan's technical capability to conduct precision strikes against high-value military targets
rather than civilian infrastructure.
Pakistan's ability to withstand India's initial incursion and counter with effective military responses
while avoiding nuclear escalation demonstrates that its conventional and strategic deterrence
remains credible. International reaction to the conflict showed concern about potential nuclear
escalation, which brought rapid diplomatic intervention, particularly from the United States. The
ceasefire brokered with U.S. mediation on May 10 indicates that the international community
recognizes the risks of allowing conflicts between these nuclear powers to escalate.
The conflict ultimately enhanced Pakistan's deterrence posture by demonstrating:
1. Operational capabilities against advanced Indian systems
2. Restraint in targeting selection, focusing on military rather than civilian targets
3. Clarity in nuclear doctrine and thresholds
4. Ability to withstand Indian strikes while maintaining effective response capabilities
Q 2. The 'New Normal' that India Wanted to Establish: Has Pakistani Retaliation Buried It?
India's strategy in recent years has been to establish a "new normal" in its approach to Pakistan,
particularly regarding cross-border terrorism. Since the 2019 Pulwama-Balakot crisis, India has
signaled a willingness to conduct strikes inside Pakistani territory in response to terrorist attacks it
attributes to Pakistan-backed groups.
Operation Sindoor represented a significant escalation in this strategy, as India conducted missile
strikes targeting multiple locations within Pakistan proper, not just in disputed Kashmir territories.
These strikes represented the deepest incursion into mainland Pakistan since previous conflicts.
India claimed these strikes specifically targeted terrorist infrastructure associated with Jaish-e-
Mohammed and Lashkar-e-Taiba, while avoiding military targets.
India's post-2019 confidence in its air capabilities, particularly after acquiring Rafale fighters,
proved misplaced. Pakistan's claim to have shot down five Indian aircraft (including three Rafales)
severely undermines India's deterrence narrative, even as India refuses to acknowledge these
losses. Indian claims that its Russian S-400 missile systems successfully intercepted Pakistani
drones and missiles remain unverified, while Pakistan demonstrated the ability to conduct
coordinated multi-vector attacks that challenged these defenses.
However, Pakistan's robust and calculated response through Operation Bunyan al-Marsus
demonstrated that India's "new normal" strategy faces severe limitations. Pakistan not only
retaliated but targeted specific high-value Indian military assets, particularly air bases and S-400
defense systems. This response showed Pakistan would not accept India's unilateral action without
significant costs.
The conflict has created a more dangerous situation rather than establishing India's preferred "new
normal." Several factors support this conclusion:
1. Pakistan demonstrated willingness and capability to respond forcefully to Indian strikes on
its territory
2. The escalation rapidly drew international diplomatic intervention
3. Both sides experienced significant civilian and military casualties
4. Economic and diplomatic costs were substantial for both nations
5. The conflict reminded the world of the nuclear risks involved in India-Pakistan
confrontations
The outcome suggests that while India may have gained some domestic political advantage from
its strikes, its strategy of establishing a new threshold for military action against Pakistan has not
succeeded. Rather, a mutual deterrence dynamic has been reinforced, where both sides recognize
the risks of unilateral military action.
Q 3: The Indus Water Treaty: Legal Analysis and Pakistan's Options
Overview of the Indus Water Treaty (IWT)
The Indus Water Treaty (IWT) is a water-sharing agreement signed between India and Pakistan on
September 19, 1960, with the World Bank serving as a mediator. The treaty has been considered
one of the most successful water-sharing agreements globally, surviving multiple wars and periods
of intense hostility between the two nations for over six decades.
Key Provisions of the IWT
1. Water Allocation:
o Eastern Rivers (Ravi, Beas, Sutlej): Allocated to India for unrestricted use
o Western Rivers (Indus, Jhelum, Chenab): Allocated to Pakistan, with India
permitted limited non-consumptive use
2. Institutional Framework:
 o Permanent Indus Commission (PIC): A bilateral commission with
representatives from both countries that meets annually to exchange data and
address cooperation issues
3. Dispute Resolution Mechanism: A three-tiered approach:
o Questions: Handled by the Permanent Indus Commission
o Differences: Resolved by a neutral expert appointed by the World Bank
o Disputes: Referred to a Court of Arbitration (CoA)
4. Treaty Duration:
o The treaty contains no expiration date or unilateral exit clause
o Article XII explicitly states that the treaty "shall continue in force until terminated
by a duly ratified treaty concluded for that purpose between the two governments"
India's Suspension of the IWT in April 2025
Following the April 22, 2025 Pahalgam attack that killed 26 people (mostly Hindu tourists) in
Indian-administered Kashmir, India announced on April 23, 2025, that it was placing the IWT "in
abeyance" until Pakistan "credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism."
This was part of a broader package of diplomatic measures, including closing border crossings and
expelling Pakistani diplomats.
Can India Unilaterally Hold the IWT in Abeyance?
Legal Assessment
1. Treaty Provisions: The IWT does not contain any provision for unilateral suspension or
"abeyance." Article XII clearly establishes that the treaty can only be terminated or
modified through mutual agreement codified in a new treaty ratified by both parties.
2. International Law: Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), while
neither India nor Pakistan are formal signatories, many of its principles are considered
customary international law:
o Article 57 (Suspension): Requires either treaty provisions allowing suspension or
consent of all parties
o Article 60 (Material Breach): Allows suspension only in case of material breach by
the other party
o Article 62 (Fundamental Change of Circumstances): Known as rebus sic stantibus,
allows for treaty termination if there's an unforeseen fundamental change in
circumstances
3. Legal Expert Opinions: Multiple legal experts, including Pakistani lawyer Ahmer Bilal
Soofi, have emphasized that India cannot unilaterally suspend the treaty, stating "there is
no such provision to 'hold it in abeyance' in the treaty."
India's Potential Legal Arguments
India could potentially justify its actions under international law through several arguments:
1. Material Breach: India could argue that Pakistan's alleged support for cross-border
terrorism constitutes a material breach of the treaty's underlying spirit of cooperation.
2. Fundamental Change of Circumstances: India might claim that security threats from
Pakistan represent a fundamental change from conditions in 1960.
3. Climate Change: The impacts of climate change and altered hydrological conditions not
anticipated in 1960 could be cited as grounds for treaty revision.
However, these arguments face significant challenges in international law, as they involve matters
outside the explicit water-sharing framework of the treaty.
Implications for Pakistan
Immediate Concerns
1. Water Security: The IWT governs water that feeds 80% of Pakistan's irrigated agriculture
and its hydropower needs. Suspension threatens this vital resource.
2. Operational Impact: India's suspension of the treaty has reportedly led to:
o Reduction in water flows from the Uri Dam into the Jhelum River
o Closure of the Baglihar Dam on the Chenab River
o Plans to close the Kishanganga Dam on the Neelum River
o Halting of data sharing critical for flood warnings and water management
3. Economic Vulnerability: As a lower riparian country, Pakistan's agricultural sector (the
backbone of its economy) depends heavily on the Indus waters, with disruptions
threatening food security and livelihoods.
Pakistan's Options
Legal Recourse
1. World Bank Intervention: Pakistan's Minister of State for Law and Justice, Aqeel Malik,
has indicated that Pakistan is preparing to approach the World Bank (the treaty's facilitator)
to challenge India's unilateral suspension.
2. International Arbitration: Pakistan could take the matter to the Permanent Court of
Arbitration in The Hague, where it could argue that India has violated the treaty's terms by
unilaterally suspending it.
3. International Court of Justice (ICJ): Pakistan could potentially file a case at the ICJ
alleging that India has violated the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
However, jurisdictional hurdles exist due to India's reservations under the ICJ statute.
Diplomatic Measures
1. United Nations Security Council: Pakistan has indicated it may raise the issue at the UN
Security Council to internationalize the dispute and increase diplomatic pressure on India.
 2. International Advocacy: Pakistan can mobilize global opinion by highlighting the
humanitarian implications of water scarcity and the precedent set by unilateral treaty
suspension.
3. Regional Alliances: Pakistan could leverage its relationship with China (which controls
the headwaters of the Indus and Brahmaputra rivers) to create counter-pressure on India.
Retaliatory Actions
1. Treaty Suspensions: Pakistan has announced it will hold "all bilateral agreements with
India, including but not limited to the Simla Agreement, in abeyance" in response.
2. Military Deterrence: Pakistan has explicitly warned that attempts to stop or divert water
flow would be considered "an act of war and responded with full force."
Conclusion
India's unilateral suspension of the Indus Water Treaty lacks clear legal foundation under the
treaty's own provisions and international law. The treaty contains no mechanism for "abeyance"
and explicitly requires mutual consent for termination or modification.
For Pakistan, the suspension represents an existential threat to its water security and agricultural
economy. Pakistan's options include legal challenges through international forums, diplomatic
pressure through multilateral institutions, and potential military deterrence. However, the
effectiveness of these measures depends on international support and India's calculation of benefits
versus costs in maintaining the suspension.
The current standoff over the IWT adds another complex dimension to the India-Pakistan conflict,
with implications for regional stability, international water law, and humanitarian concerns for
millions dependent on the Indus River system.
4. Regional and Global Implications of the India-Pakistan Standoff (May 2025)
A. Pakistan's International Recognition and Position
The recent conflict between India and Pakistan has significantly shifted Pakistan's international
standing, albeit in complex ways:
Gains in International Recognition
1. Defensive Legitimacy: Pakistan successfully positioned itself as responding defensively
to India's aggression, particularly after India's unilateral "Operation Sindoor" strikes on
May 7. This narrative gained traction internationally when Pakistan limited its initial
response to airspace defense rather than immediate counter-strikes.
2. Military Technological Credibility: Pakistan's reported success in downing Indian
aircraft, particularly the advanced French Rafale fighters using Chinese J-10C jets, has
enhanced its military reputation. Multiple sources, including U.S. officials quoted by
Reuters, confirmed that "a top Chinese-made Pakistani fighter plane shot down at least two
Indian military aircraft," establishing Pakistan's air defense capabilities in international
assessments.
 3. Measured Response Approach: Pakistan's military response under Operation Bunyan al-
Marsus was presented as proportional, targeting primarily military installations rather than
civilian areas. This approach helped strengthen Pakistan's image as adhering to
international norms of conflict.
4. International Mediation Success: Pakistan's consistent calls for international mediation,
which India traditionally opposes, eventually materialized with U.S. involvement. This
strengthened Pakistan's position that Kashmir is an international issue rather than a bilateral
matter.
Limitations and Challenges
1. Terrorism Allegations Persist: Despite diplomatic gains, Pakistan has not successfully
countered international perceptions about its connections to militant groups. The initial
claim of responsibility for the Pahalgam attack by The Resistance Front (TRF), known to
have links to Lashkar-e-Taiba, reinforced these suspicions.
2. Economic Vulnerability Exposed: The conflict highlighted Pakistan's economic fragility,
with Moody's warning that "sustained escalation in tensions with India would likely weigh
on Pakistan's growth and hamper the government's ongoing fiscal consolidation."
3. Regional Isolation Concerns: Pakistan's reliance on China for diplomatic and military
support has emphasized its limited regional alliances, particularly as most nations called
for de-escalation rather than supporting either side.
B. India's Failure to Garner International Support
Despite its global diplomatic weight, India struggled to mobilize international support for its
position on the Pahalgam attacks for several significant reasons:
1. Disproportionate Response Perception: India's strikes deep into Pakistani territory,
including into Punjab province, were viewed by many countries as escalatory rather than
defensive. The United Nations explicitly called for "maximum military restraint,"
implicitly criticizing India's approach.
2. Evidence Gap: India failed to present convincing evidence of Pakistan's direct
involvement in the Pahalgam attack. While claiming two suspects were Pakistani nationals,
the lack of public evidence undermined international support.
3. Humanitarian Concerns: Reports of civilian casualties from Indian strikes, particularly
the targeting of areas that included mosques, damaged India's moral standing. Pakistan
effectively leveraged these incidents in international forums.
4. Unilateral Treaty Suspension: India's suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty was widely
criticized as legally problematic, with legal experts noting that the treaty contains no
provisions for unilateral "abeyance." This move was seen as destabilizing a long-standing
international agreement.
5. Great Power Hesitancy: Major powers were reluctant to take sides. U.S. President Donald
Trump's response was notably detached, stating the conflict was "a shame" and that he
hoped it would "end quickly," while offering no clear support for India's position.
C. Impact on Pakistan-Afghanistan Relations
The India-Pakistan conflict has had several significant implications for Pakistan's relations with
Afghanistan:
1. Taliban Afghanistan's Neutrality: The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan maintained a
careful neutral stance during the conflict. According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of
Afghanistan, they expressed "concern over the escalating tensions" while reaffirming their
belief that "security and stability serve the collective interests of all countries in the region."
2. TTP Strategic Calculations: The conflict diverted Pakistan's military focus from its
northwestern border with Afghanistan, potentially easing pressure on the Tehrik-e-Taliban
Pakistan (TTP), which has been engaged in an insurgency against the Pakistani state. This
temporary security vacuum could strengthen TTP's position.
3. Cross-Border Security Challenges: Pakistan claimed that India attempted to launch
attacks through Afghan territory, with Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry alleging that "India also
allegedly launched missiles and drones at Afghanistan." Though denied by both India and
Afghanistan, these claims risk complicating Pakistan-Afghanistan relations.
4. Strategic Depth Concerns: The conflict has revived Pakistan's traditional concerns about
strategic depth, with fears that India could increase influence in Afghanistan to create a
two-front security challenge for Pakistan. This may prompt Pakistan to intensify efforts to
secure its western border and maintain influence with the Taliban regime.
D. Impact on China's Military Capabilities vis-à-vis US and the West
The conflict has become a significant testing ground for Chinese military technology, with major
implications:
1. First Combat Test of Chinese Systems: The J-10C fighter aircraft and PL-15 air-to-air
missiles received their first real-world combat test against Western equipment. Senior
Colonel (ret) Zhou Bo from Tsinghua University noted this would be "a tremendous boost
of confidence in Chinese weapon systems" if confirmed.
2. Market Positioning: The reported downing of Rafale fighters, if conclusively verified,
represents a watershed moment for Chinese arms exports. AVIC Chengdu Aircraft's stock
rose 40% following Pakistan's claims, reflecting market confidence in Chinese military
technology.
3. Technical Intelligence Gathering: China gained invaluable operational intelligence about
the performance of both its own systems and Western counterparts in actual combat
conditions. As Reuters reported, "air warfare communities in China, the U.S. and a number
of European countries will be extremely interested to try and get as much ground truth as
they can."
4. Electronic Warfare Capabilities: Pakistan claimed its J-10C jets jammed India's Rafales'
radar and communication systems, suggesting sophisticated Chinese electronic warfare
capabilities. This represents a potentially significant shift in military technology
assessment, as electronic warfare has traditionally been a Western advantage.
 5. Export Market Implications: The conflict will likely boost Chinese arms exports,
particularly to countries seeking alternatives to more expensive Western equipment. As
noted by one analyst quoted by CNN, "it will potentially be a huge boost for Chinese arm
sales in the international market."
E. India's Position in SAARC
The conflict has significantly affected India's standing within the South Asian Association for
Regional Cooperation (SAARC):
1. Multilateral Diplomatic Setback: India's unilateral actions, particularly the suspension of
the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme for Pakistani nationals and the closure of borders,
damaged the already fragile SAARC framework.
2. Regional Leadership Questioned: India's aspirations for regional leadership were
undermined by its inability to prevent escalation or achieve a clear diplomatic victory.
Smaller SAARC nations viewed India's actions with concern rather than support.
3. Bangladesh's Critical Stance: India's restrictions on Bangladeshi media outlets, with
reports that "Indian government restricted six Bangladeshi channels' YouTube accounts
under the section 69(A) of Information Technology Act," created additional tensions with
a key SAARC member.
4. SAARC Revival Prospects Diminished: Any hopes of reviving SAARC, which has been
largely dormant since 2016, have been further set back by the conflict. The organization
remains hostage to India-Pakistan tensions, with functional regional cooperation now even
more distant.
F. Rivalry Between Chinese and Western Weapons Suppliers
The conflict has ignited an intense competition between Chinese and Western weapons systems
and their suppliers:
1. Direct Combat Comparison: For the first time, Chinese-made systems (J-10C fighters
with PL-15 missiles) directly faced Western systems (Rafale fighters with Meteor missiles)
in combat. As Reuters reported, "social media posts highlighted the face-off between
China's PL-15 air-to-air missile against the Meteor, produced by European missile group
MBDA."
2. Cost-Effectiveness Narrative: Chinese weapons systems, generally less expensive than
Western counterparts, demonstrated competitive capability, challenging the premium
pricing model of Western arms manufacturers. Pakistan's successful deployment of these
systems provides a powerful marketing narrative for Chinese exports.
3. Supply Chain Security Questions: India's reliance on multiple weapons sources (French,
Russian, Israeli, American) raised questions about supply chain security and
interoperability during conflict. By contrast, Pakistan's closer alignment with Chinese
systems demonstrated advantages in integration and logistical simplicity.
4. Arms Diversification Trends: The conflict may accelerate trends toward greater
diversification in global arms procurement, with more countries seeking a mix of Western
and Chinese systems to balance cost, capability, and geopolitical considerations.
 5. European Defense Industry Concerns: The potential first combat loss of a Rafale fighter
represents a significant setback for French arms exports. According to French sources, this
could impact ongoing negotiations for additional Rafale sales to India and other potential
customers.
G. Impact on Pakistan's Internal Security Issues
The conflict has had complex implications for Pakistan's internal security challenges:
1. Balochistan Insurgency: The conflict has temporarily diverted attention and resources
from Pakistan's ongoing counterinsurgency efforts in Balochistan, where separatist activity
had doubled in 2024 compared to the previous year. This security vacuum could allow
Baloch separatist groups to regroup and intensify operations.
2. Nationalist Sentiment: The conflict has boosted nationalist sentiment across Pakistan,
temporarily overshadowing internal divisions, including separatist tensions in Balochistan.
As noted by the Atlantic Council, Pakistan's government found itself "on a relatively
stronger footing" despite "considerable scrutiny in recent months" over issues including
"its handling of unrest in Balochistan."
3. KP Security Challenges: Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province faces ongoing threats from the
TTP, which may exploit the conflict to strengthen its position. The division of Pakistani
security forces between eastern and western fronts limits their effectiveness against this
threat.
4. "Defensive Offense" Strategy: There are indications that India has been pursuing what
its National Security Advisor Ajit Doval described as a "defensive offense" strategy,
supporting insurgents in Balochistan as a counter to alleged Pakistani support for militants
in Kashmir. This dynamic has exacerbated Pakistan's internal security challenges.
5. Civil-Military Relations: The conflict has strengthened the position of Pakistan's military
establishment within domestic politics, potentially sidelining civilian governance concerns.
This could affect the government's approach to internal security challenges, favoring
military solutions over political engagement with disaffected groups.
The India-Pakistan standoff of May 2025 has reshaped regional dynamics and global military
assessments in significant ways. Pakistan has gained some diplomatic and military credibility,
while India has faced challenges in justifying its aggressive posture. China has emerged as a
significant beneficiary through the combat validation of its military technology. The broader
implications for regional security architecture, arms markets, and internal stability within Pakistan
will continue to unfold in the coming months, with the potential to fundamentally alter South Asian
geopolitics.
Q 5. President Trump's Tweet and Kashmir on the Global Radar
President Trump's involvement in the India-Pakistan crisis has indeed placed Kashmir back on the
global radar in a significant way. Trump's intervention was notable for several reasons:
On May 10, 2025, Trump announced on social media: "India and Pakistan have agreed to a FULL
AND IMMEDIATE CEASEFIRE" following "a long night of talks mediated by the United States."
This direct involvement contrasted with his initially passive approach when he merely expressed
hope that the conflict would "end quickly."
The U.S. administration, particularly Secretary of State Marco Rubio, engaged actively with both
sides to facilitate the ceasefire agreement. Rubio specifically offered U.S. help to mediate "in order
to avoid future conflicts" and mentioned "talks on a broad set of issues," which implicitly includes
the Kashmir dispute.
Trump's intervention represents a significant shift in U.S. policy toward more active engagement
in the Kashmir issue. While India has traditionally rejected third-party mediation on Kashmir, the
severity of this crisis forced a pragmatic acceptance of U.S. involvement in the ceasefire
negotiations.
The ceasefire agreement, while preventing immediate escalation, establishes a new battlefield
reality that will shape future conflict dynamics. Secretary of State Marco Rubio's statement that
the U.S. offered assistance "in starting constructive talks in order to avoid future conflicts"
indicates American recognition that the Kashmir issue requires sustained attention to prevent
nuclear escalation.
Pakistan has repeatedly thanked Trump for his offer to mediate on Kashmir, while India has been
more reluctant to acknowledge third-party involvement. These dynamic highlights the diplomatic
challenges that remain but also demonstrates that the Kashmir issue has gained renewed
international attention.
The conflict has several implications for the Kashmir dispute:
1. International awareness of Kashmir as a flashpoint has increased significantly
2. The U.S. has positioned itself as a potential mediator between India and Pakistan
3. The humanitarian consequences of the conflict have drawn global attention to the region
4. The nuclear dimension of the conflict has heightened international concern
5. The risk of future escalation may generate sustained diplomatic efforts toward resolving
underlying issues
The ceasefire agreement, while fragile, potentially opens the door for more substantive discussions
about Kashmir, particularly as Trump has indicated willingness to engage in the dispute. Whether
this renewed international attention will translate into meaningful progress toward resolution
remains uncertain, but the conflict has unquestionably raised Kashmir's profile on the global
diplomatic agenda.
Q 8: India's Next Strategic Moves: Redeeming Regional and Global Prestige
Current Context: The May 2025 Standoff
The May 2025 standoff between India and Pakistan was triggered by a terrorist attack on April 22
in Pahalgam, Kashmir. Following the attack, India launched missile strikes on Pakistan on May 7,
codenamed "Operation Sindoor," targeting militant groups including Jaish-e-Mohammed and
Lashkar-e-Taiba. India's Ministry of Defense described the operation as "focused, measured, and
non-escalatory," emphasizing that it struck only terrorist infrastructure while avoiding Pakistani
military or government facilities. Experts react: India just launched airstrikes against Pakistan.
What’s next? - Atlantic Council
The situation has caused significant disruptions in air travel across the region, with India closing
27 airports in its northern and western regions until May 10, and Pakistan suspending flights from
key airports including Karachi, Lahore, and Sialkot. A ceasefire was announced on May 10, 2025.
Strategic Analysis: India's Potential Next Moves
1. Balancing Regional Security with Global Ambitions
According to Rudabeh Shahid, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council's South Asia
Center, "A protracted India-Pakistan crisis would divert India's strategic focus away from the
maritime Indo-Pacific and toward its western land borders, also constraining its ability to act as a
net security provider in the region." Experts react: India just launched airstrikes against Pakistan.
What’s next? - Atlantic Council This insight suggests India's first priority must be to stabilize the
situation with Pakistan while protecting its broader strategic interests.
Analysts point out that both India and Pakistan may be ignoring their "real and pressing problems
in favor of a territorial dispute." The Washington Post notes that China benefits from this continued
conflict, as "Beijing delays India's efforts to strengthen ties with other global powers or consolidate
influence in Asia-Pacific affairs" while India remains entangled in subcontinental conflicts.
Opinion | India and Pakistan’s fight over Kashmir only benefits China - The Washington Post
2. Economic Strategies for Geopolitical Leverage
India's economy, despite appearing to decelerate during fiscal year 2024-2025, shows inherent
strength in domestic demand. The growth rate for fiscal 2023-2024 was revised upward to an
impressive 9.2%—the highest in 12 years (excluding the post-pandemic rebound). India economic
outlook, May 2025 India can leverage this economic strength to enhance its global standing.
Experts suggest India's economic trajectory in 2025-2026 will be defined by two opposing forces:
 The potential positive impact of tax incentives from the Union Budget
 The potential negative impact of uncertainty in global trade networks
3. Diplomatic and Security Realignments
According to the Atlantic Council, "India's growing geopolitical importance has come at the
expense of other key players in the region such as China and Pakistan." The analysis warns that
"India's gain in geopolitical leverage—if blindly embraced by the international community—could
escalate tensions in the region as opposed to promoting stability." India’s geopolitical rise in
context: Regional implications - Atlantic Council
India has been strengthening security partnerships beyond the region. Indo-Japanese relations have
seen new strides, with increased joint military drills and the Japanese foreign minister regarding
security collaboration with India as "expanding drastically." India has also discussed increased
defense cooperation with Thailand. India’s geopolitical rise in context: Regional implications -
Atlantic Council
4. Counterterrorism Strategy and Border Security
Foreign Policy magazine notes India's focus prior to the terrorist attack: "It was focused on being
a regional power, not just in South Asia but in Asia. It was talking about a multipolar world in
which it was one of the poles... looking at its 6 percent growth... India wanted to focus on their
strategic side, on their rivalry with China, and does not want to get bogged down with Pakistan."
India-Pakistan Conflict: How to De-Escalate
Foreign Policy further suggests that India aims to "root out cross-border terrorism, but it risks
fueling discontent" with its approach, indicating that a more nuanced counterterrorism strategy
might be needed. India-Pakistan Conflict: New Delhi Has a Long-Term Counterterrorism Plan
5. Navigating the U.S.-China Dynamic
Manjari Chatterjee Miller, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, emphasizes that the
current conflict "poses a dilemma for U.S. policymakers" in how they respond to the escalating
tensions between India and Pakistan. On India-Pakistan Conflict, The United States Needs to Tread
Carefully | Council on Foreign Relations
The Washington Post analysis highlights how "China's diplomatic backing of Pakistan—especially
on sensitive issues such as Kashmir" complicates India's strategic position. Beijing has "repeatedly
blocked India's efforts to designate Pakistan-based militants as global terrorists in the United
Nations" and opposed "India's bids for leadership roles in international organizations, such as a
permanent seat on the U.N. Security Council." Opinion | India and Pakistan’s fight over Kashmir
only benefits China - The Washington Post
Q 9: Pakistan’s Counter Measures in Face of Future
1. Military Readiness and Border Fortification
The Pakistan Army has intensified its preparedness along the Line of Control (LoC), including the
deployment of anti-personnel mines and Special Service Group (SSG) commandos. Intelligence
reports suggest a reactivation of militant groups like Hizbul Mujahideen, with efforts to reignite
local militancy while avoiding overt escalations. These actions aim to strengthen defensive
positions and deter potential Indian incursions .The Week
2. Diplomatic and Economic Countermeasures
In response to India's suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty and other aggressive actions,
Pakistan's National Security Committee (NSC) has implemented several measures: Daily Pakistan
English News
 Suspension of Bilateral Agreements: Pakistan has put bilateral agreements, including the
Simla Agreement, in abeyance until India ceases its aggressive behavior .
 Closure of Wagah Border Post: The Wagah border crossing has been closed, halting
cross-border transit.
 Visa and Diplomatic Restrictions: All visas under the SAARC Visa Exemption Scheme
for Indian nationals have been suspended, and Indian defense advisors in Islamabad have
been declared persona non grata.
  Airspace and Trade Suspension: Pakistan has closed its airspace to Indian-owned or
operated airlines and suspended all trade with India, including transit through third
countries .
3. Intelligence and Counterterrorism Enhancements
On May 6, 2025, Pakistan inaugurated the National Intelligence Fusion and Threat Assessment
Centre (NIFTAC) in Islamabad (PM Office). This center aims to centralize intelligence gathering,
threat analysis, and operational responses across various agencies. NIFTAC integrates over 50
federal and provincial departments to enhance real-time threat assessment and coordinated
responses to terrorism and related threats .
4. Strategic Deterrence and Military Modernization
To bolster its deterrence capabilities, Pakistan has acquired advanced conventional weapon
systems, including: Stimson Center
 JF-17 Thunder Fighter Jets: Indigenously produced aircraft enhancing aerial combat
capabilities.
 Agosta-90B Class Submarines: Upgraded with air-independent propulsion systems for
extended underwater endurance.
 Type 054A Frigates: Chinese-built frigates enhancing naval strength.r
 Fatah-II Guided Rocket System: Advanced rocket artillery for precision strikes.
 Early Warning Systems: Including Erieye Radar and Saab 2000 aircraft for improved
surveillance .
These acquisitions aim to provide Pakistan with a broader range of response options and enhance
its deterrence posture against potential threats.
5. Joint Military Exercises and Training
The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) continues to conduct major combat training exercises, such as
"Exercise Saffron Bandit," to assess and improve combat skills, particularly in response to threats
from the Indian Air Force. These exercises focus on enhancing operational readiness and
developing new aerial combat tactics .
Reference List:
1. Reuters. (2025, May 8). The latest developments in the India-Pakistan conflict. Retrieved
from [Link]
conflict-2025-05-08/
2. CNN. (2025, May 7). India launches attacks on Pakistan after Kashmir massacre. Retrieved
from [Link]
hnk
3. CNN. (2025, May 9). India-Pakistan news [Live updates]. Retrieved from
[Link]
hnk
4. Reuters. (2025, May 5). Pakistan tests missile, India orders drills amid Kashmir standoff.
Retrieved from [Link]
india-standoff-moodys-warns-economic-cost-2025-05-05/
5. Wikipedia. (2025). 2025 India–Pakistan conflict. Retrieved from
[Link]
6. Wikipedia. (2025). 2025 India–Pakistan standoff. Retrieved from
[Link]
7. Wikipedia. (2025). 2025 India–Pakistan strikes. Retrieved from
[Link]
8. PBS News. (2025, May). At least five civilians killed after latest exchange of gunfire
between India and Pakistan. Retrieved from [Link]
five-civilians-killed-after-latest-exchange-of-gunfire-between-india-and-pakistan
9. The Washington Post. (2025, May 10). India and Pakistan agree to ceasefire, then resume
fight. Retrieved from [Link]
military-attacks/
10. ABC News. (2025, May 7). At least 31 dead in Pakistan in overnight India attacks, military
says. Retrieved from [Link]
india-attacks-military/story?id=121548110
11. Global Conflict Tracker, Council on Foreign Relations. (2025). Conflict Between India and
Pakistan. Retrieved from [Link]
between-india-and-pakistan
12. [Link]. (2025, May 10). Price of four-week Pakistan-India conflict pegged at $500bn.
Retrieved from [Link]
conflict-pegged-at-500bn
13. Reuters. (2025, May 9). India File: India-Pakistan conflict escalates. Retrieved from
[Link]
09/
14. Al Jazeera. (2025, May 9). India-Pakistan tensions: A brief history of conflict. Retrieved
from [Link]
of-conflict
15. Bloomberg. (2025, May 5). Kashmir Attack: India and Pakistan Face a Conflict Neither
Economy Can Afford. Retrieved from [Link]
05/kashmir-attack-india-and-pakistan-face-a-conflict-neither-economy-can-afford
16. TIME. (2025, May 10). India and Pakistan Agree to Full, Immediate Ceasefire: Trump.
Retrieved from [Link]
kashmir-conflict-strikes/
17. CNN. (2025, May 9). China has spent billions developing military tech. Conflict between
India and Pakistan could be its first major test. Retrieved from
[Link]
hnk
18. Atlantic Council. (2025, May 11). Experts react: India and Pakistan have agreed to a shaky
cease-fire. Where does the region go from here? Retrieved from
[Link]
fire-experts/