Chinese chatter on Operation Sindoor and what it says about nuclear conflict

India Today

07-05-2025

India's Operation Sindoor, targeting key terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, was closely monitored in China, which otherwise calls Pakistan its 'iron-buddy'. The late-night strike by India created quite a buzz on the Chinese internet, where observers debated and discussed how the situation in South Asia might evolve from here. So, how is China viewing these developments?
1. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in an official statement: 'China regrets India's military action this morning and is concerned about the current developments. India and Pakistan are inseparable neighbours and are also China's neighbours. China opposes all forms of terrorism. We call on both India and Pakistan to prioritise peace and stability, remain calm and exercise restraint, and avoid actions that further complicate the situation.'
2. Chinese coverage of the development mostly reiterated Pakistani talk points like how 'Pahalgam was a false-flag operation', how 'Pakistan has shot down six Indian fighter jets', how 'many Indian soldiers have been captured', and how 'the Indian leadership and the Indian Army are having a crisis of trust'.
3. Meanwhile, some Chinese assessments highlighted that Pakistan does have a short-term tactical advantage. It can perform well in small-scale conflicts with the help of the J-10CE, the JF-17 Thunder Block III, and Turkish drones. The PL-15 missile can also have a significant deterrent effect on Indian Rafale fighter jets. Pakistan's propaganda war, the Chinese side argued, is also highly effective.
4. But they acknowledged that Pakistan has the problem of long-term resource shortages. Pakistan's economy and military expenditure are not at par with India, making it difficult for it to sustain a full-scale war. Its army's equipment is outdated, and it will face disadvantages if the conflict expands to a ground war. Its dependence on external aid (China, Turkey, and Middle-Eastern countries) also limits its strategic autonomy.
5. Some saw external forces or the great power game, and nuclear deterrence as key variables in this conflict. They argued that China's intervention, Turkish drones, and Middle-Eastern oil capital (Saudi Arabia, etc) may provide a strategic buffer for Pakistan. Its nuclear arsenal, they noted, is also an important deterrent.
6. India, they asserted, has much to lose from the conflict. In the short term, military action may fail to achieve the goal of deterrence and instead might expose its combat capability deficiencies. International public opinion may shift from "anti-terrorism sympathy" to 'criticism towards the trouble-maker". In the medium term, India's economic transformation plans may get hit. In the long run, they argued, there will be no solution to the Kashmir issue, and periodic conflicts will continue to consume resources from India's rise.
7. They argued that historical experience dictates that there can be no winner in the India-Pakistan confrontation. Therefore, the ultimate solution, they said, has to come from political dialogue and international mediation.
8. Chinese scholars, however, ruled out the possibility of nuclear war. "Reason will eventually overcome anger," said Lin Minwang, a professor at Fudan University. In his view, India and Pakistan have played the "war" game for decades and are very clear about the bottom line. Although both sides' actions are high-profile and loud, the intensity and severity of the conflict are expected to be limited and will not expand or last long.
India has vented out its anger and will stop after achieving its goal. Although how Pakistan retaliates is worthy of attention and will affect the overall direction of the situation. However, given the relative decline in Pakistan's overall strength, its retaliation is expected to remain restrained, Minwang noted.
(Antara Ghosal Singh is Fellow, ORF, New Delhi. She is a graduate from Tsinghua University, China, and has been a Chinese language fellow at the National Central University, Taiwan)
(Views expressed in this opinion piece are those of the author)