‘India Showed The World What Self-Reliance In Warfare Looks Like': John Spencer On Op Sindoor

News18

4 days ago

Last Updated:
US defence expert Spencer said Op Sindoor validated India's defence self-reliance, exposed Pakistan's proxy dependency, and dealt a credibility blow to China's weapons export model
India has arrived as a self-reliant military power—and Operation Sindoor proved it. That is the verdict of John Spencer, one of the world's foremost experts on modern warfare and Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at West Point's Modern War Institute.
In his detailed analysis titled India's Operation Sindoor: A Battlefield Verdict on Chinese Weapons—And India's Victory, Spencer on Thursday described India's military response to the 22 April terror attack in Pahalgam as not merely retaliatory, but as a strategic stress test of India's defence ecosystem—and a moment of reckoning for Chinese military exports.
Far from a limited tactical operation, Spencer argued, Operation Sindoor marked India's emergence as a sovereign military power capable of fielding, operating, and succeeding with an indigenous arsenal under full-spectrum combat pressure.
'India fought as a sovereign power—wielding precision tools it designed, built, and deployed with unmatched battlefield control," he wrote. 'Pakistan fought as a proxy force, dependent on Chinese hardware that was built for export, not for excellence."
INDIA'S ARSENAL: DESIGNED AT HOME, PROVEN UNDER FIRE
According to Spencer, the defining feature of India's success in Operation Sindoor was not just military precision—it was total control over the tools of war. A decade of strategic investment under Make in India and Atmanirbhar Bharat had, he wrote, materialised into a self-sufficient, combat-ready arsenal.
Among the standout systems:
This arsenal, Spencer wrote, reflected a complete and operational indigenous military ecosystem—one that fused technology, autonomy, and battlefield effectiveness.
PAKISTAN'S COLLAPSE: A PROXY WAR, NOT A PEER FIGHT
Spencer was sharply critical of Pakistan's performance, describing it as a textbook case of strategic overdependence on foreign systems—particularly those manufactured by China for export, not endurance.
'When challenged, these systems failed—exposing the strategic hollowness behind Islamabad's defence posture," he observed.
The JF-17 Thunder, designed in China and assembled in Pakistan, was unable to compete with Indian air dominance. Its limited radar and payload capabilities were insufficient against India's electronic warfare systems and layered defences.
Pakistan's air defence network—based almost entirely on Chinese systems—also collapsed under pressure:
HQ-9 and HQ-16 SAMs, Chinese imitations of Russian S-300 and Buk platforms, failed to intercept incoming missiles or loitering drones.
LY-80 and FM-90 short-range and medium-range systems were unable to detect or engage India's low-flying strikes.
The CH-4 drones, widely used by Pakistan, were either jammed or destroyed.
Spencer noted that Turkish drone operators were reportedly brought in, exposing Pakistan's reliance not only on foreign hardware, but also on overseas expertise to operate it.
Even the F-16s, Pakistan's most capable aircraft, were absent from the battlefield due to US-imposed end-user restrictions prohibiting their use against India. Spencer argued this underscored the strategic fragility of nations reliant on conditional imports.
The final blow, he wrote, came with the destruction of Pakistan's Saab 2000 AEW&C aircraft, which crippled its aerial command and control. Spencer described it as a 'strategic blinding", adding that Pakistan lost not just equipment, but situational awareness itself.
'By the end of the campaign," he wrote, 'Pakistan had lost key radar stations, its premier AEW&C aircraft, dozens of drones, and its ability to contest Indian airspace."
A STRATEGIC SIGNAL—AND A MARKET REACTION
Spencer emphasised that Operation Sindoor was more than retaliation—it was a blueprint for 21st-century sovereign warfare. It showed what a country can achieve when it owns, operates, and refines its own systems across the full spectrum of warfare—from radar to response, missiles to ISR.
'India showed the world what self-reliance in modern warfare looks like—and proved that 'Atmanirbhar Bharat' works under fire," he wrote.
The strategic signal had tangible consequences. Indian defence stocks surged:
Paras Defence & Space rose 49 per cent in May.
MTAR Technologies and Data Patterns also posted strong gains.
In contrast, Chinese defence giants AVIC, NORINCO, and CETC saw dips in investor confidence, as the battlefield performance of their systems dented export credibility.
THE STRATEGIC TAKEAWAY: INDIA HAS ARRIVED
Spencer concluded that India not only retaliated, but delivered a strategic message—to adversaries and partners alike.
'This wasn't just retaliation," he wrote. 'It was India's proof-of-concept. A war waged and won on its own terms—with tools of its own making."
For India, Operation Sindoor was not just a military success—it was a sovereign assertion of capability, credibility, and control. It proved that India's defence transformation is no longer aspirational. It is operational. Combat-tested. Real.
Watch India Pakistan Breaking News on CNN-News18. Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated!
tags :
Atmanirbhar Bharat Indian defence industry Indian military Operation Sindoor
Location :
New Delhi, India, India
First Published:
May 29, 2025, 13:44 IST
News india 'India Showed The World What Self-Reliance In Warfare Looks Like': John Spencer On Op Sindoor