"It was a test of India's indigenous systems vs Chinese systems...": Warfare expert Spencer on Pakistan's escalation during Op Sindoor
In a video interview with ANI, warfare scholar and expert John Spencer, who is Chair of Urban Warfare Studies at the New York-based Modern War Institute, also said Operation Sindoor came to be a test of India's indigenous systems versus the Chinese systems, and the world was watching.
India launched Operation Sindoor early on May 7 and hit terror infrastructure in Pakistan and PoJK in response to the Pahalgam terror attack in which 26 civilians were killed. India repelled subsequent Pakistani military aggression and pounded its airbases.
India and Pakistan agreed to a cessation of hostilities following a call made by Pakistan's DGMO to his Indian counterpart.
Spencer said Pakistan is a Chinese-equipped military, so 'this is absolutely a test of Chinese military technologies, both for the rest of the world and also for China'.
'It (China) uses it (Pakistan) as a lab for this technology...India does share a border with China. Turkey does provide capabilities to Pakistan... Absolutely, a test of those technologies. There is an element of proxy warfare where it's kind of geopolitically who has a military defence agreement with whom and what's the extent of it. But absolutely, this is a test of Indian indigenous systems versus Chinese systems. And everybody was learning from that demonstration because war puts everything to the test,' he said.
Spencer said that for the military capabilities, the evidence was in the video, satellite footage, 'not in the words about how you said your Chinese systems performed'.
He said there is a difference between a war and a named operation like Sindoor, which was a response to a terrorist attack that had a clear start and a clear ending
'There are a lot of nuances there, even from the geopolitical perspective of China or any adversary to India, using Pakistan and these borders to isolate India economically and militarily in all aspects... There is a difference between a war and a named operation like Sindoor, which was a response to a terrorist attack that had a clear start and a clear ending...and this broader kind of state of conflict where nation states are trying to weaken what they view as threats and weaken their neighbours, which is unfortunate,' he said.
Answering a query, Spencer, who is a scholar, author, security analyst and an internationally renowned expert on urban warfare, military strategy and other related topics, said nobody can predict the future, but one of the ways to prevent future wars is through preparation.
'War is always uncertain, political, and human. You can't predict the triggering moment of the next war. You can definitely identify the underlying current or the underlying issues that persist... The underlying condition within India, which is a pattern of response to cross-border terrorism, leads to the formation of a doctrine that an enemy takes advantage of. Nobody can predict the future, but one of the ways you prevent future wars is through preparation, change and being on the ground,' he said.
'This was why I studied Operation Sindoor. It wasn't just about the four days. It was what was happening in the decade preceding and the five years preceding, from India's emergence to the Indian military's transformations and preparations, to the small business innovations that were taking place with the technologies and so many elements that were preventing and leading to being prepared for a war. I can't tell you when the next one is because the enemy always gets a vote. But I can tell you that India is more prepared,' he added.
Regarding the effectiveness of Chinese weapon systems used by Pakistan, Spencer suggested potential shifts in procurement strategies by the Western neighbour, also highlighting 'user error' while managing the equipment.
Spencer indicated that Pakistan might seek advanced technologies elsewhere also, despite financial constraints.
'Absolutely. You would think we put rational actor theories in place, like if what you bought doesn't work, then you go back to the seller and say, 'This didn't work like it was supposed to.' But you also know if there's user error. Absolutely, they'll try to identify their weaknesses and look towards solutions, but they have a money problem. The IMF has to bail Pakistan out,' he said.
'So, where can they get it cheaply? They also want advanced superior technologies. It is a challenge for Pakistan and some other nations, but they'll definitely be looking to integrate... For the military capabilities, the evidence was in that video, satellite footage, not in the words about how you said your Chinese system performed,' he added. (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
5 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Peace and normalcy returning to Manipur, says Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla
Manipur Governor Ajay Kumar Bhalla on Saturday (July 26, 2025) asserted that peace and normalcy are returning to the state with the collaborative efforts of the government, armed forces and civil society organisations. Also read: Editorial: Healing Manipur: on Manipur and President's Rule Mr. Bhalla was speaking at an event in Imphal organised to commemorate the 26th anniversary of Kargil Vijay Diwas. "Many have lost their lives and thousands have become homeless in the ethnic violence in Manipur. The government has taken various steps to resolve the crisis and restore peace and confidence. Joint operations of combined teams of state police and armed forces have been able to recover numerous firearms and ammunition over the past few months. "Peace and normalcy are returning to the state with the collaborative efforts of the government, armed forces and civil society organisations. Numerous insurgents involved in extortion, including cyber-facilitated schemes and funding militia groups, have been arrested during intensified crackdowns in recent months," he said. Manipur Police have launched an anti-extortion cell and confidential helpline bringing together state police, CAPFs, Assam Rifles and Army to streamline complaints and protect citizens from unlawful demands, he added. Multiple checkpoints have been strategically established across the hill and valley districts, on the national highways, to ensure essential supplies of food and medicines. These combined efforts alongside community outreach are steadily dismantling armed networks, curbing extortion and restoring civil order, the Governor added. "Further, several initiatives are being taken to ensure the displaced people regain hope and skills. Dialogue is underway with civil society organisations from Meitei, Kuki-Zo and Naga communities for voluntary resettlement of internally displaced persons (IDPs) and inclusive safety guarantees," Mr. Bhalla said. Manipur has been under the President's rule since February 13 this year after Chief Minister N. Biren Singh resigned from his post and the assembly was put under animated suspension. More than 260 people have been killed and thousands rendered homeless in ethnic violence between Imphal Valley-based Meiteis and adjoining hills-based Kukis in Manipur since May, 2023.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
5 minutes ago
- First Post
From aspiration to agency: India redefines its global role
India seems to have resolved a complex arithmetic: diplomacy without submission, trade without compromising sovereignty, tech engagement that does not sacrifice agency, and multilateralism that negotiates interest, not ideology read more It is not the India of aspiration alone; it is the India of agency, reframing between autonomy and engagement, between principle and pragmatism. File image/ AP In the rapidly shifting global political architecture, few nations stand at as pivotal a juncture as India, caught in the confluence of normative aspirations, strategic autonomy, economic opportunity, and diplomatic realignment. From international tech rule‑setting to high‑stakes trade negotiations, from balancing sanctions pressure to recalibrating relations with China, the past few weeks have made clear that it's India's real moment. This is not mere reactivity but about India stepping forward to set the narrative, even under the weight of great power tensions and domestic imperatives. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Take the sharp warning from Nato Secretary‑General Mark Rutte, a diplomatic salvo that carries real consequences. In statements delivered in Washington and to Congress, Rutte emphasised that 'secondary sanctions', including tariffs up to 100 per cent, could be deployed against major economies like India, China, and Brazil should they continue to trade with Russia. The intent: leverage global economic ties to pressure Moscow toward a peace settlement over Ukraine. The declaration is a clear signal that India's commercial engagements are being scrutinised through the lens of Western security priorities. Delhi's swift rebuke, citing 'double standards' and asserting its sovereign right to conduct its trade, reveals India's determination to resist external dictates, even as it shoulders the complexity of geopolitical entanglements. Yet, this episode does not simply reflect Indian defiance. Rather, it underscores a rare and consequential exercise of normative sovereignty. India is not tethered to any bloc; it takes pride in being a multi-aligned and principled actor. Domestic energy security demands, its long‑standing commitment to global South solidarity, and cautious calibration with both West and East place it in a strategic sweet spot or jeopardy, depending on perspective. When Rutte urged these countries to 'make the phone call to Vladimir Putin' or face sanctions, he emphasised pressure, but India refused to be boxed into Western frameworks, opting instead for a calibrated diplomacy. This is not a retreat; this is self‑definition in action. World Trade Organisation (WTO) reform, gaining traction ahead of the Cameroon Ministerial, is another arena where India is quietly influencing multilateral rules. Talks now hinge on thorny compromises: easing 'consensus' gridlocks, demanding proof for industrial subsidies, and revisiting the special status of countries like India and China. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Pushed by the US and Europe to revive a stalled WTO, these shifts could undermine developing country carve-outs. While India remains restrained, its backroom diplomacy is active. The challenge lies in securing meaningful exceptions without stalling reform, testing not just India's trade stance but also its broader role in global rule-making. This is more about realigning trade with development than resistance. At the same time, New Delhi finds itself on the cusp of a potentially transformative bilateral trade agreement with the US, ahead of a hard August 1 US tariff deadline. An article of faith in India's political economy has been bilateralism as an antidote to protectionism, and Washington has signalled expansiveness: from high‑tech to supply‑chain resilience. Yet this is no yawning liberal fixture; it is a negotiation circumscribed by domestic concerns on both fronts. For India, offering tariff concessions or regulatory liberalisation might invite debate around industrial policy and food sovereignty; for the US, access to Indian markets must be matched by deeper procurement commitments and intellectual property standards. If last week's Nato‑sanctions episode underscores Indian autonomy, this trade narrative highlights its readiness to play a constructive, collaborative role, so long as reciprocity and national interest underpin any deal. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Meanwhile, India's pivot toward China, marked by Jaishankar's first visit to Beijing since the 2020 standoff, is a calculated move. At the SCO summit, his meeting with Wang Yi focused on de-escalation, a border resolution, and reviving trade minus 'restrictive measures'. China called normalisation 'hard-won', underscoring mutual interest in quiet diplomacy and regional stability. Beneath the optics, India is asserting agency: addressing boundary disputes, restoring critical supply chains, and preserving open trade. It's a calibrated framework—friendship without illusion, cooperation without compulsion. Now, juxtapose these developments with India's stealth campaign in global AI norm‑setting. While less visible to the world's press, New Delhi has been earnest, partaking actively in the Unesco‑led 2025 AI Action Summit and championing inclusive, transparent, and sustainable AI frameworks. Internally, the government's Shinrin hush, its hallmark IndiaAI mission, has enabled the creation of the India AI Safety Institute and the public‑sector BharatGen model, announced earlier this year. This reflects a coherent, outward‑looking narrative: one where India is not merely a consumer of Western AI but a producer and ethical interlocutor in its own right, framing a normative trajectory for the Global South. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This junction of AI, trade, sanctions, and diplomacy reveals an Indian posture defined by complexity rather than simplification. India is neither a protectable emerging market nor a fearful collateral of competition; it is instead a multifaceted actor shaping its lane, steering norms, and anticipating friction. If India is being squeezed by trade reform at the WTO, by diplomatic pressure over Russia, and by bilateral negotiations with large economies, it is responding with a choreography of normative offers, negotiation discipline, and diplomatic nuance. Strategic autonomy is no longer a slogan; it is a tactical posture. India's message comes across loud and clear: we will trade responsibly, not opportunistically; we will engage in global initiatives, not deflect them; we will assert our interests, not surrender them. This posture is especially critical because India's multilateral footprint is expanding with institution‑shaping spaces. In 2025, it has convinced even sceptics that its voice is consequential and its initiatives, from AI safety to trade alliances, are worth centralising. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD None of this is without strain. The geo‑economic environment is a maze of competing pressures: pressure to align with Western sanctions regimes, to commit to bilateral trade deals, to accelerate AI governance, and to stabilise border diplomacies. But India seems to have resolved a complex arithmetic: diplomacy that does not buy influence with submission, trade that does not cost sovereignty, tech engagement that does not sacrifice agency, and multilateralism that negotiates interest, not ideology. The key test lies ahead: can India engineer a degree of coherence across ministries, Commerce, Finance, External Affairs, and IT? Can it manage stakeholder friction between business communities aligned to greenhouse tech corridors and those tied to legacy energy relations with Russia? Can it maintain credibility on the world stage while cultivating domestic legitimacy? These questions are not rhetorical; they are strategic deadlines directed at policymaking systems, where alignment and execution define success. Ultimately, this is more than policy choreography; it is India redefining its global centre of gravity. When the US Congress debates whether India is aligned enough to merit exemption from sanctions, Delhi's internal coordination across diplomatic, economic, and strategic lines becomes part of its national security calculus. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD When WTO multilateralism teeters, India can offer constructive reform, leadership or resistance. When AI norm debates emerge, India doesn't merely have a seat; it has proposals. India projects the kind of policy confidence few states of its standing enjoy. India stands assertive, multi‑alignment‑centric, normatively engaged, and institutionally responsive. It is not the India of aspiration alone; it is the India of agency, reframing between autonomy and engagement, between principle and pragmatism. Amal Chandra is an author, political analyst and columnist. He posts on 'X' at @ens_socialis. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
India.com
5 minutes ago
- India.com
China stuns US, NATO, Japan, Taiwan with its latest hypersonic air-to-air missile, its range is..., big matter of concern for India as...
(Representational image: New Delhi: Face-to-face war between fighter planes is a thing of the past. Air-to-air missiles (AAM) have become the new face of air dominance. These have become the primary weapons for air-to-air warfare, which can bring down a plane from hundreds of kilometers away. Beyond Visual Range i.e. BVR missiles, also known as AAM missiles, have now become the biggest weapon in modern warfare. What does China claim? China has claimed to have taken the biggest leap in this direction. China has claimed that it has tested an air-to-air missile with a range of up to 1000 kilometers in the air. If China's claim is correct, then it means that the definition of air warfare has changed forever. Having a range of one thousand kilometers means that enemy fighter jets will not be able to fly. China can wreak havoc from Japan to Taiwan with these missiles. How powerful is the new Chinese air-to-air missile? Reports in the South China Morning Post say that the Chinese army is developing a new hypersonic air to air missile, which will have a range of between 800 and 1000 kilometers. Experts believe that if this is not China's propaganda and if the report is correct, then it means that this missile can also shoot down the world's most advanced fighter jets like the American F-22 Raptor, B-21 Raider and F-35 stealth fighter jet. According to the report, the speed of this air to air missile can be Mach 5 (6174 kmph) or even more. Why is the world concerned by China's latest air to air missile? The hypersonic speed and such a high range of the air-to-air missile means that it will be the most dangerous missile in the world. In such a situation, the air combat doctrine of America, India, Japan, Taiwan and other countries may need to be redesigned. At present, India is close to developing the Astra-3 air-to-air missile, whose range is expected to be around 400 kilometers. While the range of America's AIM-174B is also around 400 kilometers. The range of Russia's R-37M missile is also between 350 to 400 kilometers. That is, the maximum range of the existing air-to-air missiles in the world is around 400 kilometers, but this one thousand kilometer missile of China can change every strategy and equation. Why is it a matter of concern for India? Indian Air Force currently has Astra Mk-1 and soon, it will have Astra Mk-2 and Mk-3 missiles. But the range of these missiles is between 200 and 400 kilometers. Given the Chinese claim of having a 1000-kilometer hypersonic missile, India will not only have to speed up the development of Astra series missiles but also develop hypersonic air to air missiles. Apart from this, ISRO and DRDO will have to jointly develop such sensors and radar systems that can track hypersonic missiles flying at such a distance in time. Air to air missiles are usually made to shoot down enemy fighter planes as well as surveillance aircraft AWACS, AEW&CS, in such a situation India will have to keep its AWACS, AEW&CS aircraft under security cover.
