Latest news with #PakistanMilitary
The Independent
7 hours ago
- Politics
- The Independent
India finally admits it lost fighter jets in clash with Pakistan – but refuses to say how many
India has confirmed for the first time that it lost fighter jets during its brief military conflict with Pakistan earlier in May, though the country still refuses to clarify the number or nature of aircraft it lost. New Delhi and Islamabad stepped back from the brink of all-out war following their worst military escalation in decades, which resulted in the deaths of dozens of civilians in cross-border shelling, as well as drone attacks by both sides. Pakistan 's military claimed it shot down six Indian Air Force jets, including three French-made Rafale aircraft, during the initial clashes. Both India and Pakistan claimed to have downed each other's fighter jets in a dogfight that reportedly involved over 125 aircraft, making it the largest aerial battle since the Second World War. General Anil Chauhan, India's chief of defence staff, admitted India suffered initial losses in the air, but declined to give details. 'What is important is that... not the jet being downed, but why they were being downed,' he told Bloomberg TV on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. However, he said Pakistan's claims of downing six Indian warplanes were "absolutely incorrect". 'The good part is that we are able to understand the tactical mistake which we made, remedy it, rectify it, and then implement it again after two days and flew all our jets again, targeting at long range,' Gen Chauhan said. In separate remarks to Reuters in Singapore he said that after rectifying tactics, "we went back on the 7th, 8th and 10th in large numbers to hit air bases deep inside Pakistan, penetrated all their air defences with impunity, carried out precision strikes'. The Indian air force "flew all types of aircraft with all types of ordinances on the 10th", he said. India has previously said its missiles and drones struck at least eight Pakistani air bases across the country that day, including one near the capital Islamabad. India's director general of air operations, Air Marshal AK Bharti, had told a press conference earlier in the month that "losses are a part of combat" and that India had downed some Pakistani jets. Islamabad has denied it suffered any losses of planes but has acknowledged its air bases suffered some hits, describing the impact as minimal. Some of the attacks were reportedly against bases near Pakistan's nuclear facility in Kirana Hills of Punjab province, but the Indian military has said the facility itself was not targeted. "Most of the strikes were delivered with pinpoint accuracy, some even to a metre, to whatever was our selected mean point of impact," Gen Chauhan said. Gen Chauhan and Pakistan's chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Sahir Shamshad Mirza, have both said there was no danger at any time during the conflict that nuclear weapons were considered. "I think there's a lot of space before that nuclear threshold is crossed, a lot of signalling before that, I think nothing like that happened," Gen Chauhan said. "There's a lot of space for conventional operations which has been created, and this will be the new norm." "It's my personal view that the most rational people are people in uniform when conflict takes place," he added. "During this operation, I found both sides displaying a lot of rationality in their thoughts as well as actions. So why should we assume that in the nuclear domain there will be irrationality on someone else's part?" The conflict began after India struck alleged militant hideouts in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir to avenge the deaths of 26 people, mostly Hindu tourists, killed in a terror attack in India-administered Kashmir on 22 April. New Delhi accused Pakistan of backing the gunmen who carried out the massacre. Islamabad denied the charge and sought an independent investigation. The Indian strikes escalated the tensions into a military conflict as the two sides exchanged heavy fire along their de facto border in the restive Kashmir region as well as missile and drone strikes on military installations. The Indian military claimed to have killed nearly 100 militants with its overnight strikes and 35-40 personnel of Pakistan's armed forces in subsequent action along the de facto border. The Pakistani army said on Tuesday that the clash with India had left 11 soldiers and 40 civilians dead. A Pakistani minister last week claimed their armed forces had killed 40-50 Indian soldiers. The intense four-day period of fighting came to a halt with a ceasefire announced by both governments following talks between their national security advisers. US president Donald Trump has claimed credit for brokering the truce, though Indian officials have quietly rowed back against the idea that his intervention was pivotal.
Al Arabiya
a day ago
- General
- Al Arabiya
Indian Navy will lead New Delhi's response to any future Pakistani aggression: Minister
India will use the firepower of its navy in response to any future aggression by Pakistan, India's defense minister said on Friday, weeks after the fiercest fighting in decades between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. Relations between India and Pakistan are tense after four days of fighting this month, which involved fighter jets, missiles, drones and artillery before a ceasefire was announced. 'If Pakistan resorts to anything evil or unethical, it will, this time, face the firepower and ire of the Indian Navy,' Defense Minister Rajnath Singh said on the aircraft carrier INS Vikrant off the coast of the western Indian state of Goa. A spokesperson for Pakistan's military referred Reuters to a May 12 statement, which said there would be a 'comprehensive and decisive' response whenever Pakistan's sovereignty was 'threatened and territorial integrity violated.' The latest fighting erupted after 26 people, mostly Indian tourists, were killed in an April 22 attack in Kashmir, a disputed Himalayan territory claimed by both nations. New Delhi blamed the attack on 'terrorists' backed by Pakistan, which denied the charge. A ceasefire took effect on May 10 and a top Pakistani military official told Reuters on Friday that both countries were close to reducing their troop build-up along their border to pre-conflict levels. The Indian Navy has said it deployed its carrier battle group, submarines and other aviation assets in the northern Arabian Sea within 96 hours of the April 22 attack. Defense Minister Singh said 'Operation Sindoor', under which India launched the strikes on Pakistan, was paused, but not yet over. 'We stopped our military actions on our own terms. Our forces had not even started showing their might,' he said.
Reuters
a day ago
- General
- Reuters
Indian Navy will lead New Delhi's response to any future Pakistani aggression, minister says
NEW DELHI, May 30 (Reuters) - India will use the firepower of its navy in response to any future aggression by Pakistan, India's defence minister said on Friday, weeks after the fiercest fighting in decades between the two nuclear-armed neighbours. Relations between India and Pakistan are tense after four days of fighting this month, which involved fighter jets, missiles, drones and artillery before a ceasefire was announced. "If Pakistan resorts to anything evil or unethical, it will, this time, face the firepower and ire of the Indian Navy," Defence Minister Rajnath Singh said on the aircraft carrier INS Vikrant off the coast of the western Indian state of Goa. A spokesperson for Pakistan's military referred Reuters to a May 12 statement, which said there would be a "comprehensive and decisive" response whenever Pakistan's sovereignty was "threatened and territorial integrity violated". The latest fighting erupted after 26 people, mostly Indian tourists, were killed in an April 22 attack in Kashmir, a disputed Himalayan territory claimed by both nations. New Delhi blamed the attack on "terrorists" backed by Pakistan, which denied the charge. A ceasefire took effect on May 10 and a top Pakistani military official told Reuters on Friday that both countries were close to reducing their troop build-up along their border to pre-conflict levels. The Indian Navy has said it deployed its carrier battle group, submarines and other aviation assets in the northern Arabian Sea within 96 hours of the April 22 attack. Defence Minister Singh said 'Operation Sindoor', under which India launched the strikes on Pakistan, was paused, but not yet over. "We stopped our military actions on our own terms. Our forces had not even started showing their might," he said.
Japan Times
4 days ago
- Politics
- Japan Times
Lessons from India-Pakistan war: Were China's arms overrated?
The brief military conflict between India and Pakistan from May 7 to May 10 marked a turning point in South Asian security dynamics. This was not a conventional border conflict, but a high-tech showdown featuring drones, cruise and ballistic missiles and long-range air defenses. While India and Pakistan were the primary belligerents, a third power — China — played a pivotal, if indirect, role. Beijing's involvement via the supply of advanced weapon systems and real-time satellite reconnaissance data to Pakistan turned the engagement into a revealing trial run for Chinese arms in a live combat setting. This conflict offered the first real-world glimpse into how China's premier military technologies perform under fire. The implications extend far beyond South Asia — to Taiwan, the East and South China Seas and global arms markets. The operational lessons drawn from this brief war matter not just for India and Pakistan, but for military planners from Tokyo to Washington. Scrutinizing Chinese systems Pakistan relied heavily on Chinese military hardware. Most notably, it deployed the J-10C 'Vigorous Dragon' fighter jets armed with PL-15E air-to-air missiles and HQ-9 long-range surface-to-air missile systems with a 200-kilometer engagement envelope. These platforms were tested in actual combat for the first time. Chinese satellite reconnaissance reportedly supported Pakistani targeting, with Beijing even re-tasking satellites to enhance coverage over Indian military zones. Yet despite the apparent sophistication of Pakistan's imported arsenal, the results were far from decisive. The J-10Cs launched multiple PL-15E missiles at Indian targets, but there is no independent verification of successful hits. India's integrated air defenses withstood the onslaught, gaining air superiority. Indeed, by the conflict's end, Indian airstrikes had crippled major Pakistani air bases — including Nur Khan and Bholari — without suffering any confirmed retaliatory damage. Nur Khan, near Pakistan's nuclear command and army headquarters, was particularly symbolic. Its targeting by Indian cruise missiles signaled a calibrated message: Even high-value, well-defended assets are not beyond reach. Disproportionate impact While both sides employed drones and missiles, the quality of strikes proved more decisive than the quantity. Pakistan reportedly launched 300 to 400 drones in a single night, yet satellite imagery showed little damage on Indian soil. India, by contrast, relied on precision standoff weapons — especially the supersonic BrahMos cruise missile, codeveloped with Russia — which successfully hit high-value targets in Pakistan with minimal risk to Indian military personnel. The BrahMos missile, already exported by India, emerged as the standout performer of the conflict. It demonstrated both survivability and pinpoint accuracy in a contested airspace, validating India's investment in standoff precision platforms. These are designed to destroy critical infrastructure without needing to cross the enemy's border. India's shift toward such systems reflects a broader strategic change: moving from reactive defense to a more assertive doctrine that punishes Pakistan's transborder terrorism with calibrated strikes. This could have far-reaching implications for deterrence on the Indian subcontinent. Global strategic significance There are three major reasons why this short conflict merits serious international attention. First, it offers a preview of what a future Chinese military operation might look like. Beijing has made no secret of its ambitions toward Taiwan and any effort to seize or blockade the self-governing island would likely rely on systems similar to those used by Pakistan. That makes the observed performance of the J-10C, PL-15E and HQ-9 systems particularly relevant to U.S. and allied military planners. Second, in the South China Sea, China has grown increasingly aggressive, harassing Philippine and Vietnamese vessels with ramming, water cannons and even bladed weapons. If China were to escalate in this region, the same air and missile systems could come into play. The India-Pakistan conflict thus provides critical insight into their combat performance and vulnerabilities. Third, in the Himalayas, India and China remain locked in a military standoff that was triggered in 2020 by Chinese encroachments on Indian borderlands. Despite diplomatic moves to ease tensions, both countries continue to mass troops and weaponry along their disputed frontier. The combat data generated from the conflict with Pakistan offers India an invaluable edge in anticipating Chinese capabilities and countermeasures. Propaganda vs. reality Predictably, the information war ran parallel to the actual conflict. Pakistan claimed to have shot down at least five Indian fighter jets on the first day. However, no wreckage has been presented and satellite imagery has not corroborated the claim. The Indian military dismissed the allegation, stating that all its pilots returned safely. On the Indian side, Lt. Gen. Rajiv Ghai stated that some Pakistani aircraft were downed over Pakistan's own territory. This claim, while more plausible given the precision of India's strikes, similarly lacks independent verification. What is evident, however, is the absence of traditional dogfights between rival warplanes. All air combat appears to have occurred beyond visual range, with neither side's fighter jets crossing international borders. This reflects the international evolution in the nature of air warfare, emphasizing sensors, missiles and electronic warfare over maneuverability and pilot skill. Electronic warfare and drones Both sides deployed drones extensively, but with varying degrees of effectiveness. India primarily used small drones for ISR (intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance), whereas Pakistan fielded swarms of drones for both reconnaissance and attack. However, Pakistan's boast of neutralizing 85% of Indian drones seems overstated. Conversely, India's robust electronic warfare systems, along with its multilayered air defenses, effectively intercepted or deflected most Pakistani projectiles, including a ballistic missile aimed at New Delhi. Interestingly, China's CM-401 missile — a hypersonic anti-ship missile launched in this conflict from upgraded JF-17 jets — was reportedly used by Pakistan against land targets. Yet there was no visible or confirmed impact, raising questions about the missile's versatility outside its intended maritime role. The geopolitical signaling The tide of battle turned decisively after the explosions from the May 10 Indian strike on Nur Khan airbase triggered American alarm, especially given that Pakistani nuclear assets are located near this airbase. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio intervened, urging Pakistan's military leadership to de-escalate. Within hours, Pakistan's director-general of military operations contacted his Indian counterpart to propose an immediate ceasefire, which India accepted. This sequence underscores two points. First, Indian strikes achieved their objective of imposing costs without triggering an all-out war. Second, India effectively pierced the perceived immunity conferred by Pakistan's nuclear deterrent — an umbrella under which Pakistan has long sponsored cross-border terrorism with relative impunity. Final takeaways For China, the conflict served as a valuable though sobering test of its exported weaponry. While some systems functioned adequately, others like the HQ-9 air defense system showed critical vulnerabilities when deployed without integrated support. Beijing will likely revise and upgrade these platforms based on the feedback from its client-state. For India, the conflict validated its investment in precision strike capabilities and highlighted the importance of indigenous platforms like the BrahMos. It also signaled a new doctrinal posture — proactive, punitive and technologically assertive. For the world, this short conflict provided a rare, real-world laboratory to observe how modern missile and drone warfare unfolds between technologically matched rivals. In an era of strategic ambiguity and hybrid threats, those lessons are not just instructive; they are indispensable. Brahma Chellaney is a geostrategist and the author of nine books, including 'Water: Asia's New Battleground.'
Khaleej Times
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Khaleej Times
Operation Sindoor explained: How India attacked Pakistan overnight, and why
[Editor's Note: Khaleej Times is bringing you the latest updates on rising tensions between India and Pakistan here.] Over the last week, as diplomatic relations rapidly unravelled following the Pahalgam attack, Pakistani intelligence sources forewarned an attack by India was imminent. On May 7, in the middle of the night, that warning was proved true. India attacked multiple sites in Pakistan early on Wednesday, targeting what it called 'terrorist infrastructure'. At least eight Pakistanis were killed and 35 injured, a Pakistan military spokesperson said in a statement. India's Ministry of Defence said the strike was part of 'Operation Sindoor' and described it as "a precise and restrained response" to the attack in Pahalgam last month, which claimed 26 lives. Here is everything you need to know about what the operation means and how it took place: What is 'Operation Sindoor'? The name of India's military operation, Sindoor, is an apparent reference to the women who lost their spouses in the attack on Hindu tourists in Pahalgam last month. Sindoor is a Hindi word used to refer to the traditional red vermilion worn by married Hindu women on their forehead symbolising protection and marital commitment. Women traditionally stop wearing it when they are widowed. The imagery has been brought to life with a graphic that has gone viral in the aftermath of the attack (see below): Stay up to date with the latest news. Follow KT on WhatsApp Channels. How many sites were hit and where? India claims that it attacked nine sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir under the operation. According to ANI sources, Indian armed forces struck four targets in Pakistan, including Bahawalpur, Muridke, and Sialkot, and five in Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Pakistan's Defence Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif told Geo that all sites targeted by India were civilian and not militant camps. The Indian statement further said, "No Pakistani military facilities have been targeted." How were the sites chosen? Indian forces said they selected the location for strikes with the intent of targeting top Jaish-e-Mohammed and Lashkar leadership for their role in sponsoring terrorist activities in India, stated ANI, citing close sources. What was the impact of the strikes? Initial reports recorded three civilian deaths in Pakistan, including that of a child. Within a couple of hours, however, the death toll was revised to eight, with 35 casualties reported. Meanwhile, a statement by the Indian army added that three civilians had been killed after Pakistan "resorted to indiscriminate firing and shelling". How has Pakistan responded? Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif called the Indian attack "unprovoked" and "cowardly", and said the "heinous act of aggression will not go unpunished." What does this operation mean for ongoing tensions? Wednesday's strikes are a dangerous heightening of friction between the South Asian neighbours, who have fought multiple wars since they gained independence from the British in 1947. For days, the international community has piled pressure on Pakistan and India to step back from the brink of war. However, in the wake of the attacks — which is the worst fighting in years between the nuclear-armed neighbours — Pakistan has said it would mount a befitting response in a "time of its choosing" to what it called "an act of war". Here, in the UAE, expats from both communities spent a restless night, staying up to watch the news and connect with anxious loved ones near the border amid fears of a full-blown war breaking out. (Read the full story here.) How have world leaders reacted? Asked about the strikes, US President Donald Trump told reporters in Washington he hopes the fighting "ends very quickly". US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he was monitoring the situation between India and Pakistan closely, adding that he will "continue to engage both Indian and Pakistani leadership towards a peaceful resolution". "The world cannot afford a military confrontation between India and Pakistan," the spokesman for UN chief Antonio Guterres, Stephane Dujarric, said in a statement, adding that Guterres called for "maximum restraint." Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, UAE Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, also called on India and Pakistan to exercise restraint and avoid further escalation that could threaten regional and international peace. The minister stressed that listening to voices calling for dialogue and understanding is crucial to avoiding military escalation, consolidating stability in South Asia, and sparing the region from tensions.
