A controversial American report has claimed that Pakistan achieved significant military success against India in a hypothetical four-day conflict, dubbed 'Operation Sindoor', in May 2025. This extensive 800-page document, released by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC), has ignited a fierce debate and drawn sharp criticism, particularly from India, for its contentious claims regarding the outcome of the simulated war and its reinterpretation of past events.
Disputed Claims on Aerial Combat and Rafale Jets
One of the report's most provocative assertions revolves around aerial combat. It states that Pakistan claimed to have shot down at least six Indian fighter jets, including advanced Rafale aircraft, suggesting that this incident damaged the Rafale's image. However, the report itself offers a contradictory detail, confirming that only three Indian aircraft were actually shot down. This discrepancy highlights a potential for exaggeration or unverified claims within the document, raising questions about the accuracy. Of its military assessments and the narrative it seeks to establish regarding the capabilities of advanced Indian defense assets.
Pahalgam Attack Reclassified as 'Insurgent Attack'
The report further stirred controversy by reclassifying the Pahalgam attack, an event. Historically recognized by India as a terrorist act, as merely an 'insurgent attack'. This reinterpretation carries significant implications for India's long-standing diplomatic efforts to highlight cross-border terrorism and hold perpetrators accountable. Such a reclassification could potentially undermine India's narrative on state-sponsored terrorism on international. Platforms, thereby complicating its foreign policy objectives and its global fight against terror.
China's Strategic Use: Weapon Testing and Global Promotion
The USCC report meticulously details China's strategic utilization of the India-Pakistan conflict. It posits that China leveraged the war as a live testing ground for its modern weaponry, providing a unique opportunity to showcase its military technology to a global audience. This demonstration, according to the report, allowed China to validate the effectiveness of its defense products in real combat scenarios, subsequently boosting their appeal in the international arms market and reinforcing China's growing influence as a major arms exporter.
Post-Conflict Arms Deals and Military Aid
Further underscoring China's strategic gains, the report highlights a significant arms deal struck five months after the simulated conflict, while china reportedly sold 42 J-10C fighter jets to Indonesia for a staggering 75,000 crore rupees. This transaction is presented as a direct consequence of the alleged performance of Chinese weapons during 'Operation Sindoor', illustrating how China translated its military involvement into substantial commercial and strategic benefits, thereby expanding its defense industry's global footprint.
Pakistan's Reliance on Chinese Military Technology
The report explicitly details Pakistan's heavy reliance on Chinese military hardware during the conflict. It identifies specific Chinese weapons systems reportedly deployed by Pakistan, including the HQ-9 air defense system, PL-15 missiles, and J-10 fighter jets. The document further reveals that an overwhelming 82% of Pakistan's weapons acquisitions between 2019 and 2023 originated from China, underscoring a deep and enduring military dependency that shapes the regional power dynamics and strategic alignments.
Allegations of Chinese Intelligence Support
Adding another layer of complexity, the report mentions India's assertion. That Pakistan received crucial intelligence support from China during the conflict. While Pakistan has vehemently denied these claims, and China has maintained a non-committal stance, the allegation itself raises serious questions about the extent of Beijing's involvement and its potential role in shaping the outcome of regional conflicts. Such claims, if substantiated, could have profound geopolitical implications for regional stability.
India's Diplomatic Backlash and Congress's Concerns
The report has elicited a strong political backlash in India. Congress leader Jairam Ramesh vocally criticized the report, questioning whether the Prime Minister and the Ministry of External Affairs would formally object to its contents. He characterized the report as a "big blow to Indian diplomacy," reflecting widespread concern within. Indian political circles about the report's potential to undermine India's international standing and diplomatic efforts.
Understanding the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC)
To contextualize the report, it's important to understand the USCC, while established in the late 1990s, the Commission emerged from growing US concerns over China's rapid economic and technological ascent. Its mandate is to monitor and assess the implications of China's economic and technological activities for US national security. The USCC functions as an advisory body, submitting its findings and recommendations to the US Congress. For any recommendation to be included in its final report, it. Requires the support of at least eight members, representing a two-thirds majority.
Chinese Media Rebuttal: Global Times Challenges USCC's Credibility
The Chinese state-run newspaper Global Times launched a scathing critique of the USCC report, challenging its credibility and impartiality, while the newspaper accused the USCC of once again portraying China's economic, technological, and security advancements as global threats. It argued that the report is politically motivated, lacks an objective analysis of facts, and is riddled with "misunderstandings and arrogance" concerning China, thereby questioning the underlying intentions behind its publication.
Defense of China's Sovereign Rights and Arms Industry
The Global Times further defended China's position, asserting that accusing or misrepresenting the development of China's arms industry is tantamount to denying a sovereign nation's fundamental right to enhance its self-defense capabilities. This argument frames China's military modernization as a legitimate national security imperative, rather than an aggressive expansion, emphasizing its right to protect its interests and territory.
Accusations of US Weaponizing Supply Chains
In a direct counter-accusation, the Global Times argued that it's the United States, not China, that weaponizes supply chains. It cited examples such as restrictions on chip technology, bans on military equipment, blacklisting of companies, and pressuring allies to form an anti-China front, while the newspaper contrasted these actions with China's responses, which it characterized as purely reactive measures to US sanctions, rather than attempts to harm the global economy or international stability.
China's Rare Earth Policy and Global Stability
Addressing specific criticisms, the Global Times clarified China's rare earth policy, stating that its primary objective is to stabilize supply chains, not to restrict exports. This explanation aims to dispel any notions that China uses its control over critical resources for geopolitical use, portraying its policies as geared towards maintaining global economic stability rather than disruption.
Conclusion: A Politically Charged Report Amidst Geopolitical Tensions
So, to wrap up, the Global Times asserted that the USCC report reflects America's inherent difficulty in comprehending a rapidly changing world. It criticized the report for its annual repetition of similar narratives, its disregard for facts, and its persistent political bias, which, according to the newspaper, has diminished its global reputation. The USCC report, with its contentious claims and conflicting interpretations, thus serves as a stark illustration of the. Complex and often fraught geopolitical landscape involving the US, China, India, and Pakistan, potentially exacerbating existing international tensions.
