As tensions between India and Pakistan escalate following the Pahalgam terrorist attack, global defence analysts are watching with acute interest. The standoff is not merely a bilateral conflict between nuclear-armed neighbours, a report in the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post noted. The situation is emerging as a potential first battlefield for a broader geopolitical contest — one that could pit Chinese-manufactured and co-developed Pakistani weapons against India’s growing arsenal of western and indigenous military hardware,the report said quoting experts.
The international community has called for restraint, but behind the scenes, military observers are preparing for what could become an unprecedented confrontation. A full-scale conflict, if it erupts, would offer the most significant test yet of how China’s military exports perform against NATO-standard systems — with profound implications for defence strategies, arms markets, and geopolitical alignments across the Indo-Pacific and beyond.
Tensions have surged after the attack in Kashmir. In its aftermath, Pakistan has conducted high-profile military exercises featuring its Chinese-supplied JF-17 fighters and SH-15 howitzers, signalling readiness to repel any Indian reprisal. The Pakistani army broadcast clips of the drills across social media, showcasing its military assets in a clear message of deterrence.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has granted the armed forces “operational freedom” to respond. Echoing the muscular stance seen in the aftermath of the 2019 Balakot air strikes, Indian leaders have vowed to deliver a “crushing blow” to terrorism.
That rhetoric, analysts suggest, is underpinned by both domestic political pressure and strategic calculations. “India is not looking to escalate this crisis,” said former Indian ambassador Yogesh Gupta. “But it must re-establish deterrence after what was achieved post-Balakot has eroded.”
Gupta warned that Pakistan’s current army chief, General Asim Munir, appears far less inclined to de-escalate tensions than his predecessor. That, he argued, raises the stakes significantly for India’s military planners.
The concept of "escalation dominance" — the ability to inflict heavier damage and dictate the tempo of conflict — has returned to the centre of strategic thinking in South Asia. But the lessons of 2019 are sobering. Then, despite India’s dramatic cross-border air strike against a militant camp in Balakot, Pakistan’s military responded effectively, even shooting down an Indian MiG-21 and capturing its pilot.
Pakistan also demonstrated its ability to retaliate using Chinese-made systems, such as the JF-17 fighter equipped with beyond-visual-range missiles. It was a moment that, according to Georgetown University professor Christine Fair, shattered India’s claim to escalation superiority.
“What 2019 showed is that India can strike inside Pakistan, but the damage was limited and Pakistan responded in kind,” Fair said. She also noted that competing domestic victory narratives in both countries helped contain the crisis — a luxury that may not be available this time.
What makes the current situation uniquely significant is the composition of the two nations’ arsenals. Pakistan’s military increasingly relies on Chinese platforms, including the JF-17 Block III and the more advanced J-10C fighters, equipped with AESA radars and long-range PL-15 missiles. India, meanwhile, fields a blend of technology from France, Russia, and its own defence industry, including the Rafale fighter jets armed with Meteor BVR missiles, the Tejas Mk1A, and the Russian-made S-400 missile defence system.
Military analyst Boyko Nikolov suggests that a clash between these assets would be closely studied by defence establishments worldwide. “This would be the first time that advanced Chinese fighters like the J-10C face off against proven Western platforms like the Rafale in live combat,” he said. “It would offer invaluable insights into system capabilities, electronic warfare, and aerial doctrines.”
Beyond the high-profile fighter jets, artillery systems would also draw scrutiny. Pakistan’s Chinese-supplied SH-15 howitzers could come up against India’s K9 Vajra, a domestically produced version of the South Korean K9 platform. The performance of these systems in terms of mobility, precision, and survivability would influence artillery procurement decisions globally.
For China, any Indo-Pak conflict offers a dual opportunity: to test its exported weapons under combat conditions and to stretch India’s military resources, already strained by the ongoing Himalayan border stand-off. Beijing has invested heavily in bolstering Pakistan’s military capacity — providing everything from conventional arms to nuclear technology — as part of its long-standing effort to counterbalance India’s regional influence.
“China has always been adversarial to India’s rise,” said Gupta. “Its defence partnership with Pakistan is part of a broader strategic containment plan.”
Security analyst Asfandyar Mir agrees that Beijing’s calculus will weigh heavily on India’s response. “India now faces a dual-front threat,” he said. “Pakistan on one side, and the long-running friction with China on the other. That reality complicates any Indian decision to escalate.”
Should hostilities break out, defence ministries from Washington to Riyadh will be watching closely. A real-world duel between the JF-17 and Tejas — both lightweight, multirole fighters developed on tight budgets — would be of special interest to smaller nations weighing cost-effective air power solutions. Similarly, the performance of Chinese BVR missiles against western equivalents could reshape future procurement trends and tilt arms deals in either direction.
As Nikolov put it, “The outcome would influence not just South Asia, but global arms markets, future design priorities, and the trajectory of Chinese military exports.”
However, Gupta cautions against placing too much weight on hardware alone. “Wars aren’t won by weapons alone,” he said. “It’s about strategy, execution, morale, and the broader political context. How India and Pakistan respond to this moment will matter as much as what they use to fight.”
For now, both nations remain in a posture-heavy phase, rattling sabres while avoiding direct confrontation. But the danger lies in miscalculation — a poorly timed strike, a mis-attributed attack, or domestic political pressure pushing one side over the edge.
“The mood in India is one of vengeance, and the leadership appears determined to extract a heavy price,” said Mir. “Pakistan, for its part, is just as ready to retaliate.”
The margin for error, analysts agree, is razor-thin.
