US Congress Report Confirms Pakistan’s Military Victory Over India Showcased Chinese Weapons in May 2025 Clash

(DEFENCE SECURITY ASIA) — In a stark and unprecedented assessment that has sent ripples across global defence establishments, the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) concluded that Pakistan’s military achievements during the intense four-day confrontation with India in May 2025 represented one of the most consequential shifts in regional power dynamics in decades.

The USCC’s annual report to the US Congress highlights how Chinese-supplied advanced military hardware decisively tilted the military balance in Islamabad’s favour, offering Beijing a real-world combat testbed for its most sophisticated weapon systems.

The episode, now assessed as the most severe escalation between the two nuclear-armed rivals in more than half a century, exposed deep structural vulnerabilities in India’s air defence, tactical command integration, and cross-domain response posture while simultaneously validating the combat performance of China’s proliferating defence ecosystem.

The USCC report explicitly states: “Pakistan’s military success over India in its four-day clash showcased Chinese weaponry.”

This unambiguous declaration has triggered extensive debate across strategic circles from Washington to New Delhi and Beijing, particularly amid deepening Sino-Indian border tensions and the emerging two-front pressure India faces along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) with China and the Line of Control (LoC) with Pakistan.

The conflict, fought between 7 and 10 May 2025, saw cross-border airstrikes, precision missile exchanges, coordinated artillery barrages, and targeted cyber disruptions that cumulatively inflicted sharp material losses on India while Pakistan emerged with what analysts describe as “remarkably light setbacks.”

Defence observers note that this outcome challenges longstanding narratives surrounding Indian military superiority, narratives often reinforced by India’s multi-billion-dollar procurement of Western platforms such as the Rafale.

The four-day clash simultaneously amplified China’s ambitions to expand its high-tech arms exports to global markets, using Pakistan’s performance as a live-fire advertisement for the efficacy of Chinese weapon systems under modern hybrid-warfare conditions.

The confrontation also carries profound implications for the Indo-Pacific strategic architecture, global arms markets, US foreign policy priorities, and the evolving military balance between India and China.

Roots of the Escalation: From the Pahalgam Attack to the Launch of Operation Sindoor

The seeds of the May 2025 conflict were planted on 22 April 2025, when a devastating militant assault in Pahalgam, located within Jammu and Kashmir’s Anantnag district, killed 26 civilians, many of whom were tourists visiting the iconic Baisaran meadow.

The attackers, armed with automatic rifles and grenades, executed one of the deadliest civilian-targeted attacks in the region in years, prompting immediate accusations from New Delhi that Pakistan-based militant organisations were responsible.

Islamabad vehemently denied any involvement and demanded an independent international probe while Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi condemned the attack as a “cowardly act orchestrated by our adversaries”, declaring that India would respond with decisive force to deter future aggression.

Diplomatic channels between India and Pakistan deteriorated rapidly in the following days.

New Delhi reinforced troop deployments along the LoC, bolstered air defence systems, and increased combat air patrols, while Pakistan placed its armed forces on high alert and initiated strategic dispersal of key air and missile assets.

Amid intelligence reports pointing to heightened activity in cross-border militant camps, India launched Operation Sindoor on 7 May 2025.

Named after the symbolic vermilion mark representing resolve, the operation saw Indian forces execute a coordinated series of precision-guided airstrikes and missile attacks on targets across Pakistan’s Punjab province and Azad Jammu and Kashmir (AJK).

Indian officials asserted that more than 100 militants were neutralised and key logistical hubs destroyed, justifying the operation as a pre-emptive necessity to safeguard national security.

Pakistan immediately denounced the incursion as an unprovoked breach of sovereignty, prompting the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) and Pakistani Army to mobilise in a rapid and synchronised response.

The USCC noted that the initial Indian strikes penetrated deeper into Pakistani territory than any attack since 1971, a critical factor that catalysed the swift escalation into a limited but intense conflict.

The United States intervened diplomatically, with then-President Donald Trump claiming personal credit for brokering the ceasefire after Pakistan’s substantial retaliatory successes.

Trump later boasted: “Modi called me, desperate to end it after I threatened tariffs—eight Indian planes were essentially shot down.”

While the number was widely disputed, the comment underscored the global attention the clash had generated.

The Pahalgam attack itself remains a subject of strategic contestation.

The USCC report refers to the event as a “deadly insurgent attack”, a phrase that angered Indian policymakers who insisted the term underplayed Pakistan’s alleged role.

Pakistani commentators, meanwhile, portrayed the episode as symptomatic of India’s internal security failures.

The diverging narratives only hardened both sides’ public positions, contributing to the rapid breakdown of dialogue that preceded the May confrontation.

The Four-Day Clash: Tactical Realities, Modern Warfare, and Pakistani Battlefield Advantage

The conflict escalated across air, land, and cyber domains in a manner that defence analysts have since cited as a preview of future high-intensity hybrid warfare in South Asia.

On 7 May, Indian Air Force (IAF) Rafale fighters armed with Meteor BVR missiles crossed into Pakistani airspace during early sorties, targeting suspected militant infrastructure.

Initial claims from Indian officials suggested successful strikes with little resistance.

However, these assessments were quickly overturned once Pakistan’s integrated air defence network activated and scrambled interceptors.

By 8 May, Pakistan had launched its counterstrikes, deploying drones, cruise missiles, and rapid artillery barrages against Indian military positions along the LoC.

The PAF’s Chinese-built J-10C “Vigorous Dragon” fighters became a central feature of the engagement, engaging IAF aircraft in BVR duels and short-range confrontations.

Pakistan initially claimed to have downed five Indian aircraft, later revising the number to seven, allegedly including Rafale units.

While independent verification remains limited due to restricted access to the conflict zones, satellite imagery and open-source intelligence suggested multiple confirmed Indian air losses, with aircraft wreckage appearing in AJK.

The peak of the conflict occurred on 9 May, when both sides exchanged coordinated missile attacks.

India launched several BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles targeting Pakistani positions.

Yet Pakistan’s Chinese-origin HQ-9 surface-to-air missile (SAM) batteries—systems broadly comparable to Russia’s S-300—intercepted many incoming threats, demonstrating their high-altitude, long-range defensive capabilities.

Simultaneously, PAF J-10C fighters armed with long-range PL-15 air-to-air missiles, boasting ranges exceeding 200 km, allowed Pakistani pilots to engage Indian assets from standoff distances that outmatched many IAF platforms.

Pakistani forces claimed strikes against 26 Indian military targets, including airbases and logistics nodes, all without losing a single PAF aircraft—claims bolstered by the lack of official Indian confirmation of successful kills against Pakistani jets.

The clash’s cyber dimension added further complexity.

Indian officials accused China of providing “live inputs” on 109 Indian military positions, facilitating Pakistani targeting.

Both Beijing and Islamabad denied the allegation, but the incident highlighted the possibility of real-time data-sharing between China and Pakistan, signalling a new dimension of integrated warfare capability in South Asia.

Pakistan’s rapid 20% defence budget increase in June 2025—to approximately USD 9 billion (around RM 42.3 billion)—reflected Islamabad’s intent to consolidate and expand the technological advantages demonstrated during the confrontation.

Military analysts noted that Pakistan’s superior situational awareness resulted from a deeply integrated command network infused with Chinese radar, EW systems, and data-link architecture.

The May clash, though short, provided a clear demonstration of the convergence of conventional strike doctrines with cyber, electronic warfare, and information campaigns—a hallmark of modern hybrid warfare environments.

Chinese Weapon Systems: The Decisive Factor That Redefined Pakistan’s Combat Performance

A central conclusion of the USCC report is that Chinese-origin systems formed the backbone of Pakistan’s battlefield advantage.

The commission highlights that the May 2025 confrontation was the first real-world combat test for several cutting-edge Chinese systems.

The USCC emphasises: “The four-day clash marked the first battlefield use of Chinese HQ-9 air defence systems, PL-15 air-to-air missiles and J-10 fighter aircraft.”

The HQ-9 SAM system, with engagement ranges up to 200 km, performed with high efficacy against India’s BrahMos missiles and incoming aircraft, validating the system’s multi-target tracking and anti-stealth radar capabilities.

Derived from Russian S-300 lineage but incorporating Chinese AESA radars and indigenous guidance systems, the HQ-9’s resilience in dense electronic environments demonstrated performance comparable to Western equivalents like Patriot PAC-3.

The PL-15 missile delivered the PAF a major overmatch capability.

Its active radar seeker, high-energy propulsion, and “shoot-and-forget” profile allowed Pakistani fighters to engage beyond the detection envelope of several IAF aircraft.

Many analysts compare it to the American AIM-120D but highlight the PL-15’s potentially superior kinematic performance.

The J-10C, equipped with advanced avionics, AESA radar, and thrust-vectoring, outclassed India’s ageing MiG-21 Bisons and challenged India’s much-heralded Rafales in several engagements reconstructed through post-conflict simulations.

The USCC report also notes China’s rapid follow-up offer of advanced platforms to Pakistan, including 40 J-35 fifth-generation stealth fighters, KJ-500 airborne early-warning aircraft, and expanded ballistic missile defence coverage.

Beijing’s arms transfers to Pakistan—accounting for 82% of Pakistan’s weapons imports from 2019 to 2023—are part of a long-term strategic alignment designed to complicate India’s force-planning horizon.

The report also reveals that China employed AI-generated disinformation campaigns during the conflict to discredit the Rafale while promoting the J-35, further blending kinetic and non-kinetic strategies to shape global perceptions and arms market competitiveness.

Strategic Fallout: Regional, Global, and Long-Term Implications

The USCC’s 2025 report, an 800-page strategic document examining China’s defence posture and regional activities, frames the May 2025 clash as a prime example of Beijing’s opportunistic leveraging of regional crises.

A key line states: “Beijing opportunistically leveraged the conflict to test and advertise the sophistication of its weapons, useful in the contexts of its ongoing border tensions with India and its expanding defence industry goals.”

Indian political leaders reacted strongly.

Congress leader Jairam Ramesh described the report as an “astonishing diplomatic setback,” criticising the “insurgent” classification of the Pahalgam attack and the implicit acknowledgement of Pakistan’s successes.

Modi dismissed the report as biased and insisted that Operation Sindoor had achieved all intended objectives.

Pakistan welcomed the report as international validation of its defensive capability and the technological maturity of its China-backed arsenal.

Chinese officials amplified the findings across strategic forums and defence expos, highlighting them as proof of the combat-readiness of Chinese platforms.

US officials, including Trump, sought to emphasise Washington’s mediation role, although critics argued that the clash exposed weakening American influence in South Asian crisis management compared to China’s growing footprint.

Strategically, the May 2025 clash has recalibrated South Asian security.

India’s vulnerabilities complicate its deepening Quad alignment and raise questions about interoperability gaps between its diverse inventory of Western, Russian, and indigenous systems.

For Pakistan, the episode reinforces the value of a tightly integrated, unified arsenal built around Chinese technology, doctrines, and data-linked ecosystems.

For China, the clash served as an invaluable real-world demonstration, strengthening its arms export profile across Africa, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia.

For the United States, the conflict underscores the urgency of countering China’s accelerating defence technology diffusion, potentially prompting enhanced arms sales and intelligence-sharing with India.

Globally, the brief but intense four-day war has accelerated an arms race across Asia, increased the centrality of air defence and long-range precision strike systems, and intensified fears of future escalations involving nuclear thresholds.

Conclusion

The May 2025 India–Pakistan clash, as dissected by the USCC, stands as a defining case study in how advanced Chinese weaponry can decisively alter the outcome of regional conflicts, reshape strategic balances, and expand Beijing’s global defence influence.

As tensions along the LoC and LAC remain unresolved, and as India and Pakistan modernise their arsenals amid rising great-power competition, the lessons of the four-day conflict will continue to shape military planning across Asia.

With nuclear-armed rivals entangled in increasingly complex hybrid-warfare environments, proactive diplomacy, technological recalibration, and regional crisis-management frameworks have become more essential than ever to prevent the next escalation from spiralling beyond control.

The clash also demonstrated that future Indo-Pacific conflicts will increasingly be decided not by platform quantity but by the sophistication of integrated kill-chains linking sensors, shooters, and data networks across multiple domains.

The USCC’s analysis further underscores that Beijing’s ability to weaponise artificial intelligence, strategic misinformation, and multi-layered electronic warfare has introduced a new escalation vector that India must now account for in its long-term force-development roadmap.

Pakistan’s combat performance illustrated how smaller militaries can leverage asymmetric capabilities—particularly long-range BVR missiles, advanced SAM networks, and AI-enabled targeting—to neutralise the numerical advantages of larger conventional forces.

The episode also revealed the widening capability mismatch between India’s diverse, import-heavy inventory and Pakistan’s increasingly homogenous, fully interoperable Chinese-built arsenal, a divergence that will shape South Asia’s airpower calculus for years to come.

China’s exploitation of the conflict as a live demonstration of its maturing weapons ecosystem marks a turning point in global arms competition, positioning Beijing as a direct challenger to US and European dominance in high-end defence exports.

The May 2025 conflict further exposed the fragility of existing crisis-management mechanisms between India and Pakistan, signalling the urgent need for a modernised regional architecture capable of mitigating escalation risks amid an evolving multi-polar order.

Ultimately, the confrontation affirmed that South Asia has entered a new era where technological superiority, real-time intelligence fusion, and strategic partnerships—not sheer numerical strength—will dictate the outcomes of future conflicts along one of the world’s most volatile nuclear fault lines. — DEFENCE SECURITY ASIA