Pakistan says ‘door open’ for more Arab states to join mutual-defense pact
The Cradle | September 20, 2025
Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khawaja Asif said on 18 September that “the doors are not closed” for other Arab states to join the new defense pact signed with Saudi Arabia.
Asif emphasized that there was no clause preventing Pakistan from extending similar arrangements to other nations.
The agreement was signed in Riyadh by Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) during Sharif’s day-long visit, and declares that aggression against one country will be considered aggression against both.
A joint statement said the deal “reflects the shared commitment of both nations to enhance their security and to achieve security and peace in the region and the world.”
Asif also confirmed that Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal is included within the framework of the pact, describing it as a joint shield that leaves “no doubt” either side would respond if attacked.
“What we have, our capabilities, will absolutely be available under this pact,” Asif told Pakistani broadcaster Geo News.
He stressed that Pakistan had always placed its nuclear facilities under inspection and had “never committed any violation.”
“This agreement will not be a hegemonic arrangement but a defensive arrangement,” Asif emphasized.
“We don’t have any plans to conquer territory or attack anyone. But our fundamental right can’t be denied to us and we exercised that yesterday,” he added.
The minister drew comparisons with NATO, saying Muslim states had the same right to collective defense. “I think it is a fundamental right of the countries and people here, particularly the Muslim population, to together defend their region, countries, and nations.”
Pakistan has long stationed troops and air force units in Saudi Arabia, training Saudi forces and providing advisory support.
“I think that relationship has been more defined now and that understanding has been given the form of a defense agreement,” Asif explained.
Pakistani External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said India would assess the implications for its national security, adding that the government remained committed to “ensuring comprehensive national security in all domains.”
Asif also tied the pact to Pakistan’s longstanding role in protecting Islamic holy sites in the kingdom, describing it as a “sacred duty.”
Sabotage in the Skies: Was Pakistani General Zia-ul-Haq Murdered by Mossad?
The death of Pakistan’s military ruler remains one of the great unsolved puzzles of the 20th century
José Niño Unfiltered | August 17, 2025
37 years ago today, on August 17, 1988, General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq died in a mysterious plane crash that eliminated nearly every member of Pakistan’s military high command in a single devastating blow. The crash of Pak-1, a specially configured C-130 Hercules aircraft, near Bahawalpur claimed not only the Pakistani president and army chief but also Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Akhtar Abdur Rahman, several senior Pakistani military officers, U.S. Ambassador Arnold Lewis Raphel, and Brigadier General Herbert M. Wassom, head of the U.S. military aid mission to Pakistan.
Zia’s Strategic Legacy: Architect of Pakistan’s Nuclear Ambitions
Before examining the mysterious circumstances of his death, Zia’s foreign policy accomplishments merit recognition. During his rule (1978—1988), Zia transformed Pakistan from a middling regional actor into a regional power with the ability to change the strategic landscape. His most significant achievement was shepherding Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program to near-completion while successfully balancing Cold War pressures.
After India conducted its first nuclear test—codenamed Smiling Buddha—on May 18, 1974, Pakistan moved swiftly toward its own weapons program. In response to this move, then-Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto pledged that his nation would not be left behind.
“We will eat grass or leaves, even go hungry, but we will get one of our own,” he declared. Pointing to the existing arsenals of other faith-based powers, he remarked: “There is a Christian bomb, a Jewish bomb and now a Hindu bomb. Why not an Islamic bomb?”
When Zia took power in 1978, he continued the Pakistani ruling class plan to turn the South Asian nation into a nuclear power. In 1987, Zia told the Carnegie Endowment that Pakistan sought sufficient nuclear capability “to create an impression of deterrence.” His bold proclamation that Pakistan was “a screwdriver’s turn away from the bomb” sent shockwaves across intelligence communities worldwide.
The nuclear program’s success vindicated Zia’s vision. Pakistan conducted its first successful nuclear tests on May 28, 1998, becoming the world’s seventh nuclear power.
Pakistan’s Unpredictable Foreign Policy Under Zia
Zia’s foreign policy demonstrated remarkable strategic acumen. As the primary architect of the Afghan resistance against the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, he successfully convinced initially reluctant Americans to provide massive military aid. CIA veteran Bruce Riedel emphasized that “the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan was run by Zia, not by us.” Zia rejected President Carter’s initial $400 million aid offer as “peanuts” and ultimately secured $3.2 billion in military and economic aid from the Reagan administration.
Simultaneously, Zia pursued deeper ties with China and maintained complex relationships with Iran despite sectarian pressures. During the Iran-Iraq War, Pakistan officially maintained neutrality while covertly supporting Iran. Zia described Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini as “a symbol of Islamic insurgence” in 1979 and was one of the first countries to diplomatically recognize the Islamic Republic of Iran. Pakistan reportedly conducted clandestine arms deals that saw Chinese and U.S. weapons sent to Iran, including Silkworm and Stinger missiles originally intended for Afghan mujahideen, which played a decisive role for Iran in the “Tanker War” against Iraq.
The Fatal Flight: August 17, 1988
The events of that fateful day began routinely. Zia had traveled to Bahawalpur to witness a demonstration of the U.S. Army’s M1 Abrams tank at the Thamewali Test Range. After the successful demonstration, organized by Major-General Mahmud Ali Durrani, Zia and his delegation departed by army helicopter before transferring to the specially configured C-130 for the return flight to Islamabad.
At 3:40 PM Pakistan Time, Pak-1 took off from Bahawalpur Airport with thirty people aboard, including 17 passengers and 13 crew members. The aircraft had been equipped with an air-conditioned VIP capsule where Zia and his American guests were seated, walled off from both the flight crew and passenger sections. For two minutes and thirty seconds, the plane rose into clear skies. Takeoff was smooth and without problems.
At 3:51 PM, Bahawalpur control tower lost contact. Witnesses cited in Pakistan’s official investigation reported that the C-130 began pitching “in an up-and-down motion” while flying low before going into a “near-vertical dive” and exploding on impact. The plane crashed with such force that it was blown to pieces, with wreckage scattered over a wide area. All 30 people aboard died instantly.
Brigadier Naseem Khan, flying a French-made Puma helicopter in the vicinity, was among the first to arrive at the crash site. “I walked all around it,” he later recalled. “The plane had crashed at an almost perpendicular angle. I first spotted the cap worn by Gen Wassom, and then Gen Akhtar Rahman’s peaked cap. Then my eye fell upon a dismembered leg, wearing a black sock and black shoe. I suspected it belonged to Gen Zia.”
The Cover-Up Begins
Pakistan’s board of inquiry concluded that the most likely cause of the crash was a criminal act of sabotage within the aircraft. Investigators suggested that toxic gases rendered passengers and crew unconscious, preventing any distress call from being made. Curiously, despite prior C-130 models being fitted with flight recorders, none was found after the crash.
The American response proved equally suspicious. According to former New York Times South Asia Bureau Chief and Council on Foreign Relations member Barbara Crossette’s investigation, Ambassador Robert Oakley and General George B. Crist of CENTCOM rejected an attempt to have the FBI investigate a crash that killed the U.S. ambassador and an American general. Instead, they arranged for the Pentagon and State Department to hold an inter-departmental inquiry. Both officials later apologized to Congress for this decision.
Within two months of the crash, the American government was alone in promoting the theory that mechanical malfunction brought down the plane. On the other hand, most Pakistanis assumed assassination from the start.
Ambassador John Gunther Dean’s Shocking Revelations
The most explosive allegations about Zia’s death came from an unexpected source. John Gunther Dean, who in 1988 served as U.S. Ambassador to India, was a distinguished diplomat with four decades of service who had held more ambassadorships than most envoys. Dean was uniquely positioned to observe the aftermath of Zia’s death, and what he suspected would end his diplomatic career.
Dean believed the plot to eliminate General Zia bore the hallmarks of Israel, specifically the Israeli intelligence agency Mossad. His suspicions weren’t outlandish. Dean had personal experience with Israeli operations. Eight years earlier, while serving as Ambassador to Lebanon, Israelis had sought his support for their local projects, assuming that a fellow Jew would be willing to cooperate with them. When Dean rejected those overtures and declared his primary loyalty was to America, an attempt was made to assassinate him.
On August 28, 1980, Dean, his wife, daughter, and son-in-law narrowly escaped serious injury in a motorcade attack in suburban Beirut. The munitions were eventually traced back to Israel. Dean later discovered the Lebanese group claiming responsibility was an Israeli-created front organization used to carry out Mossad terrorist attacks.
Barbara Crossette’s Investigation
In 2005, after 17 years of silence, Dean finally revealed his suspicions to Barbara Crossette, in what would become a landmark investigation. Crossette’s 5,000-word article “Who Killed Zia?” appeared in the prestigious World Policy Journal, published by The New School in New York City under academic Stephen Schlesinger.
Dean’s theory centered on Israel’s alarm over Pakistan’s nuclear program. A few years before his death, Zia took bold steps to develop a nuclear weapons program. Although his primary motive was balancing India’s nuclear arsenal, Zia promised to share such weapons with other Muslim countries, including those in the Middle East. This possibility created major concerns in the Israeli national security community.
According to journalist Eric Margolis, Israel repeatedly tried to enlist India in launching a joint assault against Pakistan’s nuclear facilities. After careful consideration, India declined. This left Israel in a quandary. Zia was a proud military dictator with very close U.S. ties that strengthened his diplomatic leverage. Pakistan was 2,000 miles from Israel and possessed a strong military, making any long-distance bombing raid similar to the 1981 strike against Iraq’s Osirak reactor virtually impossible. That left assassination as the remaining option.
The Diplomatic Retaliation
Dean chose proper diplomatic channels rather than media disclosure. He immediately departed for Washington to share his views with State Department superiors and other top Administration officials. Upon reaching Washington, Dean was quickly declared mentally incompetent, prevented from returning to his India posting, and soon forced to resign. His four-decade career in government service came to a screeching halt.
Dean was sent to Switzerland to “rest” for six weeks before being allowed to return to New Delhi to pack his belongings and resign. He lost his medical clearance and security clearance because of his views about the crash. The accusation of “mental imbalance” effectively ended any investigation into his allegations.
One might expect such explosive charges from such a solid source would provoke considerable press attention, but the story was instead totally ignored and boycotted by the entire North American media. Stephen Schlesinger, who had spent a decade at the helm of World Policy Journal, saw his name vanish from the masthead shortly after publication, and his employment at The New School came to an end.
Ron Unz observed, with some shock, that the article is no longer available on the World Policy Journal website, though the text remains accessible via Archive.org. Even Dean’s detailed New York Times obituary portrayed his distinguished career in flattering terms while devoting not a single sentence to the bizarre circumstances under which it ended.
Zia’s Legacy Lives On
The patterns established during Zia’s era continue influencing Pakistan’s foreign policy today, often creating tension with traditional allies. Pakistan’s integration into China’s Belt and Road Initiative through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor represents the kind of independent alignment that characterized Zia’s approach to international relations.
However, recent attacks on Chinese nationals working in Pakistan have troubling parallels to the covert plans to potentially target Pakistan’s nuclear program in the 1980s. What was envisioned as a secure trade and energy corridor linking Xinjiang to Gwadar has instead become a flashpoint for insurgency. Baloch separatists, particularly the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), have repeatedly targeted Chinese personnel and infrastructure in a campaign to derail Pakistan’s partnership with China.
These efforts have ranged from the killing of nine Chinese engineers at the Dasu Hydropower Project in 2021, to Operation Dara-e-Bolan in January 2024, and the March 2025 hijacking of the Jaffar Express that left 59 dead. Each new CPEC agreement, including six signed in 2023, has provoked fresh waves of violence, underscoring the project’s vulnerability. Far from isolated incidents, this sustained series of attacks highlights how militant groups and their great power patrons see undermining CPEC as central to weakening the Chinese-Pakistani alliance.
Speculation about Western intelligence support for Balochi separatists has gained currency in recent years. The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), with documented ties to Israeli intelligence, launched a Balochistan Studies Project in 2025. This initiative highlighted Balochistan’s strategic importance for monitoring Iran’s and Pakistan’s nuclear program, suggesting Israel’s continued interest in leveraging regional ethnic tensions for broader geopolitical objectives.
The Imran Khan Parallel
The 2022 removal of Prime Minister Imran Khan bears striking similarities to the pressures Zia faced for maintaining independent foreign policy positions. Khan’s insistence on neutrality regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict angered Washington, just as Zia’s support for Iran during the Iran-Iraq War created friction with Reagan administration officials.
The leaked diplomatic cable published by The Intercept revealed that U.S. State Department official Donald Lu explicitly linked Khan’s removal to his Russia policy. “I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington because the Russia visit is being looked at as a decision by the Prime Minister,” Lu stated. “Otherwise, I think it will be tough going ahead.”
Khan was removed through a no-confidence vote on April 10, 2022, exactly one month after the threatening meeting with U.S. officials. The parallel with Zia’s fate thirty-four years earlier is unmistakable: Pakistani leaders who pursue independent foreign policies will face tremendous pressure from Washington and could be unceremoniously removed from power.
Iran-Pakistan Relations: From Conflict to Cooperation
The January 2024 tit-for-tat missile exchanges between Iran and Pakistan initially appeared to represent a dangerous escalation. Iran struck Balochi separatist targets in Pakistani Balochistan on January 16, killing two children. Pakistan retaliated two days later, targeting Balochi militants in Iranian Sistan-Baluchestan province, killing nine people including four children.
However, the rapid diplomatic resolution echoed Zia’s approach to managing regional relationships. Within days, both countries agreed to de-escalate through diplomatic channels. The now-deceased Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian visited Pakistan on January 29, 2024, leading to agreements on enhanced security cooperation and intelligence sharing. This swift return to cooperation reflected the kind of pragmatic diplomacy Zia employed during the Iran-Iraq War.
This move also reflects the new challenge of challenging Judeo-American perfidy with respect to the activation of Balochi militants against the security interests of both Iran and Pakistan. Iran and Pakistan have been increasingly alarmed by the growing nexus between Baloch separatists and Israel, which both states see as a direct threat to their security. As Mansur Khan Mahsud of Pakistan’s FATA Research Centre told The Cradle, “During the recent 12-day standoff between Iran and Israel, Tehran noticed a tight-knit connection between Baloch separatists and Israel. Their sharing of intelligence with Tel Aviv led to significant human and infrastructure losses for Iran.”
Tehran has gone further with its accusations, directly implicating Tel Aviv and accusing Israel of recruiting and deploying mercenaries through the Balochistan Liberation United Front (BLUF). Abdullah Khan of the Pakistan Institute for Conflict and Security Studies warned: “Iran is enhancing its ties with Pakistan in the background of militants’ increased alignment with Israel. Their liaison with Tel Aviv would further crystallize when Iran shifts its policies and takes action against BLA and BLF sanctuaries within its territory. India has cultivated strong ties with both groups, enabling it to serve as a bridge to connect them with Israel.”
The Multipolar Reality
Today’s geopolitical environment increasingly resembles the complex balance Zia navigated during the 1980s. Pakistan’s alignment with China and Iran in various contexts, from CPEC to regional security cooperation against Israel’s Judeo-Accelerationist foreign policy, represents the kind of hedging strategy Zia pioneered.
The emergence of a multipolar world order, with China and Russia challenging American hegemony, provides Pakistan with alternatives to complete dependence on Washington. This mirrors the strategic space Zia created by balancing Cold War pressures while pursuing Pakistan’s independent interests.
The emergence of India as a strategic partner for both Israel and the United States creates new pressure points for Pakistan. This convergence of Israeli and American interests regarding Pakistan mirrors the strategic calculations that may have motivated action against Zia in 1988. Pakistan’s continued opposition to India, combined with its growing alignment with China and Iran, places it squarely in opposition to the emerging U.S.-India-Israel axis.
Just as Zia-ul-Haq’s demise brought one era to a close, the unresolved questions surrounding his death continue to haunt Pakistan’s foreign policy decision-making in a world where old alliances fade and new fault lines emerge.
World rallies behind Syria as Israel tears away at it
Press TV – July 18, 2025
International organizations and a whole host of countries have expressed outright condemnation of the Israeli regime’s escalating deadly and destructive attacks against Syria under the pretext of protecting the country’s Druze minority.
A torrent of statements followed the regime’s attack on various areas in the country on Wednesday, including areas lying in its south, in reported support for the Druze.
The attacks came as fighting between members of the minority and Bedouin tribes has killed hundreds of people, with the Israeli involvement being feared to be aimed at intensifying the confrontations and further destabilizing Syria.
UNSC calls for end to Israel’s ‘impunity’
Addressing the situation, Pakistan, which holds the United Nations Security Council (UNSC)’s rotating presidency, denounced the Israeli aggression.
Ambassador Asim Iftikhar Ahmad noted that the attacks resembled Tel Aviv’s atrocities against the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, Iran, and Yemen, all of which violated the international law. The envoy also called for an end to the regime’s impunity.
Mohamed Khaled Khiari, UN assistant secretary-general, denounced the Israeli escalation on the part of the world body’s chief, Antonio Guterres.
He said the attacks amounted toa violation of Syria’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and further destabilized the country amid the already sensitive situation.
The official also advised that Tel Aviv respect the 1974 agreement that has mandated its refusal to conduct violations against the Arab nation.
China calls for Israeli withdrawal
Geng Shuang, China’s deputy UN ambassador, said Beijing called on “Israel to immediately cease its military strikes on Syria and withdraw from Syrian territory without delay.”
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian also said the attacks amounted to a flagrant violation of international law and Syria’s sovereignty, saying the Arab country had to be spared of whatever measure that could lead to further crisis and tension.
Turkey: ‘Terror state’ Israel using Druze as excuse
Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called the Israeli regime a “terror state.”
“Israel, using the Druze as an excuse, has been expanding its banditry into neighboring Syria over the past two days,” he said in a televised speech.
Erdogan said Turkey would not allow Syria’s partition, saying Tel Aviv’s actions showed it was not after peace.
PGCC: Israel after irresponsible escalation
The Persian Gulf Cooperation Council’s Secretary-General, Jasem Mohammed Albudaiw,i also said the Israeli regime’s atrocities indicated its efforts at irresponsible intensification of standing tensions.
The Israeli aggression, he added, also showed the regime’s disregard for the international community’s efforts at realizing stability and ensuring security in Syria.
Hamas: Israeli aggression ‘systematic terrorism’
The Palestinian resistance movements, Hamas and the Islamic Jihad, called the atrocities “organized terrorism.”
The latter also said Tel Aviv was trying to fragment the region through violence, reaffirming solidarity with Syria and supporting its right to resist by all means.
Ansarullah: Israeli attacks part of ‘imperialist scheme’
Yemen’s Ansarullah resistance movement denounced the Israeli strikes as part of a larger “imperialist scheme” to dominate the Arab and Muslim world.
It called for a unified Arab-Islamic response and an end to silence in the face of the aggression.
Muslim states hold intensive talks
Foreign ministers from various regional Muslim countries have, meanwhile, held intensive talks concerning the state of affairs.
The talks were held among top diplomats from Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, Lebanon, and Egypt.
The discussions that were held with the aim of helping the countries in question adopt a unified stance in the face of the situation saw the officials reiterate support for Syria’s security, unity, stability, and sovereignty.
They called on the UNSC to assume its legal and moral duties towards guaranteeing the withdrawal of the Israeli regime from Syria, and bringing about an end to its aggression by obliging it to abide by the 1974 agreement.
Malaysia: Israel threatening international peace
Malaysia also called for the international community “not to tolerate the continued aggression by the Israeli Zionist regime against other countries, threatening regional and international peace and security.”
Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said after decades of hardship, the Syrian people deserved peace, not further violence and external interference.
Norway’s foreign minister has also said he was “deeply concerned about recent Israeli airstrikes and rising domestic tensions.”
Pakistan won’t remain silent if US, Israel target Ayatollah Khamenei: Senator
Press TV – June 30, 2025
A Pakistani senator has condemned a threat by the US and Israel to target Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, saying it will trigger a response from all Muslim nations, including Pakistan.
Allama Raja Nasir Abbas Jafari, a member of the Pakistani Senate, described Ayatollah Khamenei as a religious leader and a Marja (religious authority), who is also a political leader.
Religious authorities issued a fatwa (religious decree) that says anyone who threatens the Leader is an enemy of God, whose punishment is death in Islam, he noted.
Between June 13 and 24, Israel waged a blatant and unprovoked aggression against Iran, assassinating many high-ranking military commanders, nuclear scientists, and ordinary civilians.
On June 22, the United States also jumped on the bandwagon and bombed three Iranian nuclear sites in a grave violation of the United Nations Charter, international law, and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
During the 12-day war, US President Donald Trump claimed that Ayatollah Khamenei was “an easy target.”
Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel also ranted that the assassination of Ayatollah Khamenei would “end” the war.
The Pakistani senator said Trump and Netanyahu should know that if an attack is carried out, it will not just be an attack on Iran, and all Muslims in the world will respond to it.
“We will respond in Pakistan as well; if such an action is taken, no American will remain in Pakistan. We will not remain silent when they (Trump and Netanyahu) do not abide by any law,” he added.
On Sunday, senior Iranian clerics Grand Ayatollah Nasser Makarem Shirazi and Grand Ayatollah Hossein Nouri-Hamedani issued religious decrees against any attack or threat to Ayatollah Khamenei.
They said that any person or regime that threatens or attacks the leadership and religious authority to harm the Islamic Ummah and its sovereignty is subject to the ruling of confrontation.
Pakistan breaks ranks, backs Iran in war with Israel
By F.M. Shakil | The Cradle | June 19, 2025
Despite Islamabad’s official denials of providing military or material support to Iran in its confrontation with Israel, recent developments suggest a dramatic shift in regional alignments. Today, Pakistan and China appear to be coordinating closely with Tehran, offering tangible strategic advantages as Tel Aviv escalates its hostilities.
As war clouds gathered, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi held urgent discussions with his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi on 14 June. That same day, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian spoke with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who expressed Islamabad’s “resolute solidarity” with Iran. He also added that the country “stands firmly with the Iranian people in this critical hour.”
China and Pakistan’s role
In the immediate aftermath, reports emerged of Pakistani military delegations arriving in Tehran amid the hostilities. Although swiftly denied by Islamabad, the timing and context fuel speculation of deeper collaboration. Similarly, Beijing reportedly greenlit the transfer of its BeiDou Navigation Satellite System (BDS) technology to Iran, formalized in a new bilateral MoU – an upgrade that dramatically enhanced the precision of Iranian missile strikes.
Though Pakistan continues to reject claims of missile transfers to Iran, its stance in recent days paints a different picture. On 16 June, members of the Iranian parliament chanted “Thank you, thank you Pakistan” following remarks by Pezeshkian, who praised Pakistan for standing by Iran. These developments fly in the face of Pakistan’s non-alignment rhetoric and indicate an ideological and strategic realignment by Islamabad.
It was only early last year that Iran launched missile and drone strikes into Pakistan’s Balochistan region on 16 January, targeting extremist militant group Jaish al-Adl positions. Pakistan retaliated two days later on 18 January, conducting air and missile strikes into Iran’s Sistan and Baluchestan province in an operation dubbed Marg Bar Sarmachar. The tit-for-tat was remarkably friendly in the final analysis, and appears to have settled some critical border cooperation issues between the two states.
The fact that these former adversaries – who had just engaged in direct military exchanges – have now adopted “resolute solidarity” is nothing short of breathtaking.
Beijing’s embrace of Iran is grounded in energy security and strategic depth instead. Its ambitious, multi-trillion dollar Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) aimed at linking the Eurasian landmass hinges on the stability of Tehran and Islamabad, with the Gwadar and Chahbahar ports forming key arteries in China’s westward expansion.
China also supplies J-10 fighter jets and HQ‑9 air‑defense systems to Pakistan, which played key roles in the extraordinary May 2025 skirmish between India and Pakistan – marking major testing ground for Chinese weapons. A parallel circumstance is present in Iran. China must acknowledge Iran because it is a crucial supporter of China’s energy needs and trade operations.
“The enemy of my friend is my enemy” may well define the new tripartite logic binding Iran, Pakistan, and China in resistance to Israeli and western designs.
Colonial ambitions and nuclear red lines
Tel Aviv’s recent strikes on Iranian military and nuclear infrastructure mark a new phase in a decades-long western strategy aimed at dismantling Muslim powers resistant to colonial domination. Iraq, Syria, Libya – all were destabilized under similar pretexts. The 2001 plot, conceived by the US, its European allies, and Israel, has entered its second phase, targeting Iran initially and Pakistan subsequently.
In a 2011 interview with Channel 2, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu laid bare the logic: Iran and Pakistan are the primary targets of this containment strategy, he stated blankly. “These radical regimes … pose a significant threat,” he said, stressing the need to prevent them from acquiring nuclear capability.
But recent Israeli provocations have instead triggered multipolar resistance to those plans. Speaking to The Cradle, Abdullah Khan of the Pakistan Institute for Conflict and Security Studies (PICSS) reveals that Israeli drone operators had recently attempted to sabotage Pakistan’s nuclear facilities during the India–Pakistan crisis:
“Israeli drone operators were stationed in Indian operation rooms during the recent Pakistan–India conflict, trying to target Pakistan’s nuclear facilities. However, prompt action from Pakistan thwarted their efforts, preventing them from causing any damage to the nuclear assets of Pakistan.”
Defensive posturing or new axis?
A source in Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry reveals to The Cradle that Islamabad has quietly warned Washington of a potential nuclear escalation should Israel attack Iran with such weapons.
“If such a situation arises, it will spill beyond Iran. The region will enter a new, unpredictable security phase,” the source states.
The warning was soon echoed in Tehran. On 16 June, Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) General Mohsen Rezaei declared on state television:
“Pakistan has told us that if Israel uses nuclear missiles, we will also attack it with nuclear weapons.”
Meanwhile, Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif caused a stir with an incendiary post targeting exiled Iranian royal Reza Pahlavi, the son of the ousted shah of Iran. In response to Pahlavi’s BBC interview, Asif wrote on X:
“If Iranian people are energized and motivated, according to you, show some balls and go back and lead them and remove the regime. Put your money where your arse is, bloody parasitical imperial whore.”
Bilal Khan, a Toronto-based defense/security analyst and the co-founder of independent think tank Quwa Defence News & Analysis Group, tells The Cradle that Islamabad perceives itself as under coordinated pressure from the US, India, and Israel.
“The Pakistani security elite perceive that the US and its counter-proliferation regime are imposing penalties on Pakistan, although it was India that brought the nuclear issue to South Asia. “There exists a structural perception in Rawalpindi that the US, along with its allies India and Israel, is targeting Pakistan’s nuclear program. Nonetheless, it remains uncertain how Pakistan will handle the situation. Certainly, increased investment in air defense systems, enhanced domestic intelligence capabilities, and strengthening the air force with next-generation J-35 stealth fighters are all essential to take on any possible Israeli actions.”
From denial to celebration
While Islamabad has offered no formal commitment of military aid to Tehran, Iranian media and parliament are now rallying around Pakistan with chants of “Pakistan Zindabad.”
Diplomatically, Islamabad has backed Tehran’s call for a UN Security Council session on Israeli aggression and explicitly defended Iran’s right to self-defense. Alongside Algeria, China, and Russia, Pakistan played a key role in amplifying Iran’s initiative, marking a coordinated diplomatic front that signals a deeper convergence within the Eurasian bloc. This is no small gesture from a country once considered a possible target of Israel’s preemptive doctrine.
In a move that exposes Washington’s alarm, Pakistan’s army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, was quietly summoned to the US Central Command headquarters in Florida. His absence from a key national parade in Islamabad has raised questions at home. While the Pakistani embassy remains tight-lipped, Dawn cited sources anticipating “uncomfortable conversations” in Washington.
Whether Munir’s US visit results in a recalibration or further consolidation of Islamabad’s alignment with Tehran and Beijing remains uncertain. But one thing is clear: Pakistan is no longer sitting on the fence.
Pakistan calls for Muslim states to unite against Israel
RT | June 16, 2025
Pakistani Defense Minister Khawaja Asif has called on Muslim nations to unite against Israel following its strikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites. He warned that failing to act collectively would only encourage further attacks across the Middle East.
Speaking in the National Assembly on Saturday, Asif argued that Israel “did not act alone” and had received “intelligence, cover, and support.” He said the Muslim world remained “militarily vulnerable” and urged a joint response.
“Just as Israel is currently targeting Yemen, Iran, and Palestine, if the Muslim world does not unite today and continues to prioritize its own interests and agendas, then everyone’s turn will come,” he told lawmakers.
Asif called for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) to convene and devise a strategy to confront Israel. “Wherever there are diplomatic ties with Israel in the Muslim world, they should be severed,” he said.
“We stand behind Iran and will support them at every international forum to protect their interests,” the defense minister added.
On Friday morning, Israeli jets bombed military and nuclear sites across Iran and carried out assassinations of several senior Iranian military commanders and veteran nuclear scientists. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the strikes were aimed at preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. In response, Iran launched multiple ballistic missiles at Israeli cities, including Tel Aviv.
While the US denied involvement, President Donald Trump endorsed Israel’s operation. Iran has since suspended nuclear talks with Washington.
BJP-led team returns from West Asia
By M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | Indian Punchline | June 4, 2025
The multi-party delegation led by the BJP Vice-President and spokesman Bijayant Panda which toured four countries in the Gulf region — Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain and Algeria — to rally support for the government’s war on terror against Pakistan has returned. External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar “lauded their efforts,” per media reports.
This was the most consequential delegation out of the five delegations that the government mounted to mobilise international opinion. The tidings from the Gulf have great ‘grassroots resonance’ in India’s domestic politics.
A member of Panda’s team said, “We briefed the EAM … that India’s growing economic might and position in the world order, secured by PM Narendra Modi’s diplomatic push during his tenure and visits to several nations, are key when it comes to the world’s decision to stand with us as partners both in international trade as well as on the issue of zero tolerance against terrorism.”
West Asia is India’s ‘extended neighbourhood.’ And India’s West Asian diplomacy does carry the imprimatur of Modi. For that reason, an ex-Foreign Secretary was included in Panda’s team to navigate the tricky mission. What comes to mind is Panda’s challenge was similar to Nikita Khrushchev’s as the Commissar of the Red Army at the Stalingrad Front in World War II.
Khrushchev shouted at the commanders of the 62nd Army and the 64th Army on the Stalingrad Front, ‘Comrades, this is no ordinary city. This is Stalingrad. It carries the name of the Boss.” The generals got the message and went on to crush the crack Nazi Panzer Divisions and turn the tide of the Battle of Stalingrad, which is still remembered as the bloodiest and fiercest battle of the entirety of World War II — and, arguably, in all of human history.
But Panda didn’t have such an option. His delegation received a warm reception. But the profoundly worrisome reality still continues, namely, the Gulf regimes are taking a ‘proforma’ attitude, voicing hackneyed words on terrorism but also echoing the burgeoning world opinion that India and Pakistan ought to find a solution to their issues through dialogue and negotiations.
The Gulf states have neatly sidestepped Pakistan’s alleged role in Pahalgam. They ask for ‘proof’! The top diplomat of a friendly country apparently remarked a few days ago in a private conversation as an aside that the Pahalgam terrorists physically checking out the religion of their victims first is nothing new in the subcontinent, and cited Khushwant Singh’s Train to Pakistan for reference.
What has Panda’s delegation brought home? Does it make a success story? A member of the delegation later told media in the mother of all quotes, “Every country we visited had already issued statements condemning the Pahalgam terror incident — these were reiterated by them in person to us.” But this is like reinventing the wheel.
Some profoundly troubling question arise here, especially as countdown has begun for the Shashi Tharoor moment in Washington. Tharoor also has a challenging mission. After all those decades in the UN where he handled public relations work, this must be a novel experience — to actually negotiate as a flag carrier.
Not a single senior US official is willing to name Pakistan so far — certainly, not Trump. They will wonder how this flashy neocon liberal from Delhi and an eloquent exponent of globalism in American publications all these years has shrunk and become a pale shadow of himself.
Who’s afraid of terrorism in 21st century? We are in an era where terrorism is becoming the preferred weapon to fight hybrid wars. Trump recently shook hands with the notoriously cruel ex-al Qaeda terrorist leader Ahmad al-Sharaa who committed unspeakable crimes against humanity, underscoring that yesterday’s terrorist can be tomorrow’s key ally.
That al-Qaeda was actually a creation of the Americans is known to everybody but Trump proclaimed himself openly as an admirer of al-Sharaa, telling Gulf sheikhs at a GCC conclave in Riyadh on May 14 after shaking hands with the tall six-footer Syrian that “he’s a “young, attractive guy. Tough guy. Strong past. Very strong past. Fighter.” Trump added, “He’s got a real shot at holding it [Syria] together. He’s a real leader. He led a charge, and he’s pretty amazing.”
Trump had better be right in his optimism because his entire gambit of betting on an ex-al Qaeda ally to reshape West Asia is a risky venture funded by Saudi Arabia and Qatar who’d see in all this by the time Trump becomes history a pathway to sow the germane seeds of a third Wahhabi state modelled after them in the cradle of Islamic civilisation.
In Ukraine too, terrorism is the preferred weapon for the Western powers to bleed Russia in their proxy war when in military technology and defence manufacturing industry they cannot match Russia’s, and they are no longer capable of fighting a continental war either. The stark message coming out of the attacks on Russian military assets two days ago with technical support from NATO satellites — and possibly Elon Musk’s Starlink — is that terrorism can be a game changer in geopolitics.
Therefore, all this global campaign by our government against Pakistan may have a good optic domestically as our media hypes it up dutifully, but what is the net gain for diplomacy? Even if the whole world were to now bracket Pakistan with the US, UK, Saudi Arabia or Qatar as yet another state sponsoring terrorism, so what? Who cares?
Today’s papers have reported that according to a list of chairs of the subsidiary bodies of the UN that monitor international terrorism, Pakistan holds responsible positions as co-chair of the Taliban Sanctions Committee of the UN Security Council for 2025 and the Counter-terrorism Committee. Pakistan will also be the co-chair of the informal working groups on documentation and other procedural questions as well as the general UN Security Council sanctions issues.
How could the alleged epicentre of international terrorism be possibly a watchdog and decision-maker on counter-terrorism and sanctions in a world body? Clearly, international opinion ignores India’s diatribes against Pakistan, which is also currently an elected non-permanent member of the Security Council.
On the other hand, thanks to the Biden administration and Five Eyes, an impression gained ground in recent years that the Indian government is sponsoring assassination of political opponents abroad as a matter of statecraft. Not only have we suffered some ‘reputational damage,’ but the Pakistani claim that it too is a victim of terrorism gained traction. Countries seem to hyphenate India with Pakistan. It has become necessary for Delhi to disown responsibility when a train derails in Baluchistan or an improvised explosive device blows up a Pakistani army convoy or some notorious jihadi fellow meets with unnatural death on the streets of Lahore and Karachi.
This is becoming a vicious cycle which only helps to call attention to the unresolved Kashmir problem as posing threat to regional and international security. Put differently, ‘terrorism’ in the India-Pakistan context has become the objective co-relative of the Kashmir problem and Hindu-Muslim strife. Trump’s caustic remark about the millennial war speaks for itself.
It is high time that the ‘war on terror’ is removed from our diplomatic toolbox. Certainly, our parliamentarians have no role in it. As for the optics domestically, resort to some other means. By all means, meet terrorism with coercion — if that indeed helps. Deploy what Joseph Nye called ‘smart power’. But neither expect external support, nor canvass for it.
India, Pakistan and a bit of infowarfare
By Lorenzo Maria Pacini | Strategic Culture Foundation | May 27, 2025
The recent events involving India and Pakistan, in a short-lived, conventional and timely conflict, prompt us to reflect carefully on the use and management of media coverage of the conflict.
It is important to remember that the domination of information has to do with the domination of the mind; therefore, the way in which an event is narrated largely defines the perception that the masses will have of it. Controlling the narrative means controlling the majority element of the cognitive-perceptual dimension.
So, let’s look at the facts. A few hours after the massacre of 26 civilians in Pahalgam on 22 April, the main Indian media had already passed judgement. No investigation had yet been launched, no credible claim had been made, nor had any attempt been made to identify specific responsibilities, yet in a very short time the dominant narrative had been established: Pakistan was to blame.
What happened next represents a new critical point in the information war that now accompanies every moment of tension between India and Pakistan. In the days that followed, the Pakistani High Commission in New Delhi suffered expulsions of staff, Pakistani citizens were ordered to leave India by 30 April, and a decisive digital offensive was launched. Significantly, the Indian authorities blocked Pakistani YouTube channels, froze social media profiles and targeted narratives coming from across the border.
From Islamabad’s point of view, this was not simply a response to terrorism through the media, but rather a form of information terrorism, an occupation of the narrative. This is a key turning point.
The conflict between the two countries has always been marked by propaganda, disinformation and narratives inflamed by the media on both sides and also abroad, where there is a constant attempt to identify with one faction or the other (as is to be expected); but in 2025, the information landscape is not only a subject of contention, it has become colonised territory.
Pakistan, increasingly marginalised in the large international digital spaces, finds itself fighting a narrative war at a disadvantage. The way in which the Indian media reported the Pahalgam attack follows a well-established script: vague intelligence sources, information presented as established facts, inflammatory talk shows launched well before any concrete evidence emerged. Even after Pakistan’s firm denial and request for a joint investigation, the Indian press continued its campaign. Outlets such as Times Now and Republic TV immediately ran alarmist headlines: ‘Pakistan-sponsored terrorism is back’, ‘It’s time for a military response’. Terms such as ‘atrocious’, ‘state-sponsored’ and ‘surgical strike’ dominated the broadcasts, while scientific investigations were still in their early stages.
No independent verification – note this detail – has been made public. The few Pakistani voices invited onto television programmes were promptly attacked. There was no editorial caution, no balance.
It is fair to acknowledge that Pakistan also has a complicated past with press freedom and control of narratives by the authorities, but what emerges today is not a symmetrical conflict, but rather an unbalanced silence.
On 25 April, the Indian Ministry of Information banned 16 YouTube channels, 94 social media accounts and six news sites linked to Pakistan. The official reason? ‘Protection of national security and sovereignty’. The concrete result: the blocking of almost any alternative or critical viewpoint, especially on issues such as Kashmir, the attack on Pahalgam or bilateral relations. Among the platforms affected were independent media outlets such as Naya Daur, channels run by Pakistani scholars abroad and cultural content with no political affiliation. At the same time, official fact-checking units launched a campaign to expose what they called ‘Pakistani disinformation,’ but the content removed also included material based on authoritative international sources, archive articles that were still valid, and statements taken out of context. The result was a sharp restriction of freedom of expression and access to certain local sources. Even diplomatic communications were not spared. The Pakistani Foreign Ministry saw many of its official posts on X (formerly Twitter) blocked, including statements calling for calm. On 29 April, the hashtag #FalseFlagPahalgam, widely shared in Pakistan, was virtually invisible on platforms accessible from Indian territory.
Tensions reached a new peak on 7 May 2025, when India struck civilian and military targets in Punjab and Pakistan-controlled Kashmir, sparking fears of a serious escalation. Islamabad called the operation ‘a blatant act of war’ and announced that it had shot down five Indian military jets, three of which were also confirmed by international media. India has not yet officially responded to this claim, but anonymous government sources have said that three fighter jets crashed in Indian-controlled Kashmir, without confirming whether they actually belonged to India or Pakistan.
Geopolitical asymmetries
It is precisely in this disproportion that the real asymmetry can be perceived. India, thanks to its technological resources, its links with major global platforms and its ability to influence algorithms, controls the digital narrative. Pakistan, on the other hand, is often its victim. The result is a one-sided war of narratives, in which Delhi sets the terms of the debate and Islamabad is relegated to the role of designated culprit.
The internal consequences are no less serious: increased Islamophobia, similarities between Kashmiri identity and jihadism, and some localised tensions. Hashtags such as #PunishPakistan and #MuslimTerror have spread widely without control, while Pakistani responses denouncing violence or discrimination have been labelled as disinformation and deleted.
This double standard only fuels radicalism on both sides. It pushes young Pakistanis towards closed and polarised environments and makes it increasingly difficult to build peaceful bridges between the two peoples. What was once a space for cultural diplomacy is now a digital minefield. The silence of big tech and Western media in the face of India’s censorship is significant: when an authoritarian regime represses dissent, it is called tyranny; when India does so in the name of ‘national security’, it is praised as moderate. Pakistan has asked for the opportunity to defend itself in the information arena and has been effectively denied, leaving it at an international disadvantage.
The absence of real journalistic scrutiny signals a deeper evil: narrative has replaced facts. The struggle for dominance is now being fought with tweets, headlines and talk shows.
At this level of conflict, the gap between what is true and what is plausible becomes very difficult to discern. Do you understand how powerful this tool is? The frame within which the narrative is placed is what determines how the ‘truth’ of that event will be constructed.
The example of India and Pakistan teaches us that there is no need to fire guns, even in a historical conflict such as theirs. Words work much better. Because even when the guns have fired, there will still be ‘good guns’ and ‘bad guns’, and that value judgement will be made by the way people perceive what happened, not by an objective or rationally agreeable truth.
In all this, the great media victory is that a narrative front has been opened up that can easily be used by other global powers and could be employed by some of them to drag other adversarial countries into an information conflict. Russia, China, the UK and the US have interests at stake and could become part of this expanded infowar front. Because in the world of information, war does not have the space and time limitations of conventional warfare: everything is fast, fluid, constantly expanding and contracting, and knows no night or day.
Information warfare may save more lives, but it claims more victims. Lives are saved because direct killing can be avoided; victims are claimed because everyone involved will inevitably be hit by the weapon of information.
Pakistan PM hails Iran’s diplomacy for regional peace ahead of visit
Press TV – May 26, 2025
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has hailed Iran’s peace diplomacy as commendable, underscoring his nation’s solidarity and support for the Islamic Republic.
Sharif, who will visit Tehran at the official invitation of Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Monday, made the remarks in an interview with IRNA.
Sharif stated that the primary purpose of his visit to Tehran is to express gratitude to Iran for its support—specifically endorsing Iran’s peace-seeking positions in the region—during Pakistan’s recent tensions with India.
Tensions between India and Pakistan sharply escalated after the deadly Pahalgam attack. India blamed Pakistan for the attack, but Pakistan rejected the accusations.
“I wish to express gratitude to Iranian officials for their support of peace and their mediation proposal—which we accepted but India rejected,” he said, adding “I will also use this visit as an opportunity to discuss bilateral relations and matters of mutual interest.”
Sharif praised Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s diplomatic skill, saying the Iranian top diplomat has demonstrated true statesmanship and wisdom in managing significant challenges during an exceptionally complex geopolitical era.
Sharif also stated that Pakistan firmly supports Iran’s condemnation of Israel’s genocide in Gaza, which has caused severe humanitarian devastation and regional instability.
“Islamabad and Tehran will continue to support one another on issues concerning the Muslim Ummah and to advance regional cooperation,” Sharif added.
Indian Mass Delusion Syndrome on Full Display
What leads people to celebrate defeat as victory?
By Hua Bin | May 24, 2025
Since I wrote “the DeepSeek moment of modern air combat”, more details have come out about the battlefield outcome from the May 7 and 8 Pakistan India clash.
In addition to the 3 Rafales, 1 Su-30, 1 Mig-29 and 1 Heron UAV covered in my essay, Pakistan also shot down an Indian French-made Mirage 2000. Pakistan Air Force destroyed 2 batteries of the Russia-made S400 air defense system (the command center and one radar unit) with China-made CM400akg hypersonic land-attack missiles launched from JF-17, a fighter jet produced jointly with China.
Since this is the first truly high-tech large scale air combat in the 21st century and the first beyond-visual-range (BVR) air war, military experts and commentators are studying the battle in minute detail. I plan to write another short piece on the tech behind the Pakistan victory soon.
However, another aspect of the war has come to the forefront immediately after the war. That is the mass delusion indulged by the Indian government and press about the conflict. Rather than acknowledging its setback and reviewing its strategy, tactics and battlefield lessons, the Indians are trying to mask their defeat through outright fabrications and lies on a massive scale. It is going so far as to claim the clash an unqualified victory.
Indian government, its TV media (400+ channels), and social media are filled with made-up battlefield successes, destruction in Pakistan, and superiority of the Indian military. The wild claims include –
– No Indian aircrafts were lost and no damage to S400 (though wreckage of a Rafale jet was filmed with its tail number and two burial ceremonies were held for Indian soldiers operating S400 systems. Indian report said they were shot during border skirmishes, which defies any common sense)
– Indian air force shot down 8 Pakistan F-16 jets and 4 JF-17 fighters (no US-made F-16 even took off during the conflict as the US forbid Pakistan to use F-16 in conflicts with India)
– Karachi, the largest port city in Pakistan, was firebombed by Indian navy and one third of the city was destroyed (the footage shown on Indian TVs was later fact-checked to be Israeli’s bombing campaigns in Palestine)
– A coup d’etat happened in Pakistan and the army chief was arrested
– A retired Indian air force marshal claims the Chinese air force cannot use the China-made weapons as well as Pakistan so India has nothing to worry about a conflict with China
Right after the air war, the Indian government called in diplomatic staff from 70+ countries to announce its heroic victories; Modi went on a tour of the frontline and announced a 10-day national celebration. The Indian military was tasked to go on a national tour to share their battlefield successes with patriotic citizens.
When American and French officials confirmed some of the battlefield losses suffered by India, the Indian media, led by the famous BJP promoter and TV personality Palki Sharma, went into a frenzied attack on the inferiorities of US and European weaponry. They bombasted Trump for claiming to broach a ceasefire between the two belligerents. Their argument is India would have dealt an even bigger defeat to Pakistan without the ceasefire meddling.
To this day, most Indians are under the delusion that the Indian military has dealt Pakistan a deathly blow and emerged totally victorious and unscathed.
While shrill and high octane “news” reporting is par for the course in India, and BJP, under Modi, has long shaped and exploited wide-spread jingoistic Hindu nationalist fervour, the Bollywood-like mass delusion is over the top and probably without a parallel in military history.
It is interesting to explore what lies behind such mass hysteria that is completely divorced from reality and what this means for India and its population.
A quick AI search tells you the medical or psychological term for “self-fooling” is self-deception.
Self-deception refers to the process of misleading oneself to accept as true or valid what is false or invalid. It involves cognitive biases, denial, or rationalization to maintain certain beliefs or avoid uncomfortable truths.
While not a formal medical diagnosis, self-deception is studied in psychology and psychiatry as part of defense mechanisms (e.g., denial or repression) that protect the ego from anxiety or distress.
I think this perfectly captures the psychological reasons behind the wildly delusional Indian national mood and character.
Since BJP took power, Modi and his cronies have intentionally fostered a ultra-nationalistic narrative about India’s greatness and Hindu superiority.
– India has launched unprecedented repressions of Muslims and deprived the Kashmir region (a Muslim majority region) its long-held autonomous status.
– India has embraced the fantasy to replace China as the world’s manufacturing center and top economic growth engine by opportunistically aligning with the US and the west. At the same time, it is exploring the Russia-Ukraine war to enrich itself by selling Russian oil at inflated price to the west.
– India has boasted its economy has surpassed UK and France and will join the US and China in no time as the largest economies in the world while it is still behind Japan and Germany. To inflate its GDP, India has changed its GDP accounting method twice in the last 10 years and started to count cow dung as part of GDP as agricultural inputs. Grok estimates Indian GDP calculation included the value of cow dung and other manure at $4.7 billion in 2023.
– India has attempted to bolster its military by purchasing a hodge podge suite of brand-name weaponries from France, Russia, the US and Israel. India spent 7.8 billion Euros in 2015 to purchase 36 Rafale fighters, or 220 million Euros per jet, making it the most expensive fighter jet ever sold by that time. There was so much corruption by Modi’s cronies in the deal that Wikipedia has an entire entry dedicated to the controversy. Even after the corruption case was exposed, India decided to double down and spent anther $7.4 billion to buy 26 Rafale jets for its navy just this past April. That is a staggering price tag of $285 million per Rafale, a new world record.
This Pakistan India air war was initially intended by India to show off its new found muscle until it has its ass handed back by Pakistan.
Similarly, the Modi regime announced with big fanfare its Make In India campaign in 2015 to replace China as the world’s manufacturing powerhouse. It targeted manufacturing to reach 25% GDP by 2025. Instead, Indian manufacturing GDP was 13% by 2024, down from 17% in 2010. In contrast, according to CSIS, value-added industrial output accounted for nearly 40% China’s GDP (vs. 18% in the US). Given China’s GDP is 5 times of India, that means China’s manufacturing GDP alone is 2 times as big as India’s total GDP or 16 times India’s manufacturing output.
Another interesting statistic – in Paris 2024 Olympics, India won a grand total of 6 medals – 1 silver and 5 bronze, ranking 71st among the 84 countries with medal count. This is India’s third best medal haul after 2020 and 2012, according to Wikipedia. The world’s most populous country ranks between Lithuania (70th, population 2.8 million) and Moldova (72nd population 2.4 million). India’s Gold medal haul (0) was lower than Hong Kong (2). The US and China (ex. Hong Kong) each won 40 Gold medals, and 126 and 91 total medals respectively.
This wild gap between India’s self-perception (or should we say self-delusion) as a great power and the cold reality of its economic and social backwardness is the reason behind the mass delusion.
It’s a sad combination of inferiority complex and unfounded sense of grandeur.
There was a famous character called Ah Q in an early 20th century literature work in China. Ah Q is a loser but cannot accept his lowly station in life. So he goes around telling himself he is better than the other people around him, often saying “I was beaten by my bastard son” after losing a fight. In the end, he was framed for a robbery and sentenced to death. When he was signing his death warrant by drawing a circle (since he couldn’t write), he was more upset about the circle not drawn perfectly than the death sentence.
Indians didn’t succeed in copying China’s economic success. Instead, the Indians have fully adopted Ah Q’s delusional “spiritual victory” method of coping with failures and humiliations.
The Indian celebration of their imagined success perfectly reflects Ah Q’s delusional defiance when he tried to sing a heroic song on the road to his execution. He couldn’t sing with his wobbly voice at that point, instead weakly uttered a phrase commonly used by criminals before execution, ”In another 20 years, I shall be another stout young fellow”.
The Indian media obsession with spectacles mirror Ah Q’s morbid disappointment at the crowd at his execution – they were bored because he didn’t sing properly and lamented that he was shot instead of beheaded, denying them the “entertainment” of a decapitation .
India’s celebration of its defeat at the hand of Pakistan encapsulates Ah Q’s entire existence – a blend of farce and tragedy, where self-deception persists until the bullet ends his life.
On a higher level, the dishonest propaganda by the Indian government and media is an information war against its own population. Few foreigners believe the Indian official narrative. The Indian government and media has completely lost any credibility at this point. So the real target of the disinformation campaign is the Indian population itself.
A nation without basic intellectual honesty and suffering from cognitive dissonance will not rise. Instead it will be the butt of jokes by late night comedians.
In the so-called “largest democracy in the world” where the rule is one Rupiah one vote, Modi is resorting to the lowest level of “democratic” playbook – keep the population dumb and get their votes through lies.
How India-Pakistan war will affect global and regional political order
By Salman Rafi Sheikh – New Eastern Outlook – May 24, 2025
The recent India-Pakistan war, though limited in scope, has triggered significant geopolitical reverberations by showcasing Chinese military superiority and prompting a strategic reassessment in Washington.
The China angle in regional geopolitics
Beyond the oft-repeated rhetoric of the Pakistan-China relationship being “all-weather” and “iron-clad,” the recent India-Pakistan war may come to be seen as its first major demonstration in action. Pakistan’s use of Chinese PL-15 missiles, deployed from Chinese-made J-10C fighter jets to successfully engage French-made Rafale aircraft, has underscored the strategic depth of this partnership. This has received considerable international attention, both in the media and otherwise. This show of alignment is particularly notable given recent strains in the Pak-China bilateral relationship, including attacks on Chinese interests and infrastructure projects within Pakistan.
With Pakistan importing almost 80 per cent of its weapons—which also includes cooperation in the field of military technology—from Beijing, the supply ensured to help Islamabad maintain the balance of power vis-à-vis New Delhi. More than this, China’s policy was also motivated by its desire to counter-balance Washington’s efforts to boost India against China. Ironically enough, it was only days before the recent war that the US Vice-President was in India to discuss ways to collectively counter China. But China’s support for Pakistan meant that New Delhi remained preoccupied more with Pakistan than China in a strategic sense. With this war, New Delhi’s focus will be more on Islamabad than China for at least a few more years to come. By the same token, China will most likely continue to help Pakistan develop its defence capability. Even before the war took place, media reports in Pakistan and China reveled ongoing talks between Beijing and Islamabad for the sale and purchase of J-35 fifth-generation stealth fighter jets.
These developments highlight at least four key takeaways. First, China’s defense technology—likely tested in actual combat for the first time—has proven effective enough to attract interest from other regional powers. Its demonstrated performance could prompt these countries to purchase and integrate Chinese systems into their own militaries. This, in turn, would strengthen China’s position in the regional arms market and help it outcompete rival defense exporters. Second, China’s willingness to export advanced military technology—such as the PL-15 missile and J-35 fighter jets—signals a broader strategic intent to deepen its global partnerships. This approach is consistent with Beijing’s “no-limits” alliance with Moscow.
Third, the demonstrated effectiveness of Chinese weaponry against India could encourage regional states to reassess their foreign policy alignments, potentially fostering deeper integration with Beijing over New Delhi. This trend is already evident in countries like Sri Lanka and the Maldives, where pro-Beijing political shifts have gained momentum—most notably in the Maldives, where the new government compelled Indian troops to withdraw. Fourth, Pakistan’s military successes in this conflict challenge a common narrative in global discourse: that partnerships with China inevitably lead to economic “debt traps.” On the contrary, Pakistan’s economic ties with China appear to have laid the foundation for robust military-to-military cooperation, illustrating how economic integration can support broader strategic alignment.
India’s position in Washington’s arc
Can Washington still push—with enough confidence—India as its key ally? What is the material reality of India’s standing within the US-led Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD)? If the QUAD was ever to become a military alliance, the only power in the region that the US expected to be effective on its own against China is/was India—not only because India and China have a long history of rivalry, but also because India remains a big military power. Needless to say, it is the only nuclear power part of the QUAD from the Indo-Pacific region. In this sense, it can maintain deterrence vis-à-vis Beijing. But nuclear deterrence can prevent a nuclear war, as is evident from the recent India-Pakistan conflict. It cannot necessarily prevent conventional conflict. Can India act as the front-line ally for Washington in the region in a conventional war?
The outcome of India-Pakistan was means Washington will have to rethink its strategy. It can take two shapes. First, it is very much possible that Washington will deepen its cooperation with New Delhi. Donald Trump has already offered to sell F-35 fifth-generation stealth fighters. (Russia has also offered New Delhi to sell its own fifth-generation Su-57 jets.) This, however, will necessarily involve China deepening its cooperation with Pakistan. As a result, an arms race will be triggered in the region.
A second strategic path for Washington could involve renewed engagement with China. While the timing of the Trump administration’s trade negotiations with Beijing may coincide with the outcome of the India-Pakistan conflict purely by chance, it nonetheless suggests that even a confrontational administration has not entirely ruled out dialogue as a preferred tool. Washington might also pursue a dual-track approach—engaging China while simultaneously strengthening military alliances elsewhere.
However, in the wake of shifting dynamics following the India-Pakistan conflict, the US will likely need to reassess its regional strategy and consider alternatives to India. Japan, for instance, emerges as a strong candidate. With its recent push toward military normalization and a growing appetite for deeper strategic engagement, Tokyo could become a more prominent partner in Washington’s Indo-Pacific security architecture.
To be clear, this does not imply a fundamental rupture in US-India relations. But it is increasingly likely that Washington will place India’s role under careful review, potentially redefining its status as the principal frontline ally in countering China. In response to China’s growing influence and military reach, the US will need to significantly bolster the defense capabilities of other regional actors—most notably Japan and Australia—as part of a broader strategic recalibration.
Salman Rafi Sheikh, research analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs
Featured Video
Trump Announces Operation To Escort Ships – Fmr. CIA Analyst Larry Johnson
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
Israel’s recurring use of terror on civilians
By Bob Finch | January 26, 2009
Insanely disproportionate use of violence against unarmed civilians… continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- 1977 Influenza Pandemic Sequence Shows Signs of Laboratory Creation: Journal ‘Cell’
- China issues first prohibition order to safeguard international trade order under rule of law
- Iran rejects Trump’s ‘Project Freedom,’ warns US over Hormuz role
- TRUMP ANNOUNCES OPERATION TO ESCORT SHIPS – Fmr. CIA Analyst Larry Johnson
- A few observations on Iran’s latest proposal to Trump
- ‘I urged that our objective be regime change… so did Netanyahu’ – ex-Trump adviser on Iran
- “STAGED”: Conspiracy Theories Are Everywhere!
- NATO courts screenwriters to embed alliance messaging in film, TV
- Iran replaces UAE ports with Pakistan corridor to break US blockade
- Iran sets one-month deadline for end to US-Israeli war, blockade: Report
- If Americans Knew
- As Palestinians die, Ben-Gvir celebrates birthday with golden noose cake – Daily Update
- Israel’s New Ambassador to the ‘Christian World’ Served as Envoy to Azerbaijan During the Ethnic Cleansing of Christians from Nagorno-Karabakh
- US set to sell $1B “Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System” to Israel – Daily Update
- Israeli Strikes Kill at Least 32 Across S Lebanon, Including Children – Amid “Ceasefire”
- Israel to pour $730m into propaganda arm amid reputational crisis
- Real Cost of Iran War Likely Double the $25 Billion Figure the Pentagon Gave to Congress
- Israel conducts farthest-ever strike in long history of attacks on Gaza humanitarian aid flotillas
- In Gaza, Israel commits 10+ ceasefire violations a day – Daily Update
- US ships 6,500 tons of munitions, equipment to Israel in 24 hours
- A New Library in Gaza Rises From the Ashes of Destruction
- No Tricks Zone
- Another Study Links Warming To Cloud Forcing, Shortwave Radiation, Natural Atmospheric Circulation
- Wind Energy Is Toxic, Hazardous To Human Health, Scientific Review Shows
- Oversupply Of Volatile Solar Energy Leads To Record NEGATIVE Prices!
- New Study: Extreme Heat Records, Heatwaves, Extreme Cold Records Declining Across US Since 1899
- It’s The Cold, Stupid! Cold 20 Times More Lethal Than Heat, Multiple Studies Show
- European Institute For Climate And Energy: “Climate Debate is Seldom About Science”
- New Study: The Climate May Be 5 Times More Sensitive To Solar Forcing Than Commonly Assumed
- EV Industry Reached $70 Billion In Losses In 2024 Due To Delusional Green Ideologies
- Reality Check: Maldives Have Actually Grown In Size Or Remained Stable Over Recent Decades
- Abrupt Climate Change Also Occurred NATURALLY In The Past …25 Times During Last Ice Age
Aletho News 