Last Saturday, US President Donald Trump said in a post on his social media account Truth Social that “after a long night of talks mediated by the United States, I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan have agreed to a full and immediate ceasefire.”
“Congratulations to both countries on using common sense and great intelligence,” Trump wrote. “Thank you for your attention to this matter!”
Trump’s aides had been working to secure a successful deal and to guarantee his geopolitical influence between two of Asia’s most powerful nations, one of which is a key ally in countering US rival China.
As a result, Trump announced that he had effectively halted the war between the two nations.
According to an official who spoke to the US newspaper USA Today, the US administration had become seriously concerned that the conflict could spiral out of control and decided that US Vice President J D Vance should call Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whom he had met in New Delhi the previous month.
Vance encouraged Modi to consider the options available for de-escalation, the official said, and offered what he described as “a potential off-ramp that the US understood the Pakistanis would be amenable too.”
At the same time, the State Department said that US Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke to Pakistan’s army chief and indicated that the US would be willing to mediate in talks between the two sides. Overnight, Rubio pushed the two countries to re-establish direct communication in calls with Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar and Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar.
That was enough to stop the escalation between the two nuclear neighbours, which had begun on 26 April in Baisaran Valley, also known as India’s “mini-Switzerland,” one of Kashmir’s top tourist destinations.
Militants armed with rifles descended upon tourists from the surrounding woods, killing 26 along with two Indian officers, one of whom had been married just a few days earlier. This was one of the deadliest terrorist incidents in India in years and also occurred while Vance and his family were visiting another part of the country.
Modi then said, “I say to the whole world, India will identify, track and punish every terrorist and their backers.”
After four days, Pakistan Minister for Information Attaullah Tarar stated that “Pakistan has credible intelligence that India intends carrying out military action against Pakistan in the next 24 to 36 hours on the pretext of baseless and concocted allegations of involvement in the Pahalgam incident.”
“Pakistan reiterates that any such military adventurism by India would be responded to assuredly and decisively,” he said.
On 6 May, India issued a notice to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) regarding a large-scale air exercise along the southern section of its border with Pakistan, scheduled to take place between 7 and 8 May while Indian P-8I planes were flying over the Arabian Sea.
These aircrafts possess advanced capabilities for signals intelligence reconnaissance and communication interception, allowing them to monitor enemy transmissions and map out potential threats, particularly air-defence systems. They also play a crucial part in monitoring Pakistani naval drills in the region.
In the early hours, the Indian Army launched a counter-terror operation codenamed Operation Sindoor and referring to the red powder traditionally worn by brides during weddings but not by widows and symbolising those who lost their husbands in the terrorist attack.
According to an Indian official statement, the fighter jets took off from multiple airbases to carry out sweeping attacks on nine locations along the Pakistani border, without targeting any Pakistani military installations.
The designated targets were used by groups such as Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), and Hizbul Mujahideen (HM) in Bahawalpur, Muridke, Tehra Kalan, Sialkot, Barnala, Kotli, Muzaffarabad, it said.
The Indian Army released videos confirming precision strikes on targets using cruise missiles, guided bombs, kamikaze drones, and attack drones. No reports of interceptions from the Pakistani side were mentioned. However, according to local sources, the strikes resulted in civilian casualties, with 26 people killed and 46 injured.
Pakistan Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif condemned the military action by India on “imaginary terrorist camps” and vowed to respond at a time, place, and manner of the country’s choosing.
Minutes after the strikes, numerous videos began circulating on social media showing fighter jets being hit and crashing over Indian territory, sparking chaos among Pakistani and Indian users online.
By the following day, debris from the wreckage had started to indicate the downing of a French-made Rafale jet, while local sources reported that the pilots had ejected safely and had been transported to a hospital.
However, the real surprise was the discovery of debris from several modern Chinese long-range PL-15 missiles that can be fired by AVIC J-10 jets. Later, Pakistan officially announced that it had shot down five Indian fighter jets including three Rafale jets, a Su-30, and a MiG-29.
There was no official response from the Indian side.
According to the US network CNN, a senior French intelligence official confirmed that one Indian Air Force Rafale fighter jet was shot down by Pakistan, marking what could be the first known combat loss of the French-made aircraft.
In trading on the Shenzhen Stock Exchange, shares in AVIC Chengdu Aircraft rose by 17,05 per cent, while Dassault Aviation’s (the maker of the Rafale) stock traded at €320.20. The market opened at €326.80, but the stock showed volatility throughout the day, decreasing by €4.40 from the previous close of €324.60.
In an effort to clarify events, a Pakistan military spokesperson held a press conference with journalists from multiple nationalities. Pakistan Air Vice Marshal Aurangzeb Ahmed provided a clearer picture of the aerial battle between the Pakistan and Indian Air Forces and described the battle as “one of the most intense air battles in modern history, with the Indian Air Force deploying 72 fighter jets against 42 Pakistani aircrafts.”
“To further destabilise India’s aerial assault, Dassault Falcon aircraft, modified for electronic warfare, were deployed to disrupt and isolate the Rafale jets, making them easier to target with long-range missiles, which were considered the centre of gravity in Pakistan’s defence strategy,” he said.
In addition to the release of an audio recording of an Indian Rafale pilot confirming the targeting of a fellow aircraft in mid-air, initial information was provided regarding the locations where the jets were downed, their models, and the types of missiles used in the operation.
Indian Air Marshal A K Bharti said in a press conference at the same time that Pakistan “planes were prevented from entering inside our border... Definitely, we have downed a few planes... Definitely, there are losses on their side which we have inflicted.”
Beyond visual-range combat makes it difficult to confirm kills and aircraft shoot-downs compared to traditional close-range engagements. Additionally, modern fighter jets are equipped with electronic warfare systems capable of deceptive jamming, creating false targets for the enemy to engage instead of real aircraft.
However, two facts remain: India achieved strategic success in destroying its intended targets at the start of the battle, while Pakistan secured a tactical victory by successfully shooting down at least one Rafale fighter jet.
The conflict then took a different turn, with both sides shifting their strategies. They relied on suicide drones, surface-to-surface missiles, and artillery to avoid direct aerial engagements, while also reinforcing their military presence along the border. This fuelled growing fears of further escalation between the two nuclear-armed neighbours.
The US has long acted as a guarantor of peace between the two nations, which have experienced periodic disputes of varying intensity.
However, India, one of the US’ most important allies, is also among the largest importers of US and European weapons. Because of this strategic partnership, the US did not hesitate to offer its most advanced aircraft, the F-35, despite halting deals for other key US allies, such as those in the Arab Gulf. India is keen to maintain this relationship to counter China’s growing influence.
As for Pakistan, militarily it remains one of the leading users of US weaponry, with F-16 fighter jets serving as a cornerstone of its air force. Politically, Pakistan seeks to balance its ties with China, its primary defence supplier, while also maintaining relations with the US to preserve its geopolitical leverage.
China also emerged as one of the biggest beneficiaries of the conflict, as Chinese weapons played a significant role. Pakistan highlighted the effectiveness of these in its official statements, and it is expected to positively impact future defence contracts with China.
The confrontation between India and Pakistan will serve as a valuable source of lessons in modern warfare. From a military perspective, it highlights new strategic approaches, particularly in aerial engagements and electronic warfare.
On the political front, it also shed light on the US model of rapid intervention and direct influence, demonstrating how swift diplomatic manoeuvres can shape geopolitical outcomes. This precedent is expected to have an impact on future scenarios in the Pacific, where regional powers are recalibrating their defence policies.
* A version of this article appears in print in the 15 May, 2025 edition of Al-Ahram Weekly
Short link: