Chinese Arms Under Scrutiny Following Recent Conflict

SHANGHAI: Following a recent ceasefire with India, Pakistan’s foreign minister has travelled to Beijing, the country’s primary supplier of military equipment.

The visit occurs amidst intense scrutiny from international analysts and governments regarding the effectiveness of Chinese-supplied weaponry after the recent aerial confrontations between Pakistan and India.

A key claim from the conflict earlier this month was Islamabad’s declaration that its Chinese-supplied aircraft had successfully downed six Indian planes, including three French-made Rafale fighters.

This assertion has prompted some observers to view these alleged victories as a strong indicator of Beijing’s military capabilities on a global scale.

However, experts speaking with AFP suggest caution in drawing firm conclusions about the performance of Chinese equipment based solely on these limited encounters.

Evaluating Chinese Military Hardware

Lyle Morris of the Asia Society Policy Institute noted that this situation presented a unique opportunity for the global community to assess Chinese military hardware against Western (Indian) equipment on the battlefield.

While China invests substantial funds in its defence sector annually, it remains behind the United States in terms of arms exports.

Siemon Wezeman, a senior researcher at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), stated that China’s drones are used in counter-terrorism efforts and its weapons have been used by Saudi Arabia in Yemen, as well as against rebel groups in African nations.

Referencing the Iran-Iraq war, Wezeman added that this is the first instance since the 1980s of a nation employing a significant quantity of various types of Chinese weapons in action against another state.

Pakistan’s Reliance on Chinese Arms

SIPRI data indicates that Pakistan accounts for roughly 63% of China’s arms exports. During the recent conflict, Pakistan utilized J10-C Vigorous Dragon and JF-17 Thunder aircraft, equipped with air-to-air missiles. Yun Sun of the Stimson Center mentioned it was the first deployment of the J10-C in active combat.

Islamabad’s air defense systems also incorporated Chinese technology, including the HQ-9P long-range surface-to-air missile system, Chinese radar, and armed and reconnaissance drones.

Bilal Khan, founder of Quwa Defence News and Analysis Group, based in Toronto, noted that this marked the first sustained engagement where the majority of Pakistan’s forces utilized Chinese weapons as their primary option.

While India has not formally confirmed any aircraft losses, a senior security source informed AFP that three jets crashed on Indian territory, without specifying the models or causes. Dassault, the manufacturer of the Rafale, has not issued a statement.

Expert Opinions on Aircraft Capabilities

The Rafale is recognized as one of Europe’s most advanced jets, while the J10-C is not even China’s most sophisticated, according to James Char of Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University.

However, Char suggested that if Pakistan’s claims are valid, it should not be surprising, given that the Rafale is a multirole fighter, whereas the J-10C was specifically designed for aerial combat and possesses a more powerful radar.

Following reports of the aerial combat, shares of Chengdu Aircraft Company, the maker of the J10-C, increased by over 40%.

Sun from the Stimson Center anticipates an increase in orders for Chinese contractors. However, Jennifer Kavanagh from the US think tank Defense Priorities noted that it will require considerable time and adjustments from Chinese arms manufacturers for the nation to become a major arms exporter.

She pointed out China’s difficulty in mass-producing certain essential components, such as aircraft engines.

Wezeman believes the stock markets reacted excessively, emphasizing the need to evaluate the actual performance of the weapons used and their significance. Analysts suggest that even with more data, the conflict offers limited insights into the Chinese military’s capabilities.

China’s domestic systems and weaponry are significantly more advanced than its exports. Kavanagh emphasized that while advanced hardware is important, the manner in which these weapons are employed is far more crucial.

Brian Hart of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) advised against over-interpreting recent events. He stated that direct comparisons regarding the performance of these Chinese-made systems in different environments against more advanced adversaries like the United States are not possible.

Kavanagh concluded that due to the limited data and lack of information regarding the proficiency and training of personnel on both sides, drawing definitive conclusions is difficult.