Just over a week after a brief but intense military confrontation between Pakistan and India, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister has landed in Beijing. The timing is no coincidence. The visit is freighted with implications about military alliances, strategic dependencies, and the global arms market. At the center of attention: the performance of Chinese-made weapons in live combat against Western hardware.
Pakistan claims its forces shot down six Indian aircraft during the four-day conflict, including three French-made Rafale jets. If accurate, it would mark a significant and symbolic victory for Beijing’s military-industrial complex. However, analysts are quick to caution that much remains unverified, and the fog of war has obscured what really happened.
Still, this conflict has provided a rare opportunity to witness a direct clash between Chinese and Western military technology. “This was a rare opportunity for the international community to gauge Chinese military hardware on the battlefield against Western (Indian) hardware,” said Lyle Morris of the Asia Society Policy Institute.
The main aircraft deployed by Pakistan in the conflict were the J-10C Vigorous Dragon and the JF-17 Thunder, both of which are products of China’s growing defense sector. The J-10C, in particular, was used in combat for the first time. These jets were equipped with air-to-air missiles designed and manufactured by China. Supporting them were an array of Chinese-made military systems: HQ-9P long-range surface-to-air missile systems, early warning radars, and a suite of armed and reconnaissance drones.
This was not an isolated deployment of a few Chinese systems—this was a comprehensive test. “This was the first sustained fight where the bulk of Pakistan’s forces used Chinese weapons and, basically, relied on them as their primary option,” said Bilal Khan, founder of Quwa Defence News & Analysis Group.
The fact that Pakistan is China’s biggest customer in the arms trade—accounting for roughly 63% of China’s arms exports, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI)—underscores the high stakes for both countries.
India has not confirmed the loss of any aircraft. A senior Indian security official told that three jets crashed on Indian soil, but refused to specify their models or causes. Meanwhile, French defense firm Dassault Aviation, which manufactures the Rafale, has remained silent.
Given the absence of independently verified information, skepticism is warranted. Even so, the episode is prompting major reassessments across Asia, especially in countries evaluating whether to buy Western or Chinese weaponry.
One immediate ripple effect has been felt in Indonesia, where a major $8.1 billion deal for 42 Rafale jets is suddenly under renewed scrutiny. After reports emerged of Pakistani claims to have downed Rafale fighters, voices in Jakarta began to question whether the investment was justified.
Dave Laksono, a member of Indonesia’s parliamentary Commission I overseeing defense, urged caution, stating, “Unverified claims in conflict zones cannot be used as the sole basis for assessing the effectiveness or failure of a particular weapons system.”
Laksono added that even top-tier American aircraft have been downed under certain tactical conditions. “Therefore, the performance of the Rafale cannot be measured by just one incident that has not even been fully confirmed,” he said.
While some Chinese systems appeared to perform effectively, others did not live up to expectations. Pakistan’s Chinese-made air defense systems reportedly failed to prevent India from neutralizing a missile battery near Lahore.
That failure, if accurate, is not insignificant. SIPRI’s Siemon Wezeman suggested that India’s ability to destroy a Chinese air defense system would be “a bigger success and more than balance the loss of some aircraft in the process.”
Experts caution against drawing sweeping conclusions. The Stimson Center’s Yun Sun noted that even with more data, the conflict does not offer a comprehensive view of Chinese military capabilities. “We must remember that China exports downgraded versions of its best hardware. What Pakistan used is not what the People’s Liberation Army uses internally,” she said.
In the aftermath of the reported dogfights, stock in Chengdu Aircraft Company—maker of the J-10C—soared over 40%. Investors seemed to bet on a windfall of new orders based on combat success.
That optimism may be premature. Jennifer Kavanagh from the U.S.-based Defense Priorities think tank pointed out that Chinese arms exports still face structural challenges. “China cannot mass-produce certain key inputs, including advanced aircraft engines,” she said. “Becoming a dominant arms exporter will take more time and capacity-building.”
SIPRI’s Wezeman agreed, saying, “We still have to see how well all the weapons worked and if it really means much. The market has overreacted.”
James Char of Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University added an important caveat: tactical performance often depends more on planning and deployment than raw technology. While the Rafale is among Europe’s most advanced jets, he noted, the J-10C was designed specifically for air combat and might have had tactical advantages in the scenario.
Even so, the broader lessons are not yet clear. Brian Hart from the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) warned against reading too much into a single event. “You cannot make direct comparisons to how these Chinese-made systems would fare against a peer adversary like the United States,” he said.
Moreover, the conflict’s scope was limited. There were no naval engagements or extended ground battles, and the air engagements took place in controlled environments with limited variables.
The claims made by Pakistan are also functioning as propaganda tools. As much as this was a battle in the skies, it was also a fight for perception. Chinese state media has already begun spinning the narrative, with outlets like the South China Morning Post suggesting that Rafale jets may be overrated.
This raises the stakes for countries like Indonesia, Egypt, and the UAE, all of whom have major weapons deals either pending or recently signed with Western defense contractors. If Chinese equipment is seen as cheaper and combat-proven, it could shift global arms dynamics.
Still, many defense buyers are wary of aligning too closely with Beijing, given geopolitical tensions and concerns about technology quality control and after-sales support.
What the Pakistan-India skirmish has offered is not so much a verdict on Chinese weapons, but a glimpse into how future conflicts may test rival military-industrial powers indirectly.
As China rises as a defense exporter, its ability to compete with the United States, Russia, and European manufacturers will increasingly depend not just on cost or availability, but on field performance, reliability, and strategic compatibility.
