M A Hossain,
The recent air conflict between India and Pakistan on May 7, 2025, has brought to light not just the sharpness of military strategies, but also the deeper issue of how modern war is shaped more by information and integration than by just having advanced fighter jets. Under 'Operation Sindhur', India launched air strikes into Pakistan-administered territory. In response, Pakistan claimed to have shot down five Indian jets, including three Rafale fighters—a bold assertion that has since been supported by independent images verified by international analysts, including U.S. officials.
This surprising turn of events has stirred a heated debate across military and strategic communities. How could Pakistan—often viewed as technologically behind India—inflict such significant losses, especially when India operates some of the most advanced jets like the French-made Rafale? The answer lies not in hardware alone, but in how well that tactical weapon systems are deployed, coordinated, and Integrated in a digital battlefield.
When India launched its first wave of attacks—firing twelve short-range missiles at targets in Pakistani-administered Kashmir and Punjab—its aim was to send a strong political and military signal. Reports suggest that while seven of these missiles hit their intended locations, including religious and civilian sites, five were intercepted. What followed was Pakistan’s swift retaliation. The Pakistan Air Force (PAF) scrambled its fighters while the Pakistani Army launched precision missile strikes that destroyed an Indian brigade headquarters and reportedly killed at least 15 Indian soldiers.
But it was in the skies that the most telling chapter unfolded. Pakistan’s counter-air response, which claimed the downing of multiple Indian jets, including Rafales, has now raised serious questions about how India’s military platforms talk to each other—or, more importantly, how they don’t.
India operates a diverse fleet of aircraft and air-defense systems sourced from various countries. This includes French Rafales, Russian Su-30s, MiG-29s and S-400s, Israeli SPYDER systems. While each platform is advanced on its own, the problem lies in their inability to communicate with one another in real time due to incompatible data-link systems. The Rafales use French proprietary links, the U.S. restricts interoperability for security reasons, and the Russian S-400 cannot integrate with Western or NATO-origin systems. This forces Indian commanders and pilots to rely on manual coordination, often slowing down reaction time and increasing the chances of error—including tragic friendly fire incidents like the downing of India’s own Mi-17 helicopter in 2019.
Pakistan, by contrast, has taken a different approach. Instead of acquiring the most expensive jets, it has focused on developing a unified digital warfare environment. Its indigenously developed Data-Link-17 connects its entire aerial combat ecosystem: fighter jets like the JF-17 and J-10C, air-defense systems, electronic warfare platforms, and Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACS). This means that when one system detects a threat, the entire network knows about it in real time. For example, if someone uses a voice call over the phone, they can only describe their location. But if they use WhatsApp, they can also share their real-time location. This digital cohesion allowed Pakistan to detect, track, and engage Indian fighters far more effectively during the recent skirmish.
Another major factor that tipped the scale in Pakistan’s favor was its use of electronic warfare (EW) tactics. Three of Falcon DA-20, Pakistan’s electronic attack aircraft, was deployed to jam Indian communications, effectively cutting the data-links between Indian jets and their command centers. Rafales, Su-30s, and MiG-29s couldn’t warn each other of incoming threats. In modern air combat, such communication loss can be fatal. The Indian pilots, flying in electronically blinded skies, had no idea that deadly PL-15 long-range air-to-air missiles had been launched at them.
The PL-15 missile, used by Pakistan’s J-10C and upgraded JF-17 fighters, is no ordinary weapon. With a range of over 200 km and equipped with active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars, these missiles can be fired from long distances and guided using information from AWACS and ground stations. Crucially, in this recent engagement, Pakistani jets didn’t even switch on their onboard radars. Instead, they relied entirely on their Data Link system for tracking data, allowing them to launch the PL-15s without alerting the Rafales’ onboard Spectra- the situational awareness electronic warfare suite.
This approach, often called passive tracking, gives attackers the element of surprise. Since no radar signal was emitted by the Pakistani jets, the Rafales’ sensors had nothing to detect—until it was too late. The PL-15s only activated their radar guidance in the terminal stage of the attack—just seconds before impact—leaving Indian pilots with barely any time to respond. The Spectra system, though advanced, is not built to counter such stealthy, externally-guided missile attacks, especially when multiple signals and electronic noise are being jammed around it.
All of this exposes a harsh reality: even the most advanced jets can be neutralized if they’re flying blind, disconnected, and unsupported by real-time battlefield intelligence. What matters today is not just the quality of individual platforms, but whether these platforms are part of a broader network-centric warfare system—a realm where Pakistan seems to have invested wisely and quietly.
It is an open secret that Pakistan’s military capabilities are significantly bolstered by Chinese technology. As a result, the impressive performance of Pakistan’s defense systems has drawn the attention of global powers, positioning Islamabad as a de facto extension of Chinese military reach. Notably, India’s long-claimed air superiority in the region appears to have been challenged by the technological edge provided by Beijing. Reports have even surfaced suggesting that Pakistan successfully neutralized an S-400 missile system—an event that underscores the evolving balance of power.
This development serves as a stark reminder of how quietly but effectively China has advanced in warfare technology. These advancements are not just altering the dynamics of South Asian military rivalries but are also poised to reshape the broader landscape of modern warfare. As tensions escalate between India and Pakistan, the Chinese defense industry stands to benefit strategically and commercially, leveraging the confrontation as a platform to demonstrate and promote its military technologies on the global stage.
The broader lessons from this air battle are significant. First, having different high-end systems that can’t communicate is a critical vulnerability. Second, electronic warfare is no longer a support feature; it’s often the deciding factor. And third, long-range beyond-visual-range (BVR) missiles, especially when deployed in a data-rich, electronically coordinated environment, can neutralize even stealthy and highly capable jets.
Ultimately, the recent India-Pakistan aerial clash is not just a story of jets and missiles, but of how effectively each side could see, communicate, and act in a split second. In this battle, Pakistan’s unified command and digital agility outpaced India’s fragmented might. The next wars may well be decided not by who fires first, but by who knows first—and reacts faster.
M A Hossain, political and defense analyst based in Bangladesh. He can be reached at: writetomahossain@gmail.com
This article published at :
1. Asian Age, BD : 26 May, 25
No comments:
Post a Comment