Eighteen Days: The Consequences of Tension

For eighteen days, the tension between Pakistan and India was more a battle of nerves than of weapons. Two nuclear-armed nations can never engage in direct and full pledge war, nor can they occupy each other’s territories. The conflict was entirely rooted in optics, perception and narrative. Unlike in the past, Pakistan masterfully maintained an element of surprise and strategic ambiguity. 

This episode marks the third instance since the Ukraine-Russia war and the U.S. defeat in Afghanistan that has proven nuclear deterrence alone no longer dictates outcomes. On February 1, when Trump announced tariffs on China, Beijing retaliated with 125% tariffs on the U.S. This economic clash pressured Washington to counter China’s rising influence by propping up a regional ally—India. India’s objective was to undermine China’s CPEC project, aiming to destabilize Gilgit. China, fully aware of the global dynamics, extended undeclared support to Pakistan. Today, Kashmir and Gilgit remain out of India’s reach, and internal instability plagues India itself. Meanwhile, Pakistan’s defense reliance has shifted dramatically. Once dependent on U.S. arms like the F-16 (restricted by usage clauses), Pakistan now sources 81% of its weapons from China—including J-10C jets, JF-17 Thunders, HQ-9 air defense systems, and submarines. The Pakistani Air Force’s downing of India’s French-made Rafale jets with J-10Cs showcased Chinese weaponry’s prowess, altering global power dynamics. This not only embarrassed India but also struck a blow to U.S. and Israeli interests. 

America’s Middle East and Iran policies have lost momentum. Soon, Chinese arms will flood the region, countering U.S. and Israeli dominance. While the U.S. has routinely tested its weapons, China’s first real-world trial proved decisive, cementing its advantage. Another critical shift: America’s monopoly on the arms trade is over. Chinese weapons are cheaper, equally effective, and now the world’s preferred choice. 

What seemed like routine tension redrew the global political map. Pakistan’s two-hour counter attack erased the traditional power imbalance with India, even granting Islamabad the upper hand. The Kashmir issue, long dormant, has reignited, and Pakistan now finds it easier to keep it alive internationally. The brief skirmish also reshaped global l perceptions of China’s role. India’s fatal error was underestimating China—a violation of the fundamental principle of war: know your enemy’s strength. Nations like Taiwan, observing this, will think twice before confronting China under Western provocation. Pakistan further exposed Israeli technology’s vulnerabilities by downing 84 drones, reshaping Middle Eastern power equations. The world is now undeniably bipolar.  The Pakistan-China alliance is set to deepen, with visible gains for Pakistan’s economy. The Pakistani Air Force’s performance stunned not just India and the world but even Pakistanis themselves. The transformation from 2019 to 2025 is stark. Domestically, public support—especially from the youth during this nerve war was exemplary. It also proved modern wars are fought by armies alone; civilians and tribes are no longer frontline actors. Victory has a hundred fathers; defeat is an orphan. India faces global condemnation. Modi’s fabricated nationalism lies in tatters—exposed as no different from ISIS or RSS extremism. Religious fanaticism always harms the nation. The world now recognizes India’s false-flag operation, illegal war, and subsequent media disinformation. Its defeat humiliated not just itself but also backers like Russia, France, and Israel. 

This was a war thrust upon India by America. Pakistan had no choice but to respond. Despite ceasefire appeals from the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Turkey, Pakistan reluctantly agreed. Now, Islamabad must demand two non-negotiable terms: revisiting the Indus Water Treaty and restoring Kashmir’s pre-revocation status. Pre-war, the world dismissed Pakistan as weak. This conflict proved otherwise: resources were never the issue. For the next century, India will not dare for an open war, though aerial skirmishes may persist.

Written by: Sajid Anwar Wardak,

The writer is a PhD scholar of International Relations