Operation Sindoor and defence tech: India has to contend with China, not Pakistan

Pakistan calls for a political solution and not just military superiority

Miles to go in India's defence tech

Operation Sindoor, the political decision to mount it and the armed forces’ ability to execute it are commendable. India deserves better than to live under the shadow of terror.

Does Trump’s offer to mediate on Kashmere compromise India’s sovereignty, apart from raising tempers? Outside powers play a role in conflicts that have a potential to destabilise an entire region and radiate instability farther afield.

Peace was secured in the 1965 war at Tashkent, not quite a Delhi suburb. President Clinton saved face for Nawaz Sharif to end the Kargil conflict.

Is Russia’s sovereignty under threat from Trump’s role in trying to end the Ukraine war? Trump’s offer, complete with his reference to a 1,000-year conflict between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, is a reflection of his ignorance, not of compromised Indian sovereignty.

India began the operation to punish Pakistan. Only the TV channels dreamed up pictures of war and destruction. India does not want to escalate, but will rebuff any Pak attempt to attack India – that was the official position. It was Pakistan that wanted an external intervenor to save face, after its retaliation was suppressed. Trump was willing to chip in. He will probably send someone to Stockholm to lobby for a peace Nobel, for averting a nuclear showdown.

The surgical strike after Uri did not stop Pulwama. The Balakot attack in retaliation for Pulwama did not prevent Pahalgam. Will Operation Sindoor guarantee there would be no further Pak-sponsored terror attacks?

India has been able to strike inside Pakistan and disable air defence systems and air bases. Such ability is a function of military superiority. Can military superiority be taken for granted, and relied on to guarantee future deterrence?

Pakistan’s defence capability has never really been Pakistan’s. When it used to be an American ally, its arms were supplied by the US. Now it buys 80% of its arms from China. China has supplied it with its 4.5 generation fighter aircraft, advanced missiles, submarines that can stay submerged for long periods (because of air-independent propulsion) housing nuclear missiles representing second-strike capability.

American officials say, reports Reuters, that Pakistan’s China-made J-10 aircraft shot down an Indian Rafale. India has not confirmed loss of any aircraft, but merely said that all pilots have made it back to their bases. But if a Chinese warplane firing a Chinese missile brought down a Rafale, that would be a vital technology demonstration for Beijing.

Pakistan is more than happy to serve as Beijing’s force multiplier, tying down a portion of India’s armed forces, and harassing India on and off, as required. If Pakistan is also willing to offer up combat testing of Chinese military hardware, Beijing might well be willing to pour newer and more advanced weapons into Pakistan’s outstretched palm. India would have to acquire superiority of military hardware over China to maintain military superiority over Pakistan.

India needs more than military capability to remove Pakistan as a threat. India needs to undermine the two-nation theory that makes Pakistan see itself as the secure homeland of South Asian Muslims and India as a threat to that security, giving the Pak army its legitimacy in the eyes of Pakistanis, even as the state collapses all around them.

That calls for India to move away from sectarian politics internally, and to provide governance that secures prosperity and dignity for everyone, regardless of faith. A couple of decades of such progress would undermine the two-nation thesis, and remove the rationale for Pakistan and its armed forces’ legitimacy.

But that will take time, apart from a paradigm shift in Indian politics. India needs to build better defence capability to match and surpass anything that China has. It is cheaper and more reliable to build such capability in India.

It calls for startups to work in tandem with the established defence industry. Problem areas must be worked out, possible solutions outlined, their hardware and software components spelt out, multiple startups identified to tackle the different parts of each.

One emerging challenge presents itself. Right now, an aircraft or a missile identifies the location of a target using active radar—sending out signals that bounce back from the target to enable locating its position. But active radar permits the target to discover it is being targeted. Suppose the target’s location and signature are determined by satellites in low-earth orbit (LEO), and passed on to the attack unit. The target would be caught unawares by an attack unit that uses only passive radar, which makes use of radio waves that exist independent of that attack unit.

Ukrainian drones already do something like this, using Starlink. Target-locating satellites need to be in LEO, a mere few hundred kms high, unlike geostationary satellites that are nearly 36,000 km away and make for lags in communication, called latency. China could integrate satellite-based targeting into its ordnance, using LEO satellites and AI.

India needs to develop this capability. It calls for tech entrepreneurship, seed money and lots of venture capital. The govt could provide the seed capital, besides using the Rs one lakh crore R&D corpus announced in 2024 to set up fully equipped contract R&D centres. Pension funds – EPF and NPS -- could allocate say, 5% to venture capital for strategic tech, with the savers’ permission. India Inc should chip in.

Braggadocio will not keep terror away. That calls for systematic build-up of domestic capacity.