Asia
India and Pakistan boost military capacity amid rising tensions
Former military officials and experts state that nuclear-armed neighbors India and Pakistan have significantly increased their military capabilities following the 2019 clashes, a situation that raises the risk of escalation even in a limited conflict. Tensions are rising between the Indian and Pakistani armies.
Pakistan claims India is planning military intervention after New Delhi blamed Islamabad for a deadly attack on local tourists in the Kashmir region last month. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said he would punish those who supported the attack in a way they “cannot imagine.”
Pakistan denies involvement in the attack but warns it will retaliate if targeted.
In 2019, India conducted airstrikes inside Pakistan after a bombing of an Indian military convoy in Kashmir, stating it had destroyed “terrorist camps.” Pakistani jets conducted retaliatory airstrikes in operations lasting two days and shot down an Indian aircraft. Now, retaliations are occurring intermittently between the Indian and Pakistani armies.
The neighboring countries have fought three wars in 1948, 1965, and 1971, and have clashed countless times since gaining independence, mostly over the Kashmir region, which both claim. Both countries acquired nuclear weapons in the 1990s, and Kashmir is considered one of the world’s most dangerous conflict zones. The Indian and Pakistani armies have since increased their capabilities against potential conflicts.
Military experts state that neither side would consider using nuclear weapons unless cornered, but the risk of escalation is high even in a limited conflict.
Experts speaking to Reuters stated that in such a conflict, it is likely that aircraft, missiles, or drones, which are considered to be of equal strength between India and Pakistan, would be used.
Frank O’Donnell, a visiting fellow in the South Asia Program at the Stimson Center think tank in Washington, said, “Decision-makers in both countries are more willing to take risks in initiating and escalating conflict than they were before 2019.”
“However, without a clear mutual understanding of precise actions, this could inadvertently lead to escalation,” he added.
Both sides have acquired new conventional strike options by purchasing new military equipment since 2019.
Muhammad Faisal, a South Asia security researcher at the University of Technology Sydney, said, “Both sides will think they are in a better position than last time. But we will only know this when we see a real conflict.”
India, in particular, felt it was at a disadvantage in 2019 because it had to rely on aging Russian jets. Since then, it has purchased 36 French-made Rafale fighter jets, considered one of the best Western aircraft, and has ordered more for its navy.
In contrast, Pakistan began purchasing batches of China’s J-10, one of its most advanced fighter jets and considered equivalent to the Rafale, starting in 2022. According to the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, Pakistan has at least 20 of these aircraft.
The aircraft have advanced capabilities similar to the Rafale, which is equipped with Meteor air-to-air missiles that operate beyond visual range. A Pakistani security official, who requested anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media, said the J-10 is also equipped with similar PL-15 missiles.
To fill gaps in air defense that emerged during the 2019 conflict, India purchased Russia’s battle-tested S-400 mobile anti-aircraft missile system. Pakistan, on the other hand, acquired the HQ-9 from China, which is a lower-tier system based on Russia’s S-300 system.
Anil Golani, a former air marshal in the Indian Air Force and director general of the Center for Air Power Studies think tank in Delhi, said, “In some ways, we are definitely in a better position (than in 2019).”
Speaking to Reuters, Golani added, “The call for action in the country is very high, but in my personal assessment, neither India nor Pakistan wants an all-out conflict.”
On the other hand, the US and China factors are also being discussed. China is India’s rival and Pakistan’s close ally and largest military equipment supplier. The US, meanwhile, has strong relations with India.
Muhammad Faisal from the University of Technology Sydney said, “This could be a competition between Western and Chinese technology,” adding, “For India, there is a dilemma regarding how many air squadrons to allocate to the Pakistan front, as it also needs to defend against China.”
China and India fought a brief border war in 1962, and the two armies clashed most recently in 2022 on the tense Himalayan border.
Pakistan has a fleet of F-16 aircraft purchased during periods when its relations with Washington were stronger. These F-16s were used in the 2019 conflict, leading India to issue a protest note to the US, although New Delhi currently has much closer relations with Washington.
Experts said that this time, to avoid a political tension with F-16s and to leverage the advantage of having more advanced aircraft, Pakistan would likely lead with its Chinese-made J-10s.
However, a drone or ground-launched missile attack is considered more likely because there is no risk of the pilot being shot down.
India has turned to Israel for combat-capable drones and purchased the Heron Mark 2. It has also ordered Predator drones from the US. According to the Pakistani security official, Pakistan has purchased Turkey’s Bayraktar TB2, which Ukraine used in its war with Russia, and also the Akıncı UAV from Turkey.
Amidst the ongoing tension, Pakistan conducted a test of a surface-to-surface ballistic missile with a range of 450 km (280 miles) on Saturday. A statement from the country’s army said the test was conducted to demonstrate the armed forces’ readiness to “protect national security against any aggression.” Pakistan also has short and medium-range missiles that can be fired from land, sea, and air.
India has not yet commented on the test. India’s capabilities include the BrahMos supersonic cruise missile with a range of approximately 300 km and the Agni series of intercontinental ballistic missiles.
The 2019 conflict nearly spiraled out of control with numerous missile strike threats.
Kaiser Tufail, a former fighter pilot in the Pakistan Air Force, said India failed to achieve deterrence in 2019, so this time it would aim for a sharper attack, which would bring more risk.
Modi implied after the 2019 clashes that they felt the lack of the Rafale fighter jets ordered at the time and that the outcome of the conflict might have been different if they had the French fighter jets.
“If you go beyond what we saw in 2019, that becomes very risky,” Tufail said, adding, “It is extremely dangerous for nuclear-armed countries to clash with each other.”
Asia
Analysts warn new surge in Chinese exports threatens global markets
Financial Times writer Ryan Avent has written that a fresh, rapid surge in China’s trade surplus could signal a new wave of the “China shock”.
Economists define the “China shock” as a spike in Chinese exports to global markets that intensifies competition for manufacturers in advanced economies and curtails employment in certain sectors.
The term gained widespread currency after China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001, accelerating the inflow of inexpensive Chinese goods into the US and other nations.
The US was the country hit hardest by the initial shockwave. Between 1999 and 2011, more than 2 million jobs were lost because domestic producers were unable to withstand the competition.
Avent argued that the effects of the initial wave are still felt across the American economy because China failed to carry out the rebalancing that the world expected.
The share of net exports in China’s gross domestic product contracted during the 2007-2019 period, allowing Western nations to focus on national security and other matters.
Avent reported that the trade surplus is now escalating rapidly once again, posing a threat to the economies of wealthy nations.
The writer pointed to the stagnation of domestic demand following the collapse of the real estate market six years ago as one cause of this surplus. Another prominent factor is the Beijing government’s channelling of massive resources into manufacturing in pursuit of self-sufficiency.
Attention was also drawn to the role of the depreciating yuan. An appreciation of the currency could require China to alter its foreign exchange interventions, reduce purchases of foreign currency and assets, and sell those assets off. That scenario could trigger currency depreciation and rising interest rates in other countries.
The Wall Street Journal also reported in the spring of 2024 on economists’ concerns regarding a potential second wave.
Experts predicted that global markets would once again be flooded with inexpensive goods, stating that China was manufacturing far beyond domestic demand to overcome its economic troubles.
Moreover, it was stressed that China is now competing in high-technology fields such as automobiles, computer chips, and complex machinery manufacturing.
Meanwhile, Vasiliy Kashin, Director of the Centre for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics (HSE) University in Moscow, told the Russian media outlet RBC that the US has imposed sanctions on the Chinese economy since the first shock period, adding that these measures would very likely tighten in the event of a fresh export wave.
According to assessments reported by the Financial Times, this new process could also shake China’s own economy. Alongside rising output, entry-level manufacturing plants across the country are turning toward automation and reducing personnel.
This trend could trigger a painful departure from labour-intensive production, leaving millions unemployed. Manufacturing activities in China that previously capitalised on cheap labour are shifting to other Southeast Asian countries.
The Beijing administration rejected allegations that its industrialisation steps pose risks to other countries. As reported by the Xinhua news agency, China’s Ministry of Commerce stressed that claims of a “China shock 2.0” are groundless. The ministry stated:
“The US and other Western countries have circulated the so-called ‘China shock 2.0’ narrative, asserting that China’s industrial development has shaken Western monopolies and narrowed growth space for Global South countries. This claim is unsupported by concrete data and is entirely unfounded.”
Asia
Iran and China run secret barter network to bypass oil sanctions
Iran is operating a covert, barter-like trade mechanism to bypass sanctions on its oil sales and procure billions of dollars in goods from China, including military hardware.
Speaking to the Reuters news agency, two senior Iranian officials and three sources closely monitoring the matter said the Tehran administration receives credits for goods imported from China instead of cash in exchange for the oil it sells to the country.
The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, emphasised that this method of swapping oil revenues for Chinese goods provides an immediate financial lifeline to the Tehran government at a time when the US has intensified economic and military pressure over its nuclear programme.
China, the world’s largest crude importer, continues to access discounted Iranian oil through this arrangement while shielding its banks and exporting companies from the risk of international penalties.
Although the Washington administration has imposed sanctions on several small-scale Chinese entities facilitating the transport of Iranian oil, it avoids sweeping measures that could shake the global economy.
The US has stepped up its pressure as it seeks to reopen the Strait of Hormuz amid the ongoing war between the two countries.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last month that countries failing to cut commercial ties with Tehran would risk exclusion from the dollar system.
It remains unclear how the barter mechanism has been affected by the US naval blockade imposed on Iran as part of the six-month-old war.
However, since the reimposition of the blockade on 14 July, no shipments of Iranian oil passing through the Strait of Hormuz to China have been recorded.
Beijing and Tehran, which describe Western unilateral sanctions as illegal, refrain from disclosing publicly how they sustain their trade.
Sources state that Tehran introduced this system to obtain pharmaceuticals, vehicles, and communications equipment. Chinese manufacturers are said to have no direct contact with Iran, and there is no indication that they are violating sanctions.
On the other hand, the mechanism was utilised at least once last year under contracts supplying Iran with millions of dollars’ worth of air defence equipment. The sources provided no details regarding the shipments in question, and the transactions were not independently verified.
The United Nations conventional arms embargo returned alongside other sanctions in September 2025 following the collapse of the 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers.
Tehran had withdrawn from the terms of the agreement, while Beijing and Tehran described the European nations’ automatic reimposition of sanctions as legally flawed.
Responding to questions from Reuters, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that it had no knowledge of the trade structure in question.
Beijing stated that it opposes unilateral sanctions lacking United Nations Security Council authorisation and having no basis in international law.
Iran’s diplomatic missions in New York and Geneva remained silent on the inquiries. A US official speaking on behalf of the White House stated only that they are working with international partners, including the EU, to prevent Tehran from achieving its nuclear goals.
According to data analytics company Kpler, China purchased more than 80% of the crude oil exported by Iran in 2025. This share equates to an average of 1.4 million barrels per day.
Although the two countries signed a 25-year strategic partnership agreement in 2021 covering energy and infrastructure, the operational details of their cooperation remain largely confidential.
The model in question constitutes only one of the networks through which Iran procures goods and services from China without passing through international banking channels.
A Western official and two other individuals tracking the matter said that a buyer acting on behalf of state-owned Chinese oil company Zhuhai Zhenrong deposited hundreds of millions of dollars each month until this year into ChuXin, a shadow financial entity based in China.
These deposits reportedly represent payment for oil purchased from a Hong Kong-based company linked to the National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC).
Approximately 70% of the oil revenues routed through ChuXin is allocated to infrastructure projects in Iran. The remainder is transferred to the accounts of a special purpose vehicle (SPV) established to disburse payments to companies supplying goods to Iran.
Sources close to Iran’s decision-making apparatus confirm the existence of this financial mechanism.
Fund management is shared between a firm acting on behalf of the Chinese Ministry of Commerce and another entity linked to the Central Bank of Iran. When the Central Bank of Iran authorises importers, money transfers are directed to supplier firms. While the name ChuXin does not appear in official records, one source noted that the structure exists solely on balance sheets.
Andrea Ghiselli, an international politics specialist at the University of Exeter, stated that Beijing uses these indirect networks to demonstrate that it will not bow to US secondary sanction threats.
Highlighting that Chinese leaders aim to protect their own banks and firms from being pushed out of the global financial system, Ghiselli said: “They want to create deniability.”
Asia
China leads $54bn capital injection into state banks and insurers
China’s Ministry of Finance will lead a total capital injection of $54 billion into state-owned insurance companies and banks as part of a coordinated push to reinforce the capital structure across the country’s financial system, according to details disclosed by the institutions in statements on Sunday.
China Life Insurance (Group) Co, the country’s largest life insurer, will receive 35 billion yuan ($5.2 billion) in capital support, whilst China Taiping Insurance Group will receive 7 billion yuan.
In a separate announcement, People’s Insurance Company (Group) of China (PICC) said it plans to raise up to 15 billion yuan via a private placement of A-shares to the Ministry of Finance. The company stated that the proceeds will be used to replenish its capital.
The initiative could fortify the financial position of state insurers, which have been called upon to support the equity market with medium- and long-term funds. At the same time, it could position these institutions to help regulatory authorities manage smaller and higher-risk insurance companies.
Financial sector stability
China’s insurance industry has been contending with shrinking profitability caused by prolonged low interest rates. Solvency ratios across numerous small and medium-sized insurers have also deteriorated.
China Export and Credit Insurance Corp stated that the Ministry of Finance will inject 10 billion yuan to boost the company’s core capital. China Reinsurance (Group) announced that it will execute a capital increase of 3 billion yuan.
“The capital injection represents an important step for enhancing the financial sector’s capacity to serve the real economy and promoting high-quality development across the financial and insurance industries,” China Life said in a statement. The insurer added that the capital support will improve the group’s resilience to risks.
Taiping also noted that the funds provided will strengthen the company’s solvency and other core metrics.
Banks benefit from recapitalisation plan
Separately, three state banks announced on Sunday that they will receive capital support totalling 290 billion yuan.
The recapitalisation framework was first announced during the annual parliamentary meetings in March this year. The move broadens a funding mechanism deployed last year to strengthen the capital structures of several other major state-owned lenders.
Agricultural Bank of China and Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC), two of the country’s largest state-owned lenders, announced plans to raise up to 160 billion yuan and 100 billion yuan, respectively, through private placements of A-shares to the Ministry of Finance, China National Tobacco Corp, and affiliated entities.
Both lenders confirmed that all net proceeds will be deployed to replenish their Core Tier 1 capital. The measure is expected to help sustain credit expansion at a juncture when Beijing is increasingly relying on state lenders to support economic growth.
Weak credit demand remains a persistent headwind for the world’s second-largest economy, while continuing to erode profitability across the banking sector.
Export-Import Bank of China, one of the country’s three policy banks, stated that the Ministry of Finance will inject 30 billion yuan of capital into the institution, thereby bolstering its capital base.
-
Europe5 days agoGermany’s CDU drafts tougher citizenship rules to counter AfD
-
Russia2 weeks agoWhat to know about Russia’s upcoming State Duma elections?
-
Europe2 weeks agoMarine Le Pen leads all 2027 French presidential scenarios, poll shows
-
Middle East2 weeks agoIran expands deterrence as Gulf strikes expose US munitions limits, analysts say
-
Diplomacy1 week agoGeoffrey Roberts sees Ukraine war concluding within coming months
-
Europe1 week agoGerman industrial bosses push for return to 40-hour working week
-
Russia2 weeks agoRussia warns NATO over Arctic militarisation and conflict risks
-
Asia2 weeks agoBOJ faces critical rate decision as US presses for faster hikes
