Weapons Behind the Borders: Arms Dealings in India

Introduction – Why Weapons Matter in the India–Pakistan Conflict

Since the partition of British India in 1947, India and Pakistan have been locked in one of the world’s most enduring rivalries. The two nations have fought multiple wars—in 1947–48, 1965, 1971, and 1999’s Kargil conflict—along with frequent skirmishes across the Line of Control. While political disputes over territory, ideology, and national identity fuel the conflict, another less visible yet equally decisive factor has been the role of weapons and the global suppliers who provide them.

Weapons have shaped not only the outcomes of these wars but also the military strategies and diplomatic alignments of both countries. India and Pakistan, unlike self-reliant powers, have traditionally relied heavily on foreign arms imports. This dependency has allowed outside powers—whether the United States, the Soviet Union, Russia, France, China, or Israel—to exercise enormous influence in South Asia. For suppliers, India and Pakistan are more than just clients: they are testbeds where new technologies are deployed, observed, and evaluated in real combat situations. A fighter jet’s success in dogfights over Kashmir, or a missile’s performance in wartime conditions, can elevate its global reputation and boost exports worldwide.

The story of India–Pakistan wars is therefore not just a tale of battlefield heroism or political decisions—it is also a story of tanks, rifles, submarines, missiles, and now drones, cyber tools, and precision-guided munitions. From Pakistan’s American-made Patton tanks in 1965 to India’s French Rafales and Israeli drones in recent years, foreign weapons have repeatedly tipped the balance of power. Meanwhile, illicit flows—smuggled rifles, insurgent supplies, and drone-dropped arms—have added another hidden layer to the conflict.

Understanding the arms dealings behind the wars helps us see that the battles of South Asia are shaped as much in global arms markets as they are on the frontlines.

Historical Background of India–Pakistan Wars

The history of India–Pakistan conflicts cannot be told without understanding the weapons that defined them. From the very first war after partition to the Kargil conflict of 1999, each confrontation has reflected not only the political tensions of the time but also the global arms supply lines that empowered both sides.

The 1947–48 War: The Beginning of Dependency

The first Indo-Pakistani war erupted soon after independence, primarily over the princely state of Jammu and Kashmir. Both armies were newly created, inheriting much of their equipment from the British Indian Army. India used Lee-Enfield rifles, Vickers machine guns, and Spitfire aircraft left behind by the British, while Pakistan relied on similar British-origin weapons and quickly sought additional support from the United Kingdom and the United States. The war was fought with limited but effective arms, setting the precedent that neither country could fully equip itself without external assistance.

The 1965 War: U.S. vs Soviet Firepower

By the mid-1960s, the Cold War had begun shaping South Asia’s armouries. Pakistan, aligned with the United States through SEATO and CENTO, received American-supplied Patton tanks, F-86 Sabre jets, and F-104 Starfighters. India, meanwhile, leaned on Soviet equipment, fielding MiG fighters and the nimble Folland Gnat. This British-designed but locally assembled jet earned the nickname “Sabre Slayer” for its effectiveness against Pakistan’s American aircraft. The 1965 war highlighted how great-power rivalry had spilt into South Asia, turning the subcontinent into a stage for demonstrating Western and Soviet weapons.

The 1971 War: Soviet-Backed India, Pakistan Turns to China

The 1971 war, which led to the creation of Bangladesh, was the largest and most decisive conflict between the two countries. India had by then deepened its defence ties with the Soviet Union, signing a Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Cooperation just before the war. This brought MiG-21 jets, T-55 and T-72 tanks, and advanced missile systems into India’s arsenal. On the other side, Pakistan’s dependence on the U.S. was beginning to wane due to American restrictions on arms sales, leading Islamabad to increasingly turn to China. Chinese tanks, artillery, and rifles bolstered Pakistan’s forces, though they could not offset India’s overwhelming superiority, especially in air power and naval strength. The war demonstrated the decisive role of foreign-supplied weapons in shaping outcomes on the battlefield.

The 1999 Kargil War: Mirage vs Chinese Artillery

Three decades later, the Kargil conflict once again underlined the significance of foreign weaponry. Indian Air Force Mirage 2000 fighters, purchased from France, became crucial in high-altitude precision strikes on Pakistani positions. The French-supplied jets, equipped with laser-guided bombs, gave India a technological edge. On Pakistan’s side, Chinese-supplied artillery and mortars provided firepower for entrenched troops across the Line of Control. The war showcased how advanced Western technology on India’s side could counter China-backed systems in Pakistan’s arsenal. Importantly, it also highlighted the growing role of precision-guided munitions and air dominance in modern warfare, shifting away from the massed infantry assaults of earlier decades.

From Cold War to Modern Strategic Alignments

Across these wars, one theme stands out: India and Pakistan’s security strategies have always been shaped by external suppliers. During the Cold War, Pakistan was seen as a U.S. ally while India tilted toward the Soviet Union. After the Cold War, India began diversifying its sources—buying not only from Russia but also from France, Israel, and the United States. Pakistan, meanwhile, deepened its reliance on China, which emerged as its most consistent partner in defence technology.

These shifts show that South Asia’s conflicts have never been fought in isolation. Every war was also a reflection of global power struggles—whether U.S.–Soviet rivalry or China’s rise as a defence exporter. From the rifles of 1947 to the Mirage strikes in 1999, each India–Pakistan war has been as much a story of geopolitics and arms dealing as it has been about territorial disputes and national pride.

India’s Official Arms Dealings

India’s defence posture has always been shaped by its dependence on external arms suppliers. Since independence, the country has fought four major wars with Pakistan and countless skirmishes, each of which has highlighted the importance of military hardware sourced from abroad. While India has invested in domestic defence industries, foreign suppliers—whether Russia, France, Israel, the United States, or the United Kingdom—have continued to play a decisive role in shaping India’s combat readiness.

Russia/USSR: The Backbone of India’s Arsenal

No country has influenced India’s military capabilities more than the Soviet Union, and later Russia. Beginning in the 1960s, the USSR became India’s largest defence supplier, offering not only equipment but also favourable credit terms and co-production agreements.

Aircraft: The MiG family defined the Indian Air Force (IAF) for decades. The MiG-21, inducted in the 1960s, became India’s workhorse fighter, credited with numerous victories in the 1971 war and still in service today in upgraded versions. Later, the Su-30MKI, developed jointly with Russia, became the backbone of India’s modern air fleet. With its long range, manoeuvrability, and ability to carry BrahMos supersonic cruise missiles, the Su-30MKI gave India unmatched strike capability in South Asia.
Tanks: Russia also supplied India with large numbers of armoured vehicles. The T-72 became the standard battle tank for decades, followed by the more advanced T-90 “Bhishma,” which remains India’s primary main battle tank.
Air Defence: India purchased advanced S-400 Triumf air defence systems from Russia, significantly improving its ability to counter aircraft and ballistic missiles.
Naval Power: Russian-designed submarines, destroyers, and aircraft carriers, including the refurbished INS Vikramaditya, reinforced India’s naval strength.

Russia’s dominance in Indian arms procurement was not just about equipment—it cemented a long-term strategic relationship. Training, maintenance, and joint development created a sense of reliability. However, over-reliance also exposed India to risks, such as supply chain vulnerabilities and technological limitations.

France: Precision and Prestige

If Russia provided India with quantity, France offered quality and prestige. France’s willingness to supply advanced systems without heavy political strings attached made it an attractive partner.

Mirage 2000: During the 1999 Kargil War, Mirage 2000 fighter jets proved decisive. Equipped with laser-guided bombs, they carried out precision strikes on Pakistani positions at high altitudes, something older Soviet aircraft struggled with. This success cemented the reputation of French aircraft in India.
Rafale Deal: In the 2010s, India finalised a major deal for 36 Dassault Rafale jets. The Rafale, with advanced avionics, long-range Meteor air-to-air missiles, and precision strike capabilities, provided India with a technological edge over Pakistan’s F-16s and J-10Cs. Its induction was widely publicised as a game-changer.
Naval Assets: France also supplied Scorpène-class submarines, built in India under technology transfer agreements. These modern submarines enhanced India’s undersea warfare capabilities, a critical factor in the Indian Ocean.

French arms have consistently played a “force multiplier” role—used in key moments when India needed precision and advanced technology.

Israel: Innovation and Adaptability

In recent decades, Israel has become one of India’s most important defence partners, particularly in areas where speed, innovation, and battlefield adaptability are crucial.

SPICE Bombs: India’s 2019 Balakot airstrikes used Israeli SPICE-2000 precision-guided bombs, showcasing their accuracy and effectiveness.
UAVs: Israel supplied Heron and Searcher drones for reconnaissance and surveillance. These UAVs have been vital for monitoring Pakistan’s movements across the Line of Control.
Air Defence: The jointly developed Barak-8 surface-to-air missile system, used by both the Indian Navy and Air Force, gave India a modern, flexible defence against incoming threats.
Joint Development: Israel’s willingness to co-develop systems with India, including radar, drones, and missile systems, has strengthened India’s defence industry.

Unlike Russia or France, Israel has been more agile in responding to India’s urgent operational requirements, providing systems on short notice and adapting technology for India’s specific needs.

United States & United Kingdom: Expanding the Horizon

Though India and the U.S. had a difficult defence relationship during the Cold War, the 2000s saw a new phase of cooperation.

Aircraft & Transport: The U.S. supplied C-130J Super Hercules and C-17 Globemaster aircraft, which transformed India’s strategic airlift capability. These platforms allow rapid troop and equipment deployment across borders.
Surveillance & Drones: The U.S. also supplied P-8I Poseidon maritime reconnaissance aircraft, used to monitor submarine activity in the Indian Ocean. Predator drones are being negotiated for future acquisitions.
Naval Equipment: U.S. and UK firms have collaborated on aircraft carrier technologies and logistics support. The UK has also been a steady partner in providing helicopters and naval systems.

While U.S. supplies are fewer in number compared to Russia, they add critical niche capabilities, particularly in logistics and intelligence gathering.

Case Study: Operation Sindoor

One example that illustrates India’s diverse procurement strategy is Operation Sindoor, conducted against cross-border infiltrations. India deployed:

Israeli SkyStriker loitering munitions for precision strikes,
Russian Pechora and OSA-AK air defence systems to protect ground troops.

The operation showed how India mixes equipment from different suppliers, using Israeli precision weapons, Russian missile systems, and its own indigenous systems together. This hybrid approach has become India’s hallmark.

Impact on India’s Combat Readiness

India’s reliance on multiple arms suppliers has had both advantages and drawbacks. On the positive side, it provides flexibility and access to the latest technologies from different sources. India can integrate Russian firepower with Western precision, Israeli innovation, and American logistics. This multi-sourcing strategy has given the Indian armed forces an edge over Pakistan in most major confrontations.

However, there are challenges. Maintaining a diverse arsenal means higher costs, logistical complications, and training difficulties. Spare parts, interoperability, and standardisation remain issues. Over-reliance on imports has also raised concerns about strategic autonomy, prompting initiatives like “Atmanirbhar Bharat” (self-reliance in defence).

Nevertheless, official arms dealings with Russia, France, Israel, the U.S., and the UK have ensured that India’s military remains one of the most formidable in the world. Each supplier has contributed differently—Russia with volume, France with precision, Israel with innovation, and the U.S. with strategic depth. Together, they form the backbone of India’s defence capability against Pakistan and beyond.

Pakistan’s Official Arms Dealings

Pakistan’s defence strategy has always relied heavily on external weapons suppliers, more so than India, given its smaller domestic industrial base and limited financial resources. Over the decades, Islamabad’s alliances shifted—from early dependence on the United States and France to near-total reliance on China today. This procurement pattern reflects not just battlefield needs but also the geopolitical alignments Pakistan has pursued to counterbalance India’s growing power.

China: The 81% Supplier and Strategic Lifeline

In recent years, China has accounted for roughly 81% of Pakistan’s arms imports, cementing its position as Islamabad’s most important defence partner. Unlike Western countries, which often restrict sales due to political or security concerns, China has been willing to supply Pakistan with advanced systems, technology transfers, and even joint production agreements.

JF-17 Thunder: The JF-17 is perhaps the most iconic symbol of China–Pakistan defence cooperation. Co-developed by the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex and China’s Chengdu Aircraft Corporation, the JF-17 is a lightweight, multi-role fighter jet. It has replaced older aircraft like the Mirage III/V and F-7s in Pakistan’s air force. The JF-17 Block III variant includes advanced avionics and the ability to fire beyond-visual-range missiles, giving Pakistan a cost-effective yet modern fighter fleet.
J-10C Fighters with PL-15 Missiles: To match India’s Rafale acquisition, Pakistan inducted the Chinese J-10C fighter jets, equipped with PL-15 long-range air-to-air missiles. The PL-15, boasting an active radar seeker and reported range exceeding 200 km, provides Pakistan with a counter to India’s Meteor missiles on the Rafale.
Armoured Vehicles and Air Defence: The Chinese VT-4 main battle tank has been inducted into the Pakistan Army, offering advanced firepower and protection. For air defence, the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system strengthens Pakistan’s layered shield against Indian aircraft and missiles.
Naval Expansion: Pakistan’s navy has also benefited from Chinese collaboration. The induction of Type 054A/P frigates and the ongoing construction of Hangor-class submarines have bolstered Pakistan’s ability to secure its coastline and project power in the Arabian Sea.
UAVs and Drones: China has supplied various unmanned aerial vehicles, including armed drones capable of surveillance and strike missions. These systems provide Pakistan with cost-effective alternatives to Western UAVs.

China’s support goes beyond hardware. It represents a strategic partnership where Beijing views Pakistan as a counterweight to India, while Pakistan sees China as its “all-weather ally.”

Turkey: Expanding Cooperation through UAVs

While China dominates, Turkey has emerged as a secondary but growing supplier. The Turkish defence industry has made significant progress in recent years, particularly in UAV technology. Pakistan has procured Turkish drones and sought to emulate Ankara’s tactics in drone warfare, which gained prominence in conflicts such as Nagorno-Karabakh. This cooperation reflects Pakistan’s interest in diversifying its suppliers and learning from Turkey’s experience in integrating drones into conventional operations.

Historical U.S. and Western Supplies

Before the 2000s, the United States and Western Europe were key providers of advanced systems to Pakistan.

F-16 Fighters: Perhaps the most famous example is the American-supplied F-16 Fighting Falcon. Acquired in the 1980s, these jets were Pakistan’s frontline aircraft for decades, playing roles in both conventional wars and counter-insurgency missions. They remain in service today, though their modernisation has slowed due to U.S. restrictions.
Mirage III/V Jets: France was another significant partner, supplying Mirage fighters that formed the backbone of Pakistan’s strike capability for years. The Mirage III and Mirage V were used in the 1971 war and later conflicts, including Kargil in 1999.
Agosta Submarines: France also provided Agosta-90B submarines, some of which were constructed in Pakistan with French assistance, giving the Pakistan Navy greater underwater capabilities.

However, Pakistan’s reliance on Western suppliers has declined sharply. Political tensions, concerns over nuclear proliferation, and Pakistan’s growing closeness with China have reduced Western willingness to sell advanced weapons.

Case Study: May 2025 Skirmish – J-10C Combat Debut

The May 2025 skirmish between Indian and Pakistani forces marked a historic moment in South Asian military history. For the first time, Pakistan’s newly inducted J-10C fighters were deployed in active combat. Armed with Chinese PL-15 air-to-air missiles, the J-10Cs engaged Indian aircraft in high-stakes dogfights. Reports indicated that at least one Indian aircraft was shot down using the PL-15 missile, demonstrating the potency of this Chinese system in real combat conditions.

This event served multiple purposes. For Pakistan, it validated the investment in Chinese platforms and boosted the morale of its armed forces. For China, it was a valuable real-world test of its weaponry, enhancing its credibility as a global arms exporter. International observers noted that the South Asian skies had become a showcase for next-generation weapons, with Rafales on one side and J-10Cs on the other.

Strategic Dependence on China vs. Decline of U.S. Support

Pakistan’s shift from Western to Chinese suppliers is not just a matter of convenience—it is a reflection of strategic necessity.

Decline of U.S. Support: After the 1990s, U.S. sanctions and restrictions limited Pakistan’s access to American arms. Concerns over Pakistan’s nuclear weapons program, its links to militant groups, and its deteriorating relationship with Washington after the War on Terror all contributed to the decline.
Deepening Dependence on China: In contrast, China offered Pakistan advanced equipment without the same political conditions. The two countries have collaborated on production, training, and even strategic planning. This dependence, however, comes with risks—tying Pakistan’s defense almost entirely to Beijing limits its autonomy and makes its capabilities heavily reliant on Chinese technology and support.
Pakistan’s alignment with China reflects a broader geopolitical realignment in South Asia. Where once it balanced relationships with both the U.S. and China, it now stands firmly in Beijing’s orbit.

Conclusion: A Shifting Arsenal

Pakistan’s official arms dealings reveal a country that has evolved from relying on Western suppliers to becoming almost entirely dependent on China. From JF-17s and J-10Cs in the air to VT-4 tanks on the ground and Chinese frigates in the sea, Pakistan’s armed forces are now built largely with Beijing’s assistance. Turkey provides some diversity, but the overall trajectory is clear: Pakistan’s defence future is intertwined with China.

This transformation underscores a stark contrast with India, which has diversified its arms sources and invested more in indigenous capabilities. For Pakistan, the reliance on China offers short-term strength but raises long-term questions of dependency and vulnerability. The weapons it fields today may give it confidence against India, but the true test lies in whether such dependence allows it to maintain strategic independence in the decades ahead.

Illicit Weapon Dealings & Smuggling Networks

Beyond formal arms purchases, a significant and often underreported dimension of the India–Pakistan conflict is the circulation of illicit weapons. Smuggling networks, covert state operations, and cross-border trafficking have fed insurgencies, escalated tensions, and undermined formal arms control mechanisms. These networks often blur the line between state sponsorship and non-state militancy, making the region one of the world’s most complex theatres for illicit arms flow.

ISI’s Operation Tupac – State-Sponsored Insurgency

In the mid-1980s, Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), launched Operation Tupac, a covert program to arm and train militants in Indian-administered Kashmir. This operation was modelled on the earlier U.S.-Pakistan collaboration during the Afghan jihad against the Soviets, where Pakistan had acted as a conduit for funnelling American and Saudi-supplied weapons to the Afghan Mujahideen.

Through Operation Tupac, the ISI provided Kashmiri insurgents with AK-47 rifles, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), hand grenades, and explosives. These weapons were often sourced from the massive caches left behind in Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal. The operation institutionalised the use of illicit weapons as a strategic tool, ensuring that low-intensity conflict in Kashmir would remain active without Pakistan engaging in direct war. Even today, Indian security forces regularly trace seized arms back to Pakistan-based networks, illustrating the long-lasting legacy of this program.

Lashkar-e-Taiba and Flow from Afghanistan

One of the most infamous beneficiaries of these networks has been Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), the Pakistan-based militant group responsible for the 2008 Mumbai attacks. LeT and allied groups have long tapped into weapon supplies from Afghanistan, especially during and after the U.S. war on terror.

As American troops withdrew and the Taliban reasserted control in Afghanistan, U.S.-made M4 carbines, M16 rifles, and night-vision devices increasingly began appearing in the hands of militants in Kashmir. Alongside these, Soviet-designed grenades and Chinese-manufactured rifles also trickled across the porous borders. These weapons significantly enhanced the firepower of insurgents, giving them technological parity in some cases with Indian security forces and complicating counter-insurgency operations.

Drone Smuggling in Punjab

In recent years, the battleground has expanded beyond Kashmir to include Punjab, where a new smuggling method has emerged: drones. Pakistani handlers increasingly use commercial and modified drones to ferry weapons, narcotics, and counterfeit currency across the border.

Recovered caches in Punjab have included Glock pistols, Chinese-made pistols, magazines, and ammunition. Drones allow smugglers to bypass traditional ground-based patrols and exploit blind spots along the 3,300-km-long border. This development represents a technological leap in cross-border smuggling tactics, forcing Indian agencies like the Border Security Force (BSF) to invest in counter-drone systems and radar surveillance.

Drone drops have not only armed criminal syndicates but also linked narcotics and arms smuggling together, creating a nexus where drugs fund insurgency and illicit arms fuel violence.

Cross-Border Trafficking Routes

Illicit weapons enter India through multiple routes:

Kashmir Border: Traditional infiltration corridors through the Line of Control (LoC), where militants slip in with rifles, grenades, and explosives.
Punjab Border: Drone and tunnel-based smuggling of small arms and ammunition.
Northeast Route: Arms from Southeast Asia, including Myanmar and Thailand, filter into India’s Northeast insurgencies, though these are less tied to Pakistan.
Afghanistan–Pakistan Corridor: Surplus American and Soviet weapons flow into Pakistan, from where they are redirected into Kashmir.

These routes rely on sophisticated networks of couriers, safe houses, and corrupt intermediaries. At times, legitimate trade routes and truck convoys have also been exploited, with weapons hidden among goods.

Complications for Arms Control

The persistence of these illicit networks poses a significant challenge to formal arms control efforts. India and Pakistan are both signatories to various United Nations conventions on terrorism and arms trafficking, but enforcement remains weak.

State Complicity: India accuses Pakistan of tacitly supporting these networks through the ISI, making it difficult to establish trust or pursue joint monitoring mechanisms.
Blending with Narco-Trafficking: The merging of drug smuggling and arms trafficking creates financial self-sufficiency for militant groups, reducing reliance on external funding and making them harder to choke off.
Technological Innovation: The shift from human couriers to drone drops represents a new frontier in illicit arms movement, one that international law and local enforcement are struggling to keep pace with.

Ultimately, illicit weapon flows transform the India–Pakistan conflict from a conventional standoff into a hybrid battleground, where non-state actors can sustain hostilities indefinitely without major state involvement. This erosion of the boundary between formal militaries and informal armed groups adds unpredictability to South Asia’s already volatile security landscape.

Conclusion

Illicit arms dealings and smuggling networks have acted as the shadow war beneath the formal India–Pakistan rivalry. From ISI’s Operation Tupac arming Kashmiri insurgents with Afghan war leftovers to today’s drone-based weapons deliveries in Punjab, these covert flows keep the conflict alive even during official ceasefires. The result is a persistent low-intensity war that frustrates peace efforts and undermines conventional arms control. Unless these networks are disrupted, the India–Pakistan conflict will remain as much about hidden supply chains and smuggled rifles as about fighter jets and missiles on display.

Geopolitical & Economic Dimensions of Arms Deals

Arms dealings between India and Pakistan are not simply commercial exchanges; they are deeply entangled with global geopolitics and domestic economic realities. Every aircraft, missile, or tank purchase reflects more than battlefield utility—it signals strategic partnerships, diplomatic alignments, and economic trade-offs.

Suppliers as Strategic Players

Major arms suppliers often see South Asia not only as a lucrative defence market but also as a strategic chessboard. Supplying weapons allows them to exert influence, gain leverage in regional disputes, and strengthen long-term alliances. The India–Pakistan conflict, with its recurring flare-ups, ensures that both nations remain dependent on external supplies, creating consistent demand for foreign arms industries.

Russia and India – A Legacy of Dependence

Since the Cold War, Russia (formerly the Soviet Union) has been India’s most consistent arms supplier, accounting for 60–70% of India’s total defence inventory. This reliance grants Moscow significant diplomatic leverage: for instance, during the 1971 war, the USSR provided India with MiG-21 fighters, tanks, and missile systems while offering diplomatic backing at the UN Security Council.

Even today, despite India’s growing defence ties with the U.S. and France, Russia remains critical through systems like the S-400 air defence system, Su-30MKI fighter jets, and T-90 tanks. For Moscow, India is not just a customer but a crucial partner that sustains its defence industry, especially amid Western sanctions. Arms sales ensure continued Russian influence in South Asia and secure billions in annual revenue for its economy.

China–Pakistan “Iron Brotherhood”

On the other side, China and Pakistan have forged an “all-weather” defence partnership. Beijing supplies more than 80% of Pakistan’s arms, ranging from JF-17 Thunder jets (co-developed) to VT-4 tanks and advanced J-10C fighters.

This cooperation serves multiple purposes:

It keeps Pakistan militarily capable of countering India, thus indirectly tying down Indian resources.
It allows China to showcase its defence technology in real combat scenarios (e.g., Pakistan’s use of PL-15 missiles in 2025 skirmishes).
It builds long-term dependency, as Pakistani systems increasingly rely on Chinese spare parts, training, and upgrades.

Beyond defence, these ties feed into larger initiatives like the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), strengthening Beijing’s geopolitical footprint in the Indian Ocean region.

The Western Dilemma

For Western countries like the U.S., France, and the U.K., South Asia represents both an opportunity and a contradiction. On the one hand, arms exports generate enormous profits and sustain domestic industries. On the other hand, Western governments must balance these sales with concerns about democracy, human rights, and regional stability.

The U.S. has often restricted advanced weapon sales to Pakistan due to its links with terrorism, but it has continued supplying India as part of the Indo-Pacific strategy against China.
France, meanwhile, has been more pragmatic, selling Mirage 2000s during Kargil and Rafales in recent years, emphasising business interests over politics.
The U.K. largely plays a secondary role, supplying transport and support systems rather than front-line combat equipment.

This balancing act reflects a tension: profit-driven defence industries vs. political ideals of peace and democracy.

Economic Burdens at Home

For both India and Pakistan, heavy defence spending comes at an economic cost. India, with a much larger economy, spends over $70 billion annually on defence (the world’s third-largest defence budget). While this modernises its military, it diverts resources from social sectors like healthcare and education.

Pakistan, by contrast, spends a smaller absolute figure (~$11–12 billion), but this represents a much larger share of its GDP. With recurring debt crises and IMF bailouts, Pakistan’s defence-heavy budget fuels long-term economic strain. Reliance on Chinese loans and concessional defence deals only deepens its financial vulnerability.

Conclusion

Arms deals in South Asia are more than transactional—they are a reflection of power, dependency, and strategy. Russia sustains its global relevance through India; China cements its “iron brotherhood” with Pakistan; and the West wrestles with its profit vs. principle dilemma. For India and Pakistan, the price of these partnerships is measured not just in billions of dollars but also in economic trade-offs that shape the future of their societies.

Real Stories & Ground-Level Impact

While arms deals are often discussed in terms of billions of dollars and geopolitical strategies, their real meaning emerges on the battlefield and in people’s daily lives. Behind every contract lies a story of how soldiers, civilians, and communities are directly affected by the weapons supplied to India and Pakistan.

Soldiers in Action – Foreign Weapons on the Frontline

In the 1971 war, Indian Air Force pilots flying Soviet-supplied MiG-21s recalled how the jets gave them a decisive edge against Pakistan’s U.S.-made F-104 Starfighters. Squadron Leader M. A. Ganapathy described how the MiGs, though less flashy, were reliable and easy to manoeuvre in dogfights—proving the value of India’s reliance on Soviet hardware.

Fast-forward to the 1999 Kargil War, when French-made Mirage 2000s played a pivotal role. Pilots recount flying through narrow Himalayan valleys to deliver precision laser-guided bombs on Pakistani positions. The Mirage strike not only shifted the tide of the conflict but also highlighted India’s need for Western precision technology at a critical moment. For many Indian veterans, the Mirage remains a symbol of how arms deals can change battlefield outcomes.

On the Ground – Drones and Smuggling

In Punjab villages near the border, the arms trade has a more disturbing face. Farmers report hearing buzzing sounds at night as Chinese quadcopters drop pistols, grenades, and ammunition. “We wake up to find weapons in our fields,” one villager from Amritsar told local media. For ordinary people, foreign-supplied drones and smuggled arms are not abstract—they are threats that turn their farmland into a frontline of covert warfare.

Analysts and the New Generation of Weapons

Defence analysts in New Delhi and Islamabad point to the Rafale–J-10C rivalry as the newest chapter in this arms competition. Indian pilots praise the French Rafales for their Meteor missiles and advanced radar, claiming they give India an edge in beyond-visual-range combat. Meanwhile, Pakistani officers counter that their Chinese J-10Cs, armed with PL-15 missiles, are cost-effective and tailored for South Asia. Both sides see their imported jets not just as machines, but as symbols of national pride and deterrence.

The Human Angle

For soldiers, these weapons decide survival in war. Border villagers bring fear and instability. For governments, they represent power and prestige. And for ordinary taxpayers, the billions spent on foreign arms come at the cost of schools, hospitals, and infrastructure. The stories from pilots, villagers, and analysts remind us that arms deals are not abstract—they shape real human lives across South Asia.

Lessons Learned from Past Conflicts

Each war and skirmish between India and Pakistan has left behind not just scars but also strategic lessons about weapons and their role in shaping outcomes. Both nations have drawn conclusions that continue to influence their defence policies today.

India’s Lesson – Diversification and Indigenous Power

For India, the repeated reliance on foreign suppliers underscored the risks of overdependence. In the 1965 and 1971 wars, India leaned heavily on Soviet supplies, which gave it a decisive edge. Yet, the Cold War also revealed that excessive reliance on a single supplier could limit diplomatic flexibility.

Post-Kargil, India accelerated diversification. Today, India buys not only from Russia but also from France, the U.S., and Israel—ensuring that no single country can dictate its defence policy. At the same time, there has been a stronger push toward indigenous defence production. Projects like the Tejas Light Combat Aircraft, DRDO’s missile programs (Agni, Akash, BrahMos), and the commissioning of the INS Vikrant aircraft carrier reflect an awareness that true strategic autonomy requires self-reliance. While still dependent on imports, India’s trajectory is toward a hybrid model: foreign deals for advanced technology paired with domestic innovation for long-term security.

Pakistan’s Lesson – China as Strength and Weakness

Pakistan, by contrast, has learned the limits of its earlier dependence on the U.S. After sanctions in the 1990s stalled its F-16 fleet, Islamabad turned almost exclusively to China. Today, about 81% of Pakistan’s arms come from Beijing, with flagship projects like the JF-17 Thunder, J-10C fighters, VT-4 tanks, and Type 054A/P frigates.

While this partnership provides affordability and a steady supply, it also creates strategic vulnerability. If Chinese technology fails to match Western standards in a future conflict, Pakistan risks being locked into a single pipeline with little room to manoeuvre. In other words, dependence on China strengthens Pakistan in the short term but may limit flexibility in the long term.

The Bigger Picture – Training Over Hardware

Perhaps the most universal lesson from past conflicts is that weapons alone do not decide wars. In 1965, India’s nimble Gnats defeated Pakistan’s advanced Sabres. In Kargil, Indian infantry—fighting in extreme terrain—proved more decisive than any aircraft. Across conflicts, the quality of training, leadership, and tactics often outweighed pure technological superiority.

Thus, while arms deals remain crucial, the enduring lesson is that human skill and strategy remain the ultimate weapon in South Asia’s battles.

The Way Forward – Future of Arms Dealings

Looking ahead, the trajectory of arms dealings in South Asia will likely shape not only the India–Pakistan balance but also regional and global security.

India’s Path – Atmanirbhar Bharat

For India, the central theme is self-reliance in defence. Under the Atmanirbhar Bharat initiative, New Delhi is pushing domestic defence companies, private sector players, and DRDO projects to reduce dependence on imports. The indigenous Tejas fighter jet, Arjun tanks, Akash and Agni missiles, and INS Vikrant reflect a strategic shift. India’s goal is to not only arm itself but also become an exporter of weapons, turning its massive defence budget into a driver of industry and diplomacy.

Pakistan’s Tilt – China as Lifeline

Pakistan, in contrast, is set to deepen its reliance on the Chinese defence ecosystem. The JF-17 program, J-10Cs, VT-4 tanks, and planned Hangor-class submarines are signs of this trend. While affordable and politically reliable, this dependence leaves Pakistan tied to Beijing’s technology and strategic priorities. Unless Islamabad diversifies, its military posture may become a reflection of China’s own capabilities and limitations.

New Domains – Beyond Traditional Arms

Future conflicts may not be fought only with tanks and jets. Cyber warfare, AI-powered surveillance, electronic warfare, and armed drones are rapidly entering the battlefield. Both India and Pakistan are already experimenting with UAV swarms, satellite surveillance, and precision-guided systems. These technologies could level the playing field—or escalate instability by making surprise attacks easier.

Arms Race or Stability?

The future holds two possible scenarios. An arms race, fueled by nationalism and great-power competition, could push both nations into ever-costlier purchases, straining economies. Alternatively, selective cooperation, arms control, and investment in indigenous industries could offer stability. Which path is chosen will decide if weapons remain a fuel for endless rivalry—or a lever for sustainable security.

Conclusion – Weapons as Silent Players in India–Pakistan Wars

From the first clash of 1947 to the modern-day standoff with missiles, drones, and cyber tools, one constant has remained: weapons have silently shaped the course of every India–Pakistan war. Behind the headlines of battles and peace talks lies a vast network of official suppliers and illicit smugglers who keep the rivalry alive. Tanks from America, fighter jets from Russia and France, missiles from China, or pistols smuggled across borders—all have determined strategies, outcomes, and even human lives on both sides.

For global arms dealers, South Asia has long been both a market and a laboratory. Each conflict became an advertisement for their products, boosting exports and cementing geopolitical ties. But while the global defence industry profits, the real cost is borne by ordinary people—soldiers risking their lives with imported machines, and civilians caught in the crossfire or terrorised by smuggled arms.

As India pushes for Atmanirbhar Bharat and Pakistan deepens its Chinese partnership, the question remains: can either nation break free from this cycle of dependency? True security may not come from importing the latest missile or drone, but from building self-reliance, stability, and trust—weapons of peace that no dealer can sell.

References

. . .

Discus