Congress questions conflicting Indian military officials’ accounts on Pakistan-China cooperation
New Delhi: Indian National Congress leader Jairam Ramesh has questioned conflicting statements by senior Indian military officials regarding the extent of cooperation between Pakistan and China during so-called Operation Sindoor.
According to Kashmir Media Service, sharing video clips on X, Ramesh contrasted remarks by Deputy Chief of Army Staff Lt Gen Rahul Singh, who on July 4, 2025 described the Pakistan-China partnership during the conflict as “very disturbingly deep”, with comments by former Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) Gen Anil Chauhan on August 25.
Ramesh said Gen Chauhan’s account appeared to be “simply opposite” to that of Lt Gen Singh and questioned whether the differing narratives were part of a broader effort to reshape public perception of India’s ties with China.
Lt Gen Rahul Singh had said that China used the four-day India-Pakistan conflict in May like a “live lab” to test various weapon systems while providing Islamabad with “all possible support”.
In contrast, Gen Chauhan said 70 to 80 per cent of Pakistan’s military platforms were of Chinese origin and argued that the presence of Chinese original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) in Pakistan during the conflict was merely part of routine maintenance and servicing arrangements.
“What is going on here? Is there some deeper plan to change the narrative?” Ramesh asked, while saying that there seems to be a “calibrated capitulation to China” in New Delhi’s policy.
He also referred to what he called Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “infamous clean chit to China” in June 2020 and pointed to India’s persistent trade deficits with China.
Jairam Ramesh further questioned Gen Chauhan’s recent “headline-grabbing revelations” about Indian strikes on Kiranan Hills near Sargodha during Operation Sindoor, saying such accounts could not substitute for a structured and comprehensive review of the military operation that was needed.
“Whether part of a deliberate strategy or not, (these revelations) are no substitute for a structured and comprehensive review exercise like what the K Subrahmanyam committee had carried out,” he said, referring to the Kargil Review Committee, which was set up four days after the Kargil conflict had ended.
