There are 7078 characters in this article
Estimated reading time: 17 minutes
Author | Qin Bo, Li Jie
Editor of this issue | Yu Jiaxuan
Reviewer of this issue | Shan Minmin
On May 3, 1950, President Truman (left) met with Pakistani Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan (middle). Source: WeChat official account "Bottom Line Thinking".
Recently, Indian media has frequently hyped up the so-called "Pakistan leaks" issue, referring to Pakistan as the "leaker of Chinese secrets," and extensively spreading the idea that there is a risk of "technical leakage" in Sino-Pakistani military cooperation.
This is not new. Every time Sino-Pakistani relations deepen, such as when news about China potentially exporting advanced fighter jets (such as the rumored J-35 stealth fighter) or advancing the expansion of Gwadar Port emerges, India starts to jump around, hyping up topics like "technical leakage" and "equipment outflow," trying to shift its own pressure and interfere with Sino-Pakistani cooperation: portraying China's cooperation with Pakistan as a threat to India to incite domestic nationalism, while also spreading false information to undermine Sino-Pakistani trust, making China suspicious of "Pakistani allies."
Indian media's speculative and exaggerated interpretations are not uncommon. A recent example was the rumor that "Pakistan dismantled the JF-17 fighter jet production line and gave it to Turkey." This absurd rumor lacks any military knowledge or logic, with no official reports confirming it, and it is just a farce created by some Indian media and domestic self-media outlets. The only result of this farce is to defame Sino-Pakistani relations, and the only beneficiary is India. The rhetoric of "Pakistani leaks" is essentially an old trick used by India to disrupt Sino-Pakistani relations and weaken China's influence in South Asia.
I. Western powers stoke the flames, reviving the old "China threat" narrative
The strategic cooperation between China and Pakistan is normal between sovereign states, but in the eyes of Western forces such as the United States, it is seen as a challenge and threat to their regional dominance. Every time there is a slight move in Sino-Pakistani military cooperation, Western media quickly resort to the old script, vigorously hyping up the so-called "Chinese military technology leakage threat" and "Sino-Pakistani axis disrupting regional stability."
For example, when China exports advanced fighter jets or air defense missiles to Pakistan, some voices in the West will come out to say three and four things, implying that Pakistan may "gift" Chinese technology to a third country, endangering a broader range of security. They even use this as an excuse to threaten possible arms embargoes on Pakistan, or to increase military aid to other South Asian countries to curb China's expanding influence. All these are merely using the "China threat theory" to stoke the flames, creating public opinion to justify interference in South Asian affairs.
These American hypes are nothing more than a repetition of the old script. Washington uses the media to greatly hype up the "China threat," presenting itself as a concerned guardian of regional stability and mediator, but at the same time finds excuses for its expanded arms sales and involvement in regional strategies. In 2022, the United States announced a $450 million F-16 aircraft maintenance plan for Pakistan, claiming it would help Pakistan strengthen its "counter-terrorism" capabilities. However, this explanation did not convince even India. Indian Foreign Minister directly pointed out that the U.S. explanation "cannot fool anyone," revealing that the actual deployment of these aircraft targeted India.
The U.S. stance of "helping Pakistan counter-terrorism and promoting stability" is merely a cover for its geopolitical calculations: once questioned, it claims to "separate" its relations with India and Pakistan, trying to play the role of a balance keeper to hide its real intentions.
In fact, the United States has been increasingly courting India militarily in recent years, viewing New Delhi as a key partner in the Indo-Pacific strategy, deepening joint efforts against China through mechanisms such as the Quad. The U.S. Congress even included in the Defense Authorization Act a statement supporting India in dealing with the People's Liberation Army's pressure and helping it overcome its dependence on Russian weapons. Washington's actions of tightening the India-U.S. relationship to counter China, while at the same time maintaining limited military aid to Pakistan to sustain its influence, clearly reveal its game of playing both sides.
The Western bloc led by the United States has long had a pattern of serving its hegemony by sowing discord and favoring certain nations. The Cold War era is a clear example.
In 1979, after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, Pakistan suddenly became a frontline ally of the United States in containing the Soviet Union. The Reagan administration proposed a six-year $3.2 billion aid plan to Pakistan (approximately $7.6 billion today), which included providing 40 U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets to the Pakistani Air Force. With sufficient military aid, the United States successfully guided Pakistan to cultivate and arm Afghan resistance forces for its benefit.
However, when the Soviet threat receded, the United States immediately turned its back: in 1990, after the Soviet troops withdrew from Afghanistan, President George H.W. Bush refused to endorse Pakistan's non-nuclear commitment, halting almost all military and economic aid to Pakistan, and even withholding the F-16 fighters that Pakistan had already paid for and refusing to deliver them.
Washington's sanctions against Pakistan under the pretext of its nuclear development were timed so precisely that it shows the U.S. aid to Pakistan was more of a pragmatic transaction based on its own geopolitical needs. This experience of being used and then discarded has left a long-term shadow in Pakistan-U.S. relations, with Pakistan viewing it as a reflection of the utilitarian nature of U.S.-Pakistan relations.
During the Cold War, Western aid to Pakistan often came with "anti-China" conditions - at that time, the implicit message for Pakistan to obtain large-scale Western military aid was not to be too close to China. This can be seen from the ebb and flow of U.S.-Pakistan relations: in the mid-1960s, the United States cut off supplies to Pakistan due to the South Asian war, prompting Pakistan to turn to Beijing for military aid; while in the 1980s, when the United States re-embraced Pakistan, the issue of Sino-Pakistani cooperation was deliberately downplayed by the U.S., showing that the game of "aid in exchange for distancing" is not a new historical precedent.
Entering the 21st century, especially after the dramatic changes in the Afghan situation in 2021, the United States has been cultivating two fronts in South Asia: actively courting India to build an anti-China "united front"; and at the same time repairing relations with Pakistan to prevent Pakistan from completely leaning towards China.
In 2022, the United States loudly announced the resumption of military sales support to Pakistan, branding it as maintaining regional stability and counter-terrorism cooperation. But in the eyes of South Asian countries, this is more of a temporary maneuver by Washington to balance the chessboard amid the warming of U.S.-India and U.S.-India relations. The actual intention of the United States is to maintain Pakistan through limited concessions, preventing it from fully becoming a strategic base for China, while using the "China threat" as an excuse to enhance its strategic investment in India, thus constraining China's influence in South Asia from both sides.
Historically, Western aid and weapons to Pakistan have often been conditional on the Pakistani government cooperating with their strategy. Now, Washington is repeating the same tricks by exaggerating the "China threat" to disrupt Sino-Pakistani relations, with the intention of weakening China's influence in Pakistan. These actions by the U.S. can be seen from its recent sanction measures:
Since 2023, the United States has repeatedly sanctioned Chinese companies involved in Pakistan's missile projects, claiming to prevent "missile technology proliferation," but actually targeting Sino-Pakistani defense cooperation. In September 2024, the United States went further, adding several Chinese companies and research institutions assisting Pakistan in missile development to the blacklist. China responded clearly opposing the U.S. unilateral sanctions and "long-arm jurisdiction," exposing the U.S.'s bullying behavior of interfering in others' cooperation without UN authorization.
The timing of the U.S. actions clearly indicates its strategic calculations: first, to delay Pakistan's enhancement of military capabilities through Chinese technology, indirectly maintaining India's security advantage; second, to warn regional countries not to overly rely on China militarily by undermining Sino-Pakistani cooperation. The U.S.'s intention to disrupt Sino-Pakistani relations is evident: it wants to weaken Pakistan's reliance on Chinese military equipment, while using the "China threat" to pull Pakistan back into its sphere of influence, re-establishing a favorable structure for itself in South Asia.
In this series of operations, the European allies of the United States have always been assisting. Countries such as the UK and France have followed Washington's steps in recent years, aligning their positions with the U.S. on the China strategy and South Asian issues.
In terms of public opinion, major European countries have echoed and amplified the "China threat" narrative, occasionally criticizing China's cooperation projects in South Asia. Through their own regional policies and arms sales, they work with the U.S. to exert influence. The UK released an "Indo-Pacific tilt" strategy, actively increasing its presence in South Asia and the Indian Ocean region to demonstrate its response to the U.S. Indo-Pacific layout.
Militarily, France has continued to strengthen its defense cooperation with India, becoming India's main weapons supplier after Russia. In recent years, India has spent a huge amount of money to purchase "Rafale" fighter jets and submarines from France to enhance its military projection capabilities on both the China-India and India-Pakistan fronts.
On the surface, the actions of European countries are due to their own interests, but in reality, they align with the U.S. strategy of containing China and supporting India. The involvement of European powers adds to the U.S.-led containment of China: in the diplomatic sphere, Europe and the U.S. jointly promote the negative impact of the "China-Pakistan axis" on regional stability; in the military sphere, Western allies collectively enhance the military strength of countries like India to counteract Sino-Pakistani strategic cooperation.
Throughout this process, the "China threat" narrative is not just the U.S.'s own voice, but a common rhetorical weapon used by the entire Western camp in geostrategic games. It superficially claims to uphold moral principles such as "maintaining stability" and "non-proliferation," but actually follows the old path of serving its own hegemonic logic and suppressing other countries. By sowing discord between Sino-Pakistani relations and rallying other countries to confront China, the U.S. practices a typical divide-and-conquer strategy. This tactic worked well during the Cold War and is now simply a new version of the same script.
II. Can Chinese military industry be leaked?
Technical control has an "iron jacket"
Face to face with the accusations of "Chinese military technology leakage" stirred up by India and the West, we need not be alarmed. The Chinese military industry has always implemented strict classification control mechanisms, and core secrets will never be easily exposed. The most advanced technologies—such as the avionics systems of advanced fighter jets and the guidance algorithms of missiles—are firmly held by the Chinese side, and what is provided to partners are only versions that have been performance-downgraded or black-box encapsulated.
Allied countries like Pakistan usually only have the right to use or assemble weapons, but not complete control over their core technologies. The equipment we export to "Pakistani allies" retains all the necessary "keys." From the beginning of military trade cooperation, we have already added "security locks" to the exported equipment. Some key components are embedded with special chips and dynamic encryption programs, and if unauthorized disassembly occurs, the equipment will automatically lock or even trigger self-destruction. The strict protection mechanism combined with positioning tracking technology makes anyone who tries to reverse-engineer Chinese weapons' secrets helpless.
Recently, the Indian Air Force recovered remnants of our "PL-15E" air-to-air missiles, but since the core components of the missiles had already failed after impact through the self-destruction procedure, the Indians obtained only a shell, unable to restore the algorithms and processes inside. Moreover, the international military trade sector generally follows the technical protection strategy of "performance degradation + black-box encapsulation," and China's export models are also trimmed and locked, making it difficult for enemies to uncover their true secrets even if they disassemble foreign trade equipment.
Furthermore, for joint R&D projects between China and Pakistan or cases where Pakistan plans to transfer weapon technology to a third country, China also implements full supervision and strict restrictions. Recently, the rumors about "Pakistan transferring the JF-17 fighter jet production line to Turkey" caused a stir, but the facts have proven it to be purely fictitious. In fact, the weapons Pakistan exports are mostly conventional weapons or those produced independently by Pakistan, and these transactions are almost all conducted under the permission and supervision of China, with no possibility of secretly transferring Chinese core technologies. It can be confirmed that China's military industry's secrets and critical points have not been exposed due to external cooperation, and others' attempts to steal our secrets through Pakistan are like dreaming.
Source: WeChat official account "Bottom Line Thinking".
III. Border clashes between Pakistan and Afghanistan, India benefits from it?
Currently, the South Asian situation is chaotic, with Nepal, Pakistan, and Afghanistan all experiencing problems. This wave of conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan, seemingly a sudden border friction, actually has a background of Indian and Western instigation, and the current situation in South Asia is more complex and dangerous than it appears on the surface.
Early October, Pakistan and the Taliban in Afghanistan erupted in fierce clashes at multiple border crossings. It is suspected that the Pakistani military launched airstrikes across the border targeting objectives in Kabul, triggering retaliatory cross-border night attacks by the Taliban, causing the border situation between the two countries to escalate rapidly. On the surface, the catalyst for this conflict was the Taliban's long-standing tolerance of the "Taliban of Pakistan" (TTP) within Pakistan, allowing them to launch cross-border attacks from Afghan territory. The Pakistani side was dissatisfied with the Taliban's allowing TTP to use Afghan territory for cross-border attacks, and therefore launched "unbearable" aerial strikes against relevant targets near Kabul to eliminate the threat and warn the Taliban authorities. The Taliban responded quickly with force, claiming to have successfully repelled the Pakistani "repeated violations" of Afghan airspace. Within a few days, both sides suffered casualties, and even claimed to have captured each other's outposts.
This border clash is far from a simple case of accidental border friction. First, the role of India should be noted. After the Taliban retook power in Afghanistan in 2021, although India officially did not recognize its government, it secretly adjusted its policy toward Afghanistan, trying to turn Afghanistan into a new lever to contain Pakistan.
On October 10, Indian Foreign Minister Sujan Singh met with Mutaqi, announcing that India and Afghanistan had agreed to restore diplomatic relations. Source: WeChat official account "Bottom Line Thinking".
Recently, the signs of improvement in India-Afghanistan relations have become apparent: In October 2025, Afghan Foreign Minister Mutaqi made a high-profile visit to New Delhi, and Indian Foreign Minister Sujan Singh announced that India and Afghanistan had "restored full diplomatic relations," upgrading the previous "technical team" in Kabul to an official embassy. Mutaqi even called India a "close friend," stating that this visit would improve bilateral relations. India, on the other hand, seeks to win over the Taliban regime and hints at providing economic assistance and diplomatic recognition, thereby regaining influence in Kabul.
Therefore, Indian strategic circles do not hesitate to acknowledge that the intersection of interests between India and the Taliban lies in their shared opposition to Pakistan. After all, historically, Afghanistan and Pakistan have territorial disputes and ethnic tensions (such as the Durand Line and Pashtun issues), while India and Afghanistan have deeper cultural and economic ties, making Afghanistan seem to be sandwiched between India and Pakistan, naturally giving New Delhi an opportunity.
Now, India is sending love signals to the Taliban and secretly luring them, while at the same time hoping for their conflict with Pakistan or even armed confrontation - Pakistan being caught in a two-front war is exactly what India wants. Hence, when the Pakistani military launched an air strike against Taliban targets, in addition to the "unbearable" counter-terrorism, it was largely a strategic warning to the Taliban authorities: to pressure the Taliban with force and not to lean towards the Indian camp.
Against this, the Pakistani military openly accused the Taliban of carrying out terrorist attacks in Afghanistan, blaming them for the "Indian agents" and accusing the Taliban regime of harboring TTP militants in Afghanistan to attack Pakistan. New Delhi naturally denies these accusations, and the Taliban also claims that they will not allow the use of Afghan territory to target other countries. However, India's recent actions have fully revealed its dishonorable identity as a "provocateur": publicly courting the Taliban, but actually attempting to disrupt Sino-Pakistani relations and gain profit. India is trying to use its relationship with the Taliban to exert new influence on Pakistan, and may even use the resources of the Taliban's jihadists to carry out destabilizing activities within Pakistan.
The calculation of the U.S. and other Western forces is obvious. Since the U.S. hastily withdrew from Afghanistan in 2021, its strategic needs for Pakistan have temporarily declined. However, when it saw that the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) could extend to include Afghanistan, how could it allow this regional dominance to be handed over without a fight?
In May 2025, China, Pakistan, and Afghanistan held a foreign ministers' dialogue in Islamabad, jointly declaring their commitment to promoting trilateral cooperation under the "Belt and Road" framework, supporting the extension of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor to Afghanistan. For the Taliban, this was a significant diplomatic achievement to enhance legitimacy; however, for the U.S. and Western countries, it was equivalent to expanding China's influence in the region right under their noses.
A former Afghan prime minister, Hikmatyar, warned that the Taliban's participation in the CPEC project might provoke strong opposition from the U.S., India, and Iran. He emphasized that this development goes against Washington's expectations - the U.S. originally thought the Taliban regime would not easily cooperate with its rivals, China and Russia. Now, the Taliban not only participates in building the "Belt and Road" but also agrees to China's mining of energy minerals and expanding trade in Afghanistan, leaving the U.S. with no choice but to watch its geographical vacuum be filled by opponents.
It is conceivable that certain Western intelligence agencies may secretly encourage the Taliban to adopt a stronger attitude toward Pakistan. The more intense the conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan, and the more turbulent the South Asian situation, the more it suits the interests of the U.S. and Western countries to "profit from chaos": it can slow down the progress of the CPEC project in Afghanistan, weaken the achievements of the "Belt and Road" in the region, and create opportunities for the U.S. and Western countries to intervene in South Asian affairs under the pretext of counter-terrorism and mediation. The situation in Afghanistan will become a new stage for great power rivalry - on the surface, it is the Taliban fighting with "Pakistani allies," but behind the scenes, it is undoubtedly the hands of the U.S. and Western countries stoking the fire. For this, China must remain vigilant.
On October 7, the seventh meeting of the "Moscow Format" consultations on the Afghanistan issue was held in Moscow, with Ambassador Yue Xiaoyong, the Special Representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for Afghanistan, attending. Source: WeChat official account "Bottom Line Thinking".
IV. China's Strategic Interests and Countermeasures
For China, "Pakistani allies" are reliable, but it should also see that behind the close relationship with Pakistan, there are some structural contradictions and trust deficits. Facing the collusion of India and the West in sowing discord, as well as the complex and ever-changing situation in South Asia, it is necessary to remain calm and practical, to firmly safeguard the direction of Sino-Pakistani friendly cooperation, and to skillfully deal with various undercurrent challenges.
First, rumors end with the wise, actively speaking out to refute them. For false rumors like "Pakistani leaks," the media and official channels should promptly clarify the truth and respond with factual evidence to counter the rumors. At the same time, strengthen online regulation to prevent domestic self-media from spreading unverified information, avoiding the spread of rumors in our own public opinion. When necessary, point out and criticize Indian media's malicious hype to set the record straight. In the field of public opinion, we cannot let the opponent lead the way; we must courageously stand up and shatter the conspiracy theories with the truth.
Second, deepen Sino-Pakistani cooperation, friendship does not forget the principle. Pakistan's strategic value to China is self-evident, and we should continue to support its national stability and development, including providing assistance in security and economic fields as much as possible. This is not only to consolidate friendship, but also to maintain our own interests in South Asia. Continue to upgrade technology and joint production to strengthen the modernization of Pakistan's military equipment, but at the same time ensure that China maintains control over key links, preventing third parties from getting involved. If Pakistan acts improperly, such as sharing Chinese technology with a third country or being indecisive on issues involving China's interests, China should take measures to correct it promptly. Friendship is friendship, but principles must not be compromised.
Third, actively mediate the Pakistan-Afghanistan conflict, prevent the situation from getting out of control. Prolonged conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan is not beneficial to either Sino-Pakistani party, and may also affect the safety of our personnel and projects on the ground. China has the conditions to act as a mediator for peace and reconciliation. Utilize the channels of contact with the Taliban authorities to persuade them to draw a line with India and manage the anti-Pakistan forces within their territory; at the same time, coordinate with multilateral frameworks such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to promote increased intelligence exchange and border management between Pakistan and Afghanistan, preventing misunderstandings from escalating. China's "Belt and Road" initiative has significant interests in the region, and we need to actively invest in mediation, preventing manipulators like India from interfering. As long as the tension between Pakistan and Afghanistan is eased, India's plans to encircle Pakistan from both sides will fall apart.
Finally, maintain strategic composure and clearly state the determination of the bottom line. Regarding India's provocation and the West's containment, we must maintain strategic composure and clearly state the determination of the bottom line. If India dares to cause trouble on the Sino-Pakistani border or further incite division, we can let it see the iron fist. Whether it is exposing their plots in diplomacy or strengthening military deployments on the border when necessary, we must make New Delhi understand the heavy cost of provoking China's interests. For the U.S. and other masterminds, we must resolutely struggle and not retreat, making it clear that we are determined to protect our core interests. The more they incite the "China threat," the more we should deepen cooperation with friendly countries, including Pakistan, to let the rumors collapse on their own.
Domestically, we should also improve the risk prevention plan for foreign strategic cooperation. For example, enhance the ability to analyze the strategic movements of all parties, prevent certain forces from making sudden policy reversals under special circumstances; establish a more sound military technology cooperation regulatory mechanism, and if there are signs of sensitive technology leakage, we can quickly trace it, stop it in time, or even initiate sanctions and compensation procedures, ensuring that no one has an opportunity. In short, stay calm and keep the initiative in our own hands.
There is no alliance that cannot be broken, but there can be an impregnable interest community. The noise of India and the West about "Pakistani leaks" and inciting regional conflicts shows that Sino-Pakistani cooperation is a thorn in their side. All these schemes ultimately aim to make China lose its footing in its South Asian strategy. China is not scared, and Sino-Pakistani friendship is not paper-thin. Whether it's "Pakistani allies" or Afghanistan, they are important parts of China's neighborhood diplomacy. We will distinguish right from wrong and grasp the balance. Under the premise of ensuring the safety of core interests, China can certainly guard against potential risks and challenges. For sinister plots, we must respond with wisdom and break the scheme. As long as we remain firm in our position and handle matters properly, rumors will eventually cease, and conspiracies will eventually fail. The grand strategy of Sino-Pakistani cooperation to achieve regional prosperity and stability will not be shaken by a few rumors and small actions.
About the authors:
Qin Bo, Professor at the University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Deputy Dean of the School of Foreign Languages
Li Jie, Associate Professor at the School of Foreign Languages, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Deputy Director of the Southeast Asia Research Institute
This article is reprinted from the WeChat official account "Bottom Line Thinking", published on October 15, 2025, titled "Is 'Pakistani Leaks'? It's easy to solve if you know who is spreading the rumors."
Editor of this issue: Yu Jiaxuan
Reviewer of this issue: Shan Minmin
* Go to the WeChat official account's backend and send "translation" to view the previous translation collection.
We welcome your valuable opinions or suggestions in the comments section, but please maintain friendliness and respect. Any comments with aggressive and insulting language (such as "A San") will not be accepted.
Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7562958518920217098/
Statement: This article represents the views of the author and welcomes you to express your attitude in the 【top/down】 button below.