Pakistan Backs China’s Mediation Claim in Op Sindoor — But India Disagrees Strongly

Now, Pakistan backs China's claim that it mediated during Op Sindoor

Op Sindoor: A Diplomatic Battle Over Who Really Stopped the Fighting

Months after the dust settled on Operation Sindoor—the tense May 2025 military confrontation between India and Pakistan along the Line of Control—a new front has opened: not on the battlefield, but in the realm of narratives. In a move that has raised eyebrows in New Delhi, Pakistan’s Foreign Office has now publicly backed China’s claim that Beijing mediated the ceasefire.

According to Islamabad, “Chinese leaders were in active contact with both India and Pakistan and played a constructive role in facilitating de-escalation.” But India’s official stance remains unwavering: the ceasefire resulted solely from a direct call between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of the two countries, with no third-party involvement whatsoever .

This divergence isn’t just about semantics—it’s a high-stakes contest over regional influence, diplomatic credit, and the future architecture of South Asian conflict resolution.

Table of Contents

What Was Operation Sindoor?

Operation Sindoor was launched by the Indian Army on May 9, 2025, in response to a deadly terror attack in Poonch that killed five Indian soldiers. Citing credible intelligence about active terrorist camps just inside Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, Indian forces conducted precision strikes targeting launch pads and logistical hubs.

Pakistan retaliated with artillery fire, leading to a 36-hour spike in hostilities—the most intense since the 2019 Balakot crisis. Civilian areas on both sides reported shelling, and global powers urged restraint.

By May 11, a quiet ceasefire took hold. India attributed it to a DGMO-level hotline call, a standard protocol since 2003. Pakistan initially echoed that account. But now, months later, the story has changed.

Op Sindoor: Pakistan’s New Claim About China

In a recent briefing, Pakistan’s Foreign Office spokesperson stated: “We acknowledge and appreciate the efforts of our Chinese friends, whose timely diplomatic outreach to both capitals contributed significantly to the restoration of calm” .

This aligns with earlier statements from Beijing, where Chinese officials claimed they “exercised restraint and urged dialogue” during the crisis. But crucially, both India and Pakistan had previously confirmed the DGMO channel as the sole mechanism for de-escalation—making Pakistan’s sudden endorsement of China’s role appear politically motivated.

India’s Firm Rejection: “No Third-Party Role”

The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) in New Delhi has categorically dismissed the mediation narrative. “The cessation of hostilities during Op Sindoor was the result of a direct, professional communication between the DGMOs of India and Pakistan,” a senior official stated. “There was no role, formal or informal, for any external actor.”

This position is consistent with India’s long-standing policy: no third-party mediation in bilateral matters with Pakistan. From Kashmir to ceasefire violations, India has repeatedly insisted that disputes must be resolved solely between the two nations.

Why China Wants Credit: The Geopolitical Angle

Beijing’s push to be seen as a “peacemaker” serves multiple strategic goals:

  • Regional legitimacy: Positioning itself as an indispensable power in South Asia.
  • Countering U.S. influence: Offering an alternative to Western-led conflict resolution models.
  • Strengthening the China-Pakistan Axis: Reinforcing its “all-weather friendship” with Islamabad amid CPEC investments.
  • Undermining India’s autonomy: Suggesting that even India’s military decisions require external validation.

Experts warn this could set a dangerous precedent. “If China gains a foothold as a mediator, it could insert itself into future crises—even on issues like Kashmir,” says Dr. Rekha Saxena, a security analyst at JNU .

Historical Context: Has China Ever Mediated Before?

Officially, no. India has never accepted Chinese mediation in any India-Pakistan conflict. During the 1965 and 1971 wars, China supported Pakistan but did not broker ceasefires. In the 1999 Kargil War, the U.S.—not China—played the key diplomatic role.

The 2001–02 military standoff also saw global involvement, but again, it was Washington and London, not Beijing. China’s current claim appears to be less about historical fact and more about future ambition.

What This Means for India-Pakistan Relations

Pakistan’s shift in narrative signals deeper alignment with Beijing, possibly at the cost of bilateral trust with India. By crediting China, Islamabad may be signaling to New Delhi that it now sees Beijing—not just its own military—as a strategic counterweight.

For India, this reinforces skepticism about Pakistan’s sincerity in direct talks. If Islamabad outsources its crisis management to a third country with its own agenda, the prospects for sustainable peace dim further.

Conclusion: Competing Narratives in a Volatile Region

The dispute over Op Sindoor’s de-escalation isn’t just about who made a phone call—it’s about who gets to shape the rules of engagement in South Asia. India stands firm on bilateralism. Pakistan, increasingly tethered to China, appears to be rewriting the script. As these narratives collide, the region watches nervously, knowing that how past conflicts are remembered often dictates how future ones begin. For more on regional security dynamics, see our analysis on [INTERNAL_LINK:china-pakistan-strategic-partnership].

Sources

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top