Pak support to China’s Op Sindoor mediation claim raises diplomatic questions

Pakistan has publicly supported China’s assertion that Beijing played a mediating role in easing tensions between India and Pakistan during Operation Sindoor, a limited military confrontation in May. The issue was discussed on Capital Beat with panellists Prof Aftab Kamal Pasha, Prof Mohsin Raza Khan, Vivek Deshpande, and Pushparaj Deshpande.

The discussion centred on a statement by Pakistan Foreign Office spokesperson Tahir Andrabi, who said the Chinese leadership remained in constant contact with Pakistan’s leadership and also made contact with Indian leaders during the critical period between May 6 and 10. Andrabi described these engagements as positive diplomatic exchanges that contributed to peace and security in the region.

Also read | Who ended the India–Pakistan conflict — and why the world wants the credit

India has maintained that the de-escalation of the May conflict was achieved through direct talks between the Directors General of Military Operations of India and Pakistan, rejecting the claim of third-party mediation.

Competing claims and official positions

Panellists noted that Pakistan’s endorsement follows earlier public assertions by China that it played a diplomatic role in reducing tensions. These claims came months after US President Donald Trump repeatedly stated that America had mediated between India and Pakistan during the same episode.

Prof Pasha described Pakistan’s endorsement of China’s position as a new development in the post-Operation Sindoor narrative. He outlined that India has consistently denied third-party involvement and reiterated that the ceasefire understanding emerged from military-level engagement between the two sides.

The programme highlighted that India has so far not issued a fresh public response specifically addressing Pakistan’s backing of China’s claim, maintaining its earlier position on bilateral resolution.

China’s regional diplomacy and Pakistan’s alignment

The panellists discussed China’s broader diplomatic posture, including its efforts to project itself as an active mediator in international conflicts. Prof Pasha pointed to Beijing’s recent diplomatic initiatives in other regions as part of a pattern in which China seeks to present itself as a stabilising force in disputes involving key regional actors.

Pakistan’s support for China was examined in the context of its long-standing strategic partnership with Beijing, including cooperation under the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor and broader Belt and Road Initiative projects. The panel noted that Pakistan continues to balance relationships with both China and the United States.

A panellist observed that Pakistan’s public backing of China introduces an additional diplomatic dimension for India, given China’s own unresolved border issues with India and its strategic interests in South Asia.

Calls for clarity from New Delhi

Prof Khan emphasised the importance of official clarity from the Indian government in response to the coordinated claims by China and Pakistan. He stated, “The government has to clarify, but it hasn’t,” pointing to the absence of a formal statement following China’s initial assertions.

Also read | Congress slams PM Modi over China’s India-Pakistan mediation claim

The discussion reflected concern over the implications of silence in the face of repeated mediation claims by external actors. Panellists underscored that India has historically opposed third-party mediation in bilateral disputes, particularly with Pakistan, and that this position has been a consistent feature of its foreign policy.

The programme also noted that Indian media scrutiny and public questioning were raised as factors that could influence whether the government addresses the claims directly.

Diplomatic positioning and regional implications

Pushparaj Deshpande focused on the potential impact of these developments on India’s diplomatic standing. He reiterated that Pakistan’s claims alone do not significantly alter India’s position but argued that statements from senior Chinese leadership carry greater international weight.

He highlighted that China’s assertion was not made by a lower-level official but by the Chinese foreign minister, elevating the seriousness of the claim. The discussion also addressed the broader issue of India and Pakistan being repeatedly referenced together in international narratives, a trend described as diplomatically sensitive for India.

The panellists referred to India’s traditional stance against international arbitration or mediation in bilateral disputes and noted that reaffirming this position publicly would align with long-standing policy.

Political response and timing of claims

Senior journalist Vivek Deshpande addressed the domestic political dimension, stating that no visible internal dissent has emerged within the ruling party on the issue. He questioned the timing of the coordinated claims by China and Pakistan, noting that both remained silent for months after the May conflict.

Also read | China claims mediating India-Pakistan standoff, raises questions in New Delhi

Deshpande remarked, “Why have they said it now?”, drawing attention to the strategic timing of the statements and suggesting that the intent behind the claims is a key factor in determining India’s response.

The panel also discussed the absence of any formal reaction from the Ministry of External Affairs since the story resurfaced, despite renewed international attention.

Ongoing uncertainty over Operation Sindoor

The programme concluded without a definitive answer on whether India would issue a detailed clarification regarding Operation Sindoor. Panellists agreed that the government is likely to continue asserting that de-escalation occurred through direct military communication rather than external mediation.

The discussion underscored that questions surrounding the mediation claims remain unresolved, with India’s official position unchanged and external assertions continuing to circulate in international discourse.

The content above has been transcribed from video using a fine-tuned AI model. To ensure accuracy, quality, and editorial integrity, we employ a Human-In-The-Loop (HITL) process. While AI assists in creating the initial draft, our experienced editorial team carefully reviews, edits, and refines the content before publication. At The Federal, we combine the efficiency of AI with the expertise of human editors to deliver reliable and insightful journalism.