Reasons for India-Pakistan War 2025

It is well known that the recent terrorist attack was carried out by Pakistan-based militants who targeted tourists and reportedly asked about their religion before shooting them. The attack ignited widespread anger across India and served as a potential flashpoint for escalating the situation into a larger conflict. However, is the situation really that simple and linear? Considering Pakistan is already reeling under a severe balance of payments crisis, it seems unlikely that it would intentionally provoke India into war without a deeper underlying strategy or external backing.

To truly understand the complexity of this situation, we must dive deeper into the internal socio-political environment of Pakistan and the broader South Asian region. While Pakistan did conduct elections, the legitimacy of the results has been widely questioned. A government was ultimately formed with the backing of the military, particularly under the command of Army Chief General Asim Munir. This has led many to describe it as a "puppet" or "showcase" government, lacking genuine democratic authority.

Pakistan is currently grappling with severe internal unrest, economic instability, and a balance of payments crisis. The United States has significantly reduced its financial support, and the country teeters on the brink of bankruptcy. In a bid to avoid default, Pakistan turned to China for loans. China, in turn, invested heavily in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a project highly profitable for Beijing but seen by many analysts as a debt trap for Islamabad. With limited options, Pakistan began surrendering control of strategic assets to China—first the Gwadar Port, and later the Shaksgam Valley, a disputed territory in the Northern Areas of Kashmir.

In essence, Pakistan's current economic strategy involves taking loans from China and repaying them by leasing or ceding control of critical assets. A nation in such deep economic and political turmoil is unlikely to initiate a full-scale conflict without substantial external backing. This raises a critical question: who would support Pakistan in such a confrontation? The answer likely lies in identifying actors with a vested interest in destabilizing the region.

To answer the question of who might support Pakistan, we must examine the socio-economic and political condition of China. As a communist country, China harbors a long-term strategic ambition to emerge as the leading global power—superseding the United States. While many nations are critical of American global dominance, they are equally wary of China's rise, largely due to its authoritarian governance and ideological roots in communism.

Unlike the United States, which operates under a democratic system with regular elections and evolving policies, China is governed by a single-party system. Although it refers to itself as a democracy, in reality, it functions under a centralized dictatorship led by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The party leadership, including the president, is chosen not by the general public but by a small elite group within the Politburo—whose members are themselves selected by the most powerful figure in the system. At present, Xi Jinping holds absolute authority, and any future leadership transition will likely be determined by his preferences.

This political uniformity means China's policies remain rigid and consistent over time, unlike democratic systems where change is more frequent. The CCP follows an ideological framework that does not respect international borders in the traditional sense. Its long-term vision is rooted in the belief that the world should eventually be governed under the principles of Chinese communism. One of their primary strategies toward this goal is economic: extending loans to weaker nations and drawing them into long-term debt dependence.

While I intend to explore this strategy more deeply in a separate article, the purpose of this section is to introduce the foundational ideology of the Chinese Communist Party—and to explain why many countries, despite their dissatisfaction with U.S. policies, are equally reluctant to see China rise as the next unchallenged superpower.

China is currently grappling with significant economic turmoil, most notably triggered by a real estate crisis that began in 2020. As property developers defaulted and housing demand plummeted, this crisis has gradually spilled over into the banking sector, with rising non-performing assets (NPAs) from property-related loans threatening financial stability. While China was already struggling with these internal issues, former U.S. President Donald Trump exacerbated the situation by imposing tariffs on Chinese exports. These tariffs had far-reaching consequences, putting immense pressure on China’s manufacturing sector and risking widespread unemployment.

Trump’s administration was able to take such bold steps because alternative manufacturing destinations were available—most notably Vietnam, India, and Indonesia. Among these, India stands out as the world’s fourth-largest economy and China’s most formidable regional competitor. If global businesses shift their operations to Vietnam or Indonesia, China can still maintain strategic influence in those economies due to its regional dominance. However, India presents a unique challenge. Indian policies are more protectionist, especially regarding direct Chinese investments, making it harder for China to exercise economic leverage.

If India becomes the preferred destination for global manufacturing, it could directly rival China for the second position in the global economic hierarchy. Recognizing this, China extended a diplomatic hand, calling for a business partnership and publicly stating, “Let the dragon and the elephant dance together.” While border tensions between the two nations have somewhat eased, a deep sense of scepticism persists among the Indian public and policymakers, who remain wary of China’s intentions and long-term ambitions.

If China succeeds in destabilizing India, it effectively eliminates a key competitor on the global economic stage. A weakened or economically vulnerable India may be compelled to lean towards China—especially given their shared membership in BRICS. In such a scenario, China could potentially unite the BRICS bloc against the economic dominance of the United States, further consolidating its own geopolitical influence.

China has already made substantial investments in Pakistan through its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), particularly the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). However, the success of this venture has been jeopardized by Pakistan’s ongoing internal instability. Separatist movements are active in regions like Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, and Gilgit-Baltistan. Many in these regions either seek independence or wish to align more closely with India—hoping to emulate the independent yet India-supported models of countries like Nepal, Bhutan, and Sri Lanka.

Historically, during times of conflict between India and Pakistan, hyper-nationalism surges within Pakistan. This nationalist sentiment often suppresses internal dissent and temporarily unites the country under a singular focus—deflecting attention from separatist movements. Thus, a war with India could serve two strategic purposes for China: first, it removes India from the list of rising global challengers; second, it helps stabilize Pakistan by muting internal calls for independence, thereby safeguarding China’s investment in CPEC.

In essence, a single conflict could help China achieve two major objectives—undermining India’s rise and securing its strategic foothold in Pakistan. It would be, metaphorically, like hitting two bullseyes with one arrow.

Based on this analysis, it appears that China has the strongest strategic interest in instigating a conflict between India and Pakistan. China wields considerable influence over Pakistan’s political leadership—especially its military establishment, including the all-powerful Army Chief. No other external power stands to gain as directly from such a clash. But is this alone enough to cast suspicion on China? The answer lies deeper—this is merely the tip of the iceberg.

The primary motivation for China to finance a potential war between India and Pakistan extends beyond regional dominance. It also connects to China’s internal economic crisis and its global geopolitical ambitions. China's economy has been under pressure, and the real estate and banking sectors are facing serious structural stress. However, one event could rapidly transform China’s fortunes: the annexation of Taiwan.

Though China claims Taiwan as an integral part of its territory, the situation is far more complex. Taiwan functions as an independent nation with its own government and has historically resisted Beijing's authority. Despite its small geographic size, Taiwan is an economic powerhouse—especially in the global semiconductor industry. In fact, Taiwan produces over 60% of the world’s semiconductors, a critical resource in modern technology and defense systems. Its nominal GDP is estimated at $814.44 billion, with a PPP GDP of $1.93 trillion and per capita income around $34,920. Taking control of Taiwan would give China near-monopoly control over the global chip supply chain, potentially ending its current economic troubles overnight.

However, Taiwan is under the military protection of the United States. Any attempt by China to take Taiwan by force would likely trigger direct U.S. intervention. Recently, former U.S. President Donald Trump claimed that China has taken over the Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan after the American withdrawal in 2021. In a surprising twist, reports by journalist Zark Shabab (published on Medium) and covered by Khaama Press suggest that the Taliban has handed the Bagram Airbase back to the United States. The reports include images and videos of U.S. C-17 aircraft landing at the base, welcomed by Taliban leaders. Although U.S. officials denied these claims, the physical evidence suggests otherwise—and it points to growing U.S. presence near western China, potentially to contain Beijing in the event of a Taiwan conflict.

This development is deeply unsettling for China, as it implies the U.S. is expanding its footprint in South and Central Asia to prepare for future confrontations in East Asia. With ongoing war theatres in Ukraine and Gaza/Hamas already stretching global attention, a new front in Southeast Asia could shift the strategic balance even further against China.

Given this backdrop, the most viable option for China is to divert global focus by igniting a conflict between India and Pakistan. By backing Pakistan—financially and strategically—in such a war, China could achieve multiple goals: draw India into a prolonged conflict, delay or weaken India's economic rise, suppress separatist movements in Pakistan (which threaten China’s CPEC investments), and buy valuable time to stabilize its domestic economy and prepare for the Taiwan question.

Something, however, did not go according to China’s plan—and the conflict between India and Pakistan was unexpectedly de-escalated. Despite efforts from certain left-leaning factions within India and elements of the main opposition party—who may be ideologically or strategically influenced by China—to keep the tensions alive and push the nation toward prolonged conflict, all such attempts ultimately failed. The situation was defused, and a ceasefire was achieved. But how exactly did this sudden resolution come about? To understand the behind-the-scenes developments and the real reasons behind this diplomatic breakthrough, read my next article: "India-Pakistan Ceasefire: What Really Happened?"