A new report has uncovered how China attempted to exploit the India–Pakistan conflict that erupted after Operation Sindoor, launching a coordinated disinformation campaign aimed at damaging India’s global defence image and undermining French Rafale fighter sales. The revelations, published in the annual report of the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission a powerful advisory body created by the US Congress highlight how Beijing used fake social media accounts, AI-generated visuals, and propaganda messaging to promote its own military hardware while attempting to sow confusion about India’s combat capabilities.
The Commission’s findings underline that China not only sought to manipulate global perception but also attempted to capitalise on the short-lived India–Pakistan military confrontation to advance its strategic, commercial, and diplomatic aims. The report states bluntly that Beijing “opportunistically leveraged the conflict” to market its J-35 fighter jets and portray French Rafales as vulnerable an allegation that adds a new layer to China’s intensifying information warfare strategies against India.
According to the US advisory report, China wasted no time launching a covert narrative-building exercise immediately after the India–Pakistan clashes in May. Beijing-backed accounts circulated AI-generated images of debris, falsely claiming that they belonged to Rafale jets allegedly shot down by Pakistan using China-made weaponry. This was done to “hinder sales of French Rafale aircraft in favour of its own J-35s,” the report said.
The disinformation push was part of China’s broader ‘Gray Zone’ tactics operations carried out below the threshold of formal warfare, but aimed at weakening an adversary’s political, military, and economic architecture. By amplifying false visuals, Beijing attempted to create global doubts about Rafale’s survivability and India’s air dominance. Pakistan’s own claim that it had shot down five Indian jets including Rafales was never confirmed by New Delhi. India’s armed forces categorically denied any loss of Rafales, though Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan did acknowledge losses are part of the conflict.
For China, the propaganda narrative served dual objectives: cast doubt on India’s new-generation fighter, and position the Chinese J-35 as a more advanced alternative in the international defence market.
The sequence of events that China exploited began with the Pahalgam massacre, which killed 26 civilians. India launched Operation Sindoor, a targeted campaign against terrorist hubs in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, neutralising several training camps, arms depots, and command centres.
Pakistan retaliated with a drone strike, triggering a brief but sharp confrontation between the two nuclear-armed nations. India’s counter-response inflicted heavy damage on Pakistani military installations and airbases, significantly weakening their operational capabilities.
In August, Indian Air Force Chief Air Chief Marshal A.P. Singh confirmed that India had destroyed several Pakistani fighter jets and includingone large airborne surveillance aircraft during the operation. These official statements contradicted Pakistan’s claims and undermined the narrative China was attempting to amplify through its propaganda accounts.
Beyond the disinformation offensive, the US report highlighted continuing asymmetry between India and China on the border issue. The Commission observed that China uses high-visibility diplomatic engagements to give the impression of progress while refusing to make meaningful concessions on the Line of Actual Control (LAC). Beijing attempts to compartmentalise boundary disputes, pushing for economic cooperation even as military tensions persist.
India, however, insists that normalcy in ties cannot return without resolving the border crisis. The report notes that New Delhi has become increasingly aware of the scale of the threat posed by China, especially after the clashes in eastern Ladakh.
According to the Commission, existing agreements between the two countries remain “largely conceptual,” lacking concrete timelines or actionable steps. The document also flagged the Dalai Lama succession issue as a future flashpoint, which could aggravate tensions further.
The report also contextualises India’s diplomatic outreach in 2025. After months of bilateral talks, Prime Minister Narendra Modi travelled to China for the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) Summit, where he met President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin. This move was viewed in Washington as India attempting to hedge its geopolitical risks following a downturn in India–US relations, triggered by the imposition of 50% tariffs on Indian goods.
However, in recent months, India–US ties have stabilised, and the first tranche of a new trade agreement is expected soon. The US Commission notes that it remains unclear whether India’s recalibration towards China is a temporary hedge or a longer-term shift.
China’s post–Operation Sindoor disinformation campaign underscores a troubling reality: Beijing is no longer limiting its rivalry with India to the border or diplomatic arena. It is actively waging information warfare, seeking to distort global perception, undermine India’s military credibility, and advance its defence exports. The use of AI-generated propaganda, coordinated fake accounts, and opportunistic messaging during a sensitive military conflict demonstrates how China weaponises narratives to pursue its strategic interests. For India, these revelations serve as a reminder that modern conflict extends far beyond battlefields and that safeguarding national security now requires countering misinformation as aggressively as defending territorial borders.
