A few days ago, I found myself discussing the “India–Pakistan Air Battle” with a young acquaintance. To my surprise, he had no idea what I was talking about. It made me realize just how little coverage this textbook case of modern warfare has received. For the benefit of those who don’t follow military affairs, let’s break down why this event matters.
Earlier this year, India suffered a terrorist attack, which it swiftly attributed to a group operating out of Pakistan. In response, the Indian Air Force launched “Operation Sindoor” in the early hours of May 7, targeting what it called “terrorist facilities” inside Pakistan. India expected a swift, overwhelming victory—after all, it had the numbers and the hardware. Yet, the outcome was a resounding victory for Pakistan.
What unfolded was a beyond-visual-range(BVR) air battle—jets from both sides never even saw each other. India fielded over 70 fighters; Pakistan, just 30. Neither side crossed the border; missiles flew across invisible lines. Despite India’s numerical advantage, it got nothing for its trouble. On that day, Pakistan scored an astonishing 6–0: using Chinese-built J-10CE fighters and PL-15 long-range air-to-air missiles, it downed three of India’s latest French Rafale jets, two Russian Su-30s, a MiG-29, and even an Israeli drone. In over an hour of dogfighting, Pakistan’s J-10CEs emerged unscathed. In the days that followed, they also downed an older French Mirage 2000 and even neutralized a Russian S-400 air defense system.
So, what happened? Pakistan deployed a fully integrated Chinese aerial combat system. India threw its best jets into the fight (notably, the US refused to let Pakistan use its F-16s). Indian jets, shielded by early warning aircraft, tried to sneak in at ultra-low altitude to avoid Chinese-made HQ-series missiles. They stayed well inside Indian airspace, planning to hit-and-run. Yet, despite their careful planning, they were tracked and shot down 70–90 kilometers from the border—without ever crossing it.
How? Pakistan used Chinese ZDK-03A early warning planes, electronic warfare jets, and ground radars to monitor the whole airspace. They even intercepted the downed Indian pilots’ radio chatter. The attack model was “A shoots, B guides”: early warning aircraft locked onto Indian jets, relayed targeting data to the J-10CEs, which, without switching on their own radar, fired PL-15 missiles from extreme range. The Rafales didn’t even know they were being targeted.
The PL-15 is the world’s first air-to-air missile with a dual-pulse engine. It’s guided by external data links in its early phase—no need to use its own radar, so it flies “silent.” The Rafale’s sensors pick up nothing. Only when the missile is 20 kilometers from its target does it ignite again, sprint for the kill, and switch on its own radar for a terminal lock. By then, the pilot has only seconds to react—nowhere near enough time to evade or jam the missile.
The PL-15’s range is up to 300 kilometers; the export version Pakistan uses is rated for 145 kilometers. By comparison, India’s air-to-air missiles don’t exceed 100 kilometers. The Rafale’s MICA missiles, with an 80-kilometer range, were found still attached to the wreckage—never fired. The Indian pilots likely never even knew what hit them.
No other country in recent years has fought such a lengthy, large-scale air battle. This India–Pakistan clash is a case study for every air force—a 6–0 scoreline that shocked even seasoned observers. For years, claims about China’s advanced, affordable weapons were met with skepticism. But after this battle, with $50 million J-10CEs downing $250 million Rafales, the evidence is hard to ignore.
Many analysts have called this China’s “DeepSeek Moment”—a breakthrough as significant as the debut of its AI language models earlier this year. Even the usually skeptical US magazine The National Interest acknowledged the J-10CE’s performance, saying China’s air combat capabilities now have “undeniable credibility.” And remember, the J-10CE is only China’s fourth-ranked fighter.
What does this mean for international relations?
First: China understands what it means to be weak. Recently, a clip of US scholar John Mearsheimer resurfaced online. He said:
“The Chinese talk at great lengths about the “Century of National Humiliation,” which ran from the late 1840’s to the late 1940’s. The cause of that was that China was weak, of which the Great Powers in the system took advantage. So if you’re Chinese today, you understand full well that you don’t want to be weak, because you don’t want to suffer another Century of National Humiliation.”
Second: The US is a ruthless power. Mearsheimer also said:
“The United States, as many of you know and probably many of you don't know, is a ruthless great power. You never want to underestimate how ruthless the United States is. Despite all the liberal rhetoric that we use to cover up our ruthless behavior, we are tough customers, and the Chinese are finding that out now.”
The US is ruthless if anyone dares to challenge it's position
If China cannot develop the world’s most powerful military, how can it face America’s ruthlessness? Fortunately, China has now proven its capability—validated not in its own war, but in real combat elsewhere. In the 2020 China–India border clash, the PLA faced Indian troops with broadswords and spiked clubs, leaving the J-10C on the sidelines. That’s Chinese restraint.
One last point: Pakistan’s 6–0 air battle victory on May 7 proved the strength of Chinese weapons. Four days later, China and the US began tariff negotiations in Geneva. Trump, who bullies the weak but fears the strong, likely pressed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to reach a deal with China ASAP after seeing this show of strength.
Lo Wing-hung
Bastille Commentary
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
"When meat rots, maggots appear; when fish dries, worms breed; when one grows complacent and forgets oneself, disaster follows." These words from Xunzi's chapter "Encouraging Learning" could not be more apt as a description of America's Epstein scandal. No one could have imagined that the American system had decayed to such a degree.
During the recent Winter Olympics, Western reporters pressed Eileen Gu – who competed for China – for her views on the Jimmy Lai case and the so-called Xinjiang genocide. When she declined to comment, she was savaged by American television hosts. The irony is glaring: Americans fixate on an alleged Xinjiang genocide that exists only in fiction, yet turn a blind eye to the Epstein scandal erupting right before their eyes. Why did no reporter press Eileen Gu for her views on the Epstein case?
Former Prince Andrew of the United Kingdom has finally been arrested. The British royal family had long known of Andrew's criminal involvement in the Epstein affairs, yet only distanced themselves from him in October last year – and the government has only now taken action. How remarkably swift. Had they acted with the same urgency they showed over the Jimmy Lai case, Prince Andrew would surely be behind bars already. The ancient saying – "the law does not reach the privileged; propriety does not extend to the common folk" – finds yet another confirmation in the West.
America has partially declassified over three million pages of documents related to the Epstein case. While the files appear to give the Trump administration some leeway, the contents are already horrifying. The documents implicate sitting and former American presidents, European royalty, business titans, religious leaders, and leading academics – the filth on display is truly beyond description.
We see that Thorbjørn Jagland – former Prime Minister of Norway and former chairman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee – continued to maintain close ties with Epstein even after his 2008 conviction, to the point where Epstein could effectively influence who received the Nobel Prize. We also see how Larry Summers – former US Treasury Secretary and former president of Harvard University – discussed with Epstein the art of womanising.
Even more shocking is that among those closely associated with Epstein was Noam Chomsky, widely regarded as the father of American linguistics. Long considered a public intellectual – a philosopher who spent his entire life teaching people how to challenge the powerful – Chomsky himself turns out to be one of the very corrupt elites he claimed to oppose. The Dalai Lama is also part of this picture. Given that Western journalists show such keen interest in Xinjiang, one wonders why they show no similar zeal for Tibet – or for relentlessly pursuing the scandal surrounding the Dalai Lama's connections to Epstein.
The shocking secrets unearthed by the Epstein case go far beyond the mere operation of a prostitution ring.
First – Even Worse Crimes
The public's greatest suspicion surrounding the Epstein case is this: while the scandal exposed that Epstein used underage girls for prostitution on his private island – known as "Lolita Island" – those powerful men involved could have easily arranged their own channels had they simply wanted to pay for sex. There was no need for such elaborate orchestration.
According to a source who was incarcerated alongside Epstein in the United States, what truly drew America's powerful elites to Epstein was not his sex operation, but his promise of eternal youth. While stem cell therapies have long been banned in America, academic research had apparently shown that injections of stem cell extracts could restore youthful vitality. The rumour goes that Epstein arranged for these elites to father children with the girls on the island, then extract stem cells from their own biological offspring and inject them into themselves – since the children shared their DNA, there would be no immune rejection.
This same source also claimed that just days before Epstein's so-called "suicide," he had spoken with Epstein, who was in high spirits with absolutely no signs of suicidal intent – lending weight to the suspicion that Epstein “was suicided."
With this explosive secret now in the open, and with Epstein dead and vast quantities of evidence suppressed by US authorities, the matter has become an unsolvable case.
However, emails released by the US Department of Justice show that Epstein generously funded Harvard University, much of it directed at biological research – including work by renowned genomics pioneer George Church. Church had outlined to Epstein a research programme totalling US$10 million, to be implemented across 10 phases. Among the projects was one called "Supercentenarianstudy.com" (a centenarian research project), alongside research into creating virus-resistant animals through gene editing, reversing the ageing process, and producing "cold-resistant elephants." It is clear that Epstein had an intense interest in age reversal.
If this scheme – harvesting stem cells from the elites' own biological offspring – were true, every powerful individual who participated would have committed murder and numerous other grave crimes. With evidence of their crimes firmly in the hands of Epstein and the network behind him, manipulating these elites would have been effortless.
Second – Who Is Behind It All?
The same source noted that Epstein was no ordinary figure. His girlfriend came from a foreign intelligence family, and the entire Epstein operation was funded by that country. The whole affair was a deliberate setup – a carefully orchestrated operation built around an island offering sex and the promise of eternal youth, designed to lure the Western elite – primarily Americans – into participating, then using evidence of their crimes to control their political behaviour. This explains why in the United States, regardless of whether it is the Democratic or Republican Party, there is invariably a unified and unconditional stance whenever issues relating to that country arise.
Third – The Collapse of a System
In American Hollywood films, we are always presented with a principled hero who risks his life to fight the powerful and ultimately triumphs – a happy ending. Reality, however, is precisely the opposite: the West tells you to stand on principle while having none of its own.
Britain has now arrested former Prince Andrew on a charge of mere "misconduct in public office" – suspected of leaking British trade documents to Epstein. Even for that offence, he could have been charged under the Official Secrets Act, which would have been far more serious. Of course, Virginia Giuffre – the woman who accused the former prince of sexual assault – reached an out-of-court settlement with him in 2020, collecting US$12 million. Although she never took the case to trial, she continued to allege that the former prince had engaged in sexual relations with eight underage girls who could not speak English – a far graver criminal allegation. Last April, 41-year-old Giuffre "died by suicide" in Australia. This brings to mind the case of Princess Diana, who met her end in a car crash amid royal scandal – a death that many still believe was no ordinary accident.
Britain devotes so much energy to meddling in the Jimmy Lai case and Hong Kong's democratic development, when it should really put its own house in order – abolishing its feudal and rotten monarchy before it can claim to be a truly modern state.
As for America's continuing effort to export its own model of democracy worldwide – that is even more laughable. America need not lecture us on how to prevent the next Epstein scandal, because it appears genuinely impossible to prevent under the American system. What America needs to answer is how to prevent the forces behind the Epstein affair from being exploited to manipulate American politicians – and I cannot think of any satisfactory answer it could give. In a system this rotten, no one is ever held accountable.
As the Gospel of Matthew so aptly puts it: "Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."
Lo Wing-hung
