Many historians argue that Pakistan was created not as a sovereign Islamic homeland but as a geopolitical instrument—a buffer state conceived by Western powers to serve imperial interests. Originally meant to thwart Soviet ambitions in South and Central Asia, Pakistan today finds itself adrift—an ideologically rigid, economically fragile, and diplomatically isolated nation-state. What was meant to be a “buffer” has devolved into a “duffer,” and the consequences are now being felt as tensions boil over with India.
The man widely credited—or blamed—for dragging India into a full-blown confrontation is Pakistan’s army chief, General Asim Munir. Known for his hardline religious views, Munir is not just a general but a doctrinaire ideologue who sees conflict with India not merely as policy but as theological imperative. Influenced by a militarized interpretation of Islamic eschatology, Munir reportedly views India through the lens of Ghazwa-e-Hind—a prophesied battle in Islamic tradition. This dangerously archaic mindset is what makes him not only unpredictable but also manipulable.
However, Munir's motivations aren’t just ideological. His leadership has been increasingly questioned at home. Baloch insurgents have humiliated the Pakistani army with successful ambushes, including the deadly attack on the Jaffar Express. Meanwhile, the Taliban's growing footprint in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has exposed the military’s impotence. These embarrassments have prompted Munir to distract the public and reassert his authority by provoking India—most notably through the greenlighting of the Pahalgam terror attack. But was Munir acting alone?
The deeper question remains: Who benefits from keeping India entangled in a relentless state of conflict?
The Dragon’s Pawprints
The clearest beneficiary of Indo-Pak conflict is China. Strategic experts, like Tara Kartha, have suggested that this escalation is not just a bilateral flare-up but a part of a larger conspiracy. The circumstantial evidence is glaring: nearly all the advanced weaponry used by Pakistan—PL-15E missiles, J-10CE jets, and HQ-9 missile systems—comes from China. Their use in live combat against Indian targets provided Beijing with a rare opportunity: testing its weapons against a major military power without direct involvement.
As India retaliated to terror strikes with precision attacks in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, the Chinese market reacted predictably—defense stocks surged. This economic signal suggests that Beijing, rather than being a neutral observer, sees an upside in the standoff. If India and Pakistan descend into a prolonged military conflict, it serves several Chinese interests:
-
Degrades Indian military capacity, especially on the LAC, giving China greater leverage in eastern Ladakh and Arunachal Pradesh.
-
Weakens India's global alliances, particularly the Quad, by keeping it bogged down in its western theatre.
-
Frees China to pursue regional dominance, from the South China Sea to the Himalayas, without facing coordinated resistance.
-
Diverts global attention, just as China accelerates its ambitions in Taiwan and the South Pacific.
-
Opens trade opportunities, especially as the U.S.-China trade war escalates. A distracted and economically damaged India means less competition for regional economic influence.
The Garrison State Revisited
This isn't the first time Pakistan has served as a pawn. In Pakistan: The Garrison State, political scientist Ishtiaq Ahmed details how Pakistan’s creation was deeply tied to British strategic needs. The Muslim League’s promise to provide military bases and access to Karachi Port made partition palatable to London. Post-independence, the U.S. took over the reins, using Pakistan as a frontline state against Soviet influence. Decades later, Beijing has stepped into the same role of puppet-master.
Once used by the West, Pakistan is now leased by the East. China has found in Pakistan a pliant, ideologically-compatible, and strategically positioned client state. It supplies Pakistan with weapons, builds its roads and ports (Gwadar), and helps its elite maintain control through loans, military aid, and diplomatic cover. In return, Pakistan helps keep India in check.
The Real War
This isn't just a war between India and Pakistan. It's a proxy war in a new Cold War—one between China and the emerging coalition of democratic powers in the Indo-Pacific. Pakistan, in this context, is a strawman, a strategic irritant used by China to distract, delay, and drain India.
It is no coincidence that Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin stood shoulder-to-shoulder at the Red Square just as missiles were flying over the Pir Panjal range. Both leaders are invested in reshaping the global order—one missile, one proxy war at a time. India, by being pulled into Pakistan’s orbit of madness, risks becoming an unwitting participant in this grand strategic play.
Conclusion
If the current standoff proves anything, it’s that India must not underestimate the depth of strategic manipulation at play. The real adversary is not just Islamabad, but the force that fuels its belligerence while staying safely behind the curtain. Recognizing Pakistan as a “duffer state” is only part of the truth. The more dangerous reality is that it's a disposable dagger in the dragon’s hand.
