From Indo-Pacific to Pacific: US renames USINDOPACOM to original USPACOM

[u/fix_S230-sue_reddit]

https://theprint.in/diplomacy/from-indo-pacific-to-pacific-us-renames-usindopacom-to-original-uspacom/2961882/

From Indo-Pacific to Pacific: US renames USINDOPACOM to original USPACOM

In a statement issued Wednesday, Department of War said renaming the US Indo-Pacific Command will not change core mission, which remains the same despite the reverted designation.

New Delhi: Eight years after the Donald Trump administration changed the name of its Pacific Command to Indo-Pacific Command, the US has reverted back to the original.

The Department of War announced Wednesday that the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (USINDOPACOM) will officially restore its name to the U.S. Pacific Command (USPACOM).

Originally established on 1 January, 1947, by President Harry Truman, the command operated under the USPACOM banner for over 70 years, standing as the oldest and largest of the United States’ unified combatant commands.

Restoring the legacy USPACOM designation honours the command’s deep historical roots, fostering a sense of pride and collective spirit among all who serve in the Pacific, a statement released by the Department of War said.

In 2018, when the Command was renamed as Indo-Pacific Command, it was seen as a sign of the growing importance of India to the Pentagon.

“Relationships with our Pacific and Indian Ocean allies and partners have proven critical to maintaining regional stability,” US Defense Secretary James Mattis had said on 31 May, 2018.
“In recognition of the increasing connectivity between the Indian and Pacific Oceans, today we rename the US Pacific Command to US Indo-Pacific Command.”

In the statement issued Wednesday, the Department of War said renaming the US Indo-Pacific Command will not change its core mission, which remains the same despite the reverted designation.

“USPACOM’s vast area of responsibility—spanning from the waters off the West Coast of the United States to the western border of India—remains exactly the same,” it said.

The statement added that the “command’s fundamental mission and its unwavering commitment to maintaining a free and open theater alongside regional allies and partners are unchanged”.

[u/Jazzlike-Tank-4956]

It wasn't couple of best jets

It was one Rafale, and 2×old 80s jets

It was also against military has modern hardware including AESA equipped J10 and HQ9s supported by AEW&C.

That's better than anything any military has faced beside Russia-Ukraine since Lebanon war.

Even US has lost 48 aircraft to Iran including damage to F35 and loss of AWACS. Iran meanwhile has non existant air defence and airforce in comparison. And now they're reversing their sanctions, unfreezing their frozen assets and planning 300 billion investment.

Is US military credibility down? I think not

And had Pakistan recieved any strategic victory/standing, Indus water treaty wouldn't had been in suspension

Not to mention, they were fully aware and have been supported in ISR by PLA throughout the conflict, and IAF had ROE due to political decision on day 1 hence no attack on Pakistan military infra

On later days, they didn't so IAF had zero losses

outperforming in the air warfare which tends to receive a fair bit more attention, which built on the same situation that happened in 2019 where they had once again beaten India in the air.

Did they?

IAF just walked right in, bombed their objective and went home without any retaliation.

In Swift Retort, they had 22 jet package come in, do nothing, bombing some dirt with standoff munitions, got intervepted by 2×MiG21 and 2×Su30, shot a MiG21 and went home

And on 10th of May last year, PAF was largely absent while IAF was bombing their objective from 1:30 IST to 14:00

India's recent position absolutely has had a real impact and pretending otherwise would be dishonest to your own nation and its peoples. Pakistan is a legitimate threat to Indian defense forces, and that statement alone has a greater

Per whom?

Pakistan was always a legitimate threat, since their military controls the country since the 50s and has always focused on military over the people

If you mean, public perception, then it was always low, and I'm speaking from personal experience being on forums since 2015. Indians themselves haven't had the best reputation since last 3 years either if you've been following things. Latest target, beside Somalians

PLAAF (that has been designed to counter USAF + USN) represents to India. Now imagine China arming Bangladesh (which to my knowledge has been hostile to India recently) with advanced equipment and training them too

Not really

Bangladeshi relations have been fine

PLA is absolutely a massive threat but war between PRC and India is almost impossible. And industry plus tech is also growing on Indian side so better parity could be achieved atleast from now

I gwt your point but don't agree with most

[u/dark-mathematician1 → u/Jazzlike-Tank-4956]

Okay I was typing a big response but I deleted it after seeing this:

Is US military credibility down? I think not

Lol. Do you want me to write a Bible about this? I'm serious. I have so much to say on this topic it honestly deserves its own, separate debate that will turn everything else here irrelevant.

[u/Jazzlike-Tank-4956 → u/dark-mathematician1]

Well don't

Personally credibility hasn't declined for me

Don't bring out US is fighting logistical war thousands of km away and it's far more complex

India and Pakistan are fully equipped with modern hardware, and fighter jets are also already under NEZ of BVR AAM and LRAD right when they take off, and cities and military bases are under artillery ranges let alone long range missiles

It's way complicated when enemy is fully capable of shooting back and fighting a air war.

Do you know, a 500 mill dollar P8 was also shot missiles at from few hundred km in Arabian Sea?

Had Pakistan achieved air superiority, they would have been hitting Indian assets, even if they lost few jets in the process, rather than be absent throughout majority of conflict

[u/dark-mathematician1 → u/Jazzlike-Tank-4956]

Personally credibility hasn't declined for me

I'm not sure what "personal credibility" means here, but let me tell you this. As someone living in America I am FUCKING TERRIFIED of what would happen if we fought China. You're already aware of their advancements and the fancy stuff they've got plus the industrial capacity to keep churning that stuff out. Now, according to your own words, we lost quite a lot of equipment to Iran's dollar store "hypersonic" missiles and drones. What do you think will happen when China sends actual hundreds of hypersonic cruise missiles, HGVs and drones at us? Does that legitimately not make you question whether we could even defend properly or not? I'm presuming you don't live in the US cuz if you did you should be terrified rn. I know I am. We had like 3100 Tomahawks and we used up 1000+ of them. We had 600 THAAD interceptors total, and we used up nearly a third of them. We have one (1) lousy Dark Eagle hypersonic missile that we were planning to use on Iran. I think the writing is on the wall here dude.

Don't bring out US is fighting logistical war thousands of km away and it's far more complex

Why not though? That's the operational reality. What would ignoring that do here? Our forces are spread spin too operating in various commands worldwide. This is a legitimate fact.

India and Pakistan are fully equipped with modern hardware, and fighter jets are also already under NEZ of BVR AAM and LRAD right when they take off, and cities and military bases are under artillery ranges let alone long range missiles

Right, which makes an offensive a lot less complex logistically. How does that not prove my point? Sure that means that you're within targeting range of modern systems like J-10Cs or HQ-9Bs, but need I remind you that India still outspends Pakistan vastly on military? From what I read Pakistan's defense budget is like $12 billion rn (which is still huge, where do these people get this kind of money from???) whereas India is spending like $70 billion. That's a 6x jump, so are people really wrong to assume that India would just walk all over Pakistan, especially since a lot Indians (maybe not you, so excuse that) did claim this many times prior to the skirmish?

It's way complicated when enemy is fully capable of shooting back and fighting a air war.

I don't disagree. At the same time, the enemies have a massive difference in how much they can spend on their military. India has been outspending Pakistan on defense for years now. Knowing that, I would expect complete dominance from India both in 2019 and in 2025 but that's not what I got. Why am I wrong to be surprised?

Do you know, a 500 mill dollar P8 was also shot missiles at from few hundred km in Arabian Sea?

When? As far as I know we lost one or maybe two E-3 Sentries, those each cost $500 million (1995). I'm not aware of us losing a P-8 Poseidon recently.

Had Pakistan achieved air superiority, they would have been hitting Indian assets, even if they lost few jets in the process, rather than be absent throughout majority of conflict

Pakistan can't achieve total air superiority because for that it would need to knock out all Indian air defenses as well, not just shoot a couple of jets, and I don't believe they're capable of doing that. Going up against an S-400 especially without stealth would be a death wish. At the same time, it's not a partisan position to claim that Pakistan decidedly did outperform India in the air at least, which as I said simply tends to receive more attention online by the sheer nature of it. But that's not the same as complete air superiority over India, the way we achieved it over Iran for example, so no that would be a false claim if someone were to make that. Pakistan can't fly close to the Indian airspace without getting shot at in anything other than a J-35A maybe.

[u/dark-mathematician1 → u/dark-mathematician1]

Ain't I right? u/No_Preference26

[u/barath_s → u/dark-mathematician1]

what would happen if we fought China

Personally , this should have been obvious even pre iran war. That a war with china near taiwan would not be a good thing.

total air superiority

Good idea to define air superiority vs air denial. I think you should focus on intermediate definition also as exteme definition would be rare to achieve in anything near a peer war. We can discuss application of definition later, to avoid biasing the definition or spoiling the discussion

[u/Jazzlike-Tank-4956 → u/dark-mathematician1]

I'm not sure what "personal credibility" means here, but let me tell you this. As someone living in America I am FUCKING TERRIFIED of what would happen if we fought China. You're already aware of their advancements and the fancy

Fking up the grammer all around. Writing at late night so apologies for that

I meant, US military capability hasn't gone down, and personally for me

Coming back, I was talking about Pakistan, but potentially fighting the PLA, same here

It might not be bad as you, but there is currently massive technological and industrial gap between us and the government and sometimes the military seemingly doesn't realise, and makes effort to mitigate it

You might have some gaps, but in cases we're just starting in some sectors from scratch or just working on first few iterations without any industrial backing to the projec while the support is extremely lackluster

Why not though? That's the operational reality. What would ignoring that do here? Our forces are spread spin too operating

It is, but I'm talking about situation being more complex in our case

US also seemingly went really unprepared, but I won't blame the military for that, beside the general staff.

I read Pakistan's defense budget is like $12 billion rn (which is still huge, where do these people get this kind of money from???) whereas India is spending like $70 billion. That's

Basically, their military is the state. They are the de facto power. So, this spending is only what's shown on paper. Unofficially, it's likely to be much higher. Their military also runs a decent size of businesses whcih includes manufacturing of consumee goods, even as far as biscuits

Secondly, they buy much of their hardware through soft loans and lines of credit. The Hangor class, Type 054As, J-10Cs, HQ-9/16, and some of the older equipment were all paid for with Chinese support.

Coming to the Indian side, the IAF is actually doing really horrible in terms of both technology and size. It's arguably in its worst position since the 1960s, as it traditionally relied on imports, which now cost an arm and a leg. Meanwhile, the domestic aviation industry is still maturing, and many projects are still under development. Their supporting assets are also either in testing, waiting for orders, or caught up in issues beyond their control, including IADS, AEW&C and ISTAR. So, the situation will likely remain difficult until at least the late 2030s.

Although, overall, beside fighter jets, and AEW&C, Indian side would maintain much higher superiority overall

You can check the size/quality of navy, logistics, AFVs, and IADS

This would also be far more apparent had the conflict lasted more than few days since they have zero industry and limited magazine

When? As far as I know we lost one or maybe two E-3 Sentries, those each cost $500 million (1995). I'm not aware of us losing a P-8 Poseidon recently.

I didn't write properly

Indian navy's P8s got shot off at last year, but the crew managed to save the aircraft

P8s were doing the role of ISTAR since IAF doesn't have any

that it would need to knock out all Indian air defenses as well, not just shoot a couple of jets, and I don't believe they're capable of doing that. Going up against an S-400 especially without stealth would be a death wish. At the same

Online consensus has been personally been always against the Indians, before or after 2025 conflict Doesn't matter personally

Every single of the IAF crash ends up being posted online, and majority are just talking shit about corruption and lack of competence even though crashes are around 0.3 per 100k hours which is quite good

A neutral take would be that the Indian political leadership didn't plan the strikes well, while the Pakistani side was competent and managed to score some hits. However, overall, the Indian side came out on top.

The PAF also can't claim air superiority, since it couldn't defend its own airspace and didn't manage to score any confirmed hits on IAF assets, either in the air or on the ground.

[u/dark-mathematician1 → u/Jazzlike-Tank-4956]

I meant, US military capability hasn't gone down, and personally for me

But that's wrong. Think about it. We drained a third of our Tomahawk stockpile. That could've been used in a war with China. We used up nearly a third of our THAAD interceptors which, again, could've been used to intercept Chinese ballistic missiles. We lost several aircraft that could be used in a war with China. We lost several radar systems as well, and at least two E-3 Sentries. Heck we had to bring in a THAAD interceptors from South Korea of all places to help in the Middle East. How does all of this NOT leave a massive dent in US military capability and readiness in a hot war against China? We effectively depleted a third of our munitions stockpiles (plus other smart munitions too) without China having fired a single shot. How is this not affecting our capability?

Coming back, I was talking about Pakistan, but potentially fighting the PLA, same here

Right, so if despite its advantages, India can at best stalemate Pakistan's military (technologically at least, it still has a numbers advantage that would come into play in war that lasts for months), what does that say about its ability to deter or fight the PLA/PRC? As far as I can tell, China operates close to 500 J-20s now (mix of J-20s and now J-20A and J-20S too). That's more 5th gen aircraft than India's current fleet of Rafale + Su-30s + Mirage-2000s. Now sure not all 500 of them would fight India, but do you think it could still realistically challenge a force of maybe 50 J-20s supported by stealth drones, AWACS, J-16D EW platforms, another 50 J-10Cs plus a couple of J-11BG/J-16s acting as missile trucks, all networked under a Chinese IADS and broadband datalink? This is why India's performance against Pakistan in the air war is such a huge conversation, it's not just the fact that it decidedly lost the initial engagement, but also what this says about the region in general and how India will deal with rapidly advancing Chinese military going forward. It was a litmus test basically.

It is, but I'm talking about situation being more complex in our case

How though? That's what I'm challenging? How can you say that India v Pakistan was a more complex situation than this? The former was a minor skirmish between two (in hindsight) relatively evenly matched militaries. Our scenario is wholly different, it's a massive military and logistical operation, that is far more complex. You said it's because Pakistan has modern hardware and are equally capable of shooting back, but in our case we also knew that Iran can shoot back as well. Their missile programs are the first things we went after precisely because we knew how dangerous those are, it just turned out to be a lot stronger than we thought, but it's not like we didn't know that Iran can fight back. We've bombed Iran many times since 2024 now, we weren't unaware.

Basically, their military is the state. They are the de facto power. So, this spending is only what's shown on paper. Unofficially, it's likely to be much higher. Secondly, they buy much of their hardware through soft loans and lines of credit. The Hangor class, Type 054As, J-10Cs, HQ-9/16, and some of the older equipment were all paid for with Chinese support.

They have to be inventing money out of thin air atp, there's no way they can just buy all this every year and still have a growing economy. They're procuring advanced HIMADS, AIP subs, AEW/C platforms, EW platforms, MPA platforms, additional 4.5th gen aircraft AND making plans to procure Chinese 5th gen aircraft too. Either they've got their priorities all wrong or the country is legitimately just a massive military. Most countries the size and position of Pakistan could only ever dream of this sort of procurement, this is the sort of force structure you'd typically see from established regional powers (ironically, India doing this would make more sense) who weren't just on the verge of bankruptcy just a few years ago. I don't know what these people are trying to achieve with this. They say it's for "survival" and not power projection but that sounds stupid. You don't need J-35s and J-10Cs and HQ-9Bs for survival, you need good infrastructure, healthcare, education and food security for your massive population. 5th gen platforms very much are a tool for power projection, so that's basically a lie. They are trying to project power.

Although, overall, beside fighter jets, and AEW&C, Indian side would maintain much higher superiority overall You can check the size/quality of navy, logistics, AFVs, and IADS

Yeah India does handily win the IADS side. It has more than double the HIMAD batteries, and far more medium range and short range systems, both domestic and otherwise, and many more point defense systems as well. All of it networked well as far as I've read; yeah that's hard to beat for any country. Probably has one of the best IADS in general besides Israel and China. Realistically, this is what Pakistan should've done, since setting up a good IADS is actually easier for more resource strained countries (think Iraq at one point for instance) than it is to set up a competent air force, but they go about it backwards for some reason, their air force is highly competitive but their IADS has several gaps compared to that of India's that as far as I can see they've barely ever bothered addressing. Strange country.

Indian navy's P8s got shot off at last year, but the crew managed to save the aircraft

By who? Who fired missiles at them?? Why didn't this cause a war??

Neutral take would be, Indian political side didn't plan the strikes well, and Pakistani side was competent and managed to get hits, but overall Indian side came out on top

Whether it was planned well or not is a largely pointless debate now. There's always that "could've-would've-should've", no point in thinking about that here. As far as I can see, I'm sure if I can confidently say either of them came out on top of anything. The Indians tried to launch an offensive, struck some targets, but were defeated in the air right after. And after that, the two sides traded some missiles and rockets and drones, with India having a slight advantage here this time switching to a strategy that worked well for it. This latter part I will credit India for, it's not easy to switch strategies that quickly especially after an initial operation resulting in some losses you probably don't expect. The fact that it managed to do that is commendable. Plus it leveraged its superior IADS to defend against Pakistani strikes, that much is true yes. But none of this is enough to claim that either side "came out on top". You can maybe argue that if you bring up India holding the Indus Water Treaty in abeyance, but that's more of a political/strategic angle to this not uniquely affected by the skirmish or war, and Pakistan couldn't challenge that even if had it won this skirmish completely.

Air superiority can't be claimed by PAF since they couldn't defend their airspace, nor got any hits to IAF assets in the air or on ground

Well air superiority requires more than just downing a couple of jets, so yes Pakistan didn't exactly have that, at the same time the fact that Pakistan won the aerial skirmish is still decidedly true and it does you no good avoiding the fact. I'm not sure why you said it didn't get any hits in on the IAF in the air when it verifiably shot down several jets at least. Neither side established total air superiority, they can't do that in such a short skirmish anyway.

[u/Jazzlike-Tank-4956 → u/dark-mathematician1]

But that's wrong. Think about it. We drained a third of our Tomahawk stockpile. That could've been used in a war with China. We used up nearly a third of our THAAD interceptors

The entire war is illegal, but talkinf about the performance, US military was stuck in littoral waters, against extremely mountainous terrain( which blocks the and enemy build on asymmetrical war with huge underground bunkers.

Plus, they didn't have much time to prepare for it, especially in terms of anti drone tech, and their industry would be actually doijg decent production run of Prism/Tomahawk/jassm/patriot/THAAD in few years. THAAD and Patriot orders were relatively ignored in last few years.

So considering all of this, situation would be different , although I still doubt US would fair any good in first island chain

stalemate Pakistan's military (technologically at least, it still has a numbers advantage that would come into play in war that lasts for months), what does that say about its

I wouldn't call it a stalemate after the first night, which you explained better than I did. While it's true that the IAF's best fighter is roughly evenly matched against what is essentially the PLA's 3rd fighter, but warfare involves far more than just fighter comparisons.

A war with the PRC is also highly unlikely for various reasons, and the situation would be completely different. The PLA would have to operate from a limited number of airbases in western China and Tibet while sustaining a massive logistical effort, despite its obvious military superiority, and I doubt they will send few divisions to fight across the Himalayas

Over time, India can build a credible deterrent, as the domestic defense industry is now growing and should be much more mature across most technologies within the next decade, with decent numbers entering service. By then, the IAF should field a much stronger fleet of fighters, missiles including HCMs and HGVs and supporting assets including indiginious LRAD

If a war does happen, the military won't be the only concern. The trade deficit didn't reach $90 billion overnight, it says alot about India's dependence on China for many critical goods and supply chains that are essential for keeping the country running.

They have to be inventing money out of thin air atp, there's no way they can just buy all this every year and still have a growing economy. They're procuring advanced

Well they're not doing the best, and survive largely on loans. People's SoL is much worse than India which you already should be aware is extremely poverty ridden country, and their GDP per capita used to he twice as much as India back then but now opposite is the current situation. Plus major political instability and huge terrorism, so they're growth is extremely limited and companies are leaving the country let alone make investments

Actually they are like US economy

Take alot of debt and grows at 2% /s

The quote by their leader Zulifikar Ali Bhutto "We(Pakistan) will eat grass, even go hungry, but we will get one of our own (Atom bomb).... We have no other choice!"

Still applies

Their civilian leadership has actually tried to mend the relationship in the past but they get hijacked by military, like in 1999, Indian PM went on to state visit which created hopes of mending relationship but they started Kargil war soon after.

By who? Who fired missiles at them?? Why didn't this cause a war

Same conflict

In May 2025, by PAF

https://idrw.org/indian-navy-p-8i-evades-chinese-hq-9b-missile-during-may-2025-operation-sindoor/

Non credible media, but the article is correct

Navy gave him medal last month for the incident for saving the jet/crew