1. IMF loans have little to do with India. Look at who funds the IMF, check the money trail and the scheduled packages. What we ought to focus on is FATF.
2. There have been likely US assets hurt during op sindoor. US military has its own concerns and diplomacy cant alter a superpowers military needs. Do remember US has non-India related interests in Pakistan. Vis a vis west asia and Russia. It's well known fact that US uses pak as a base for ISR in that region. If diplomacy could outtrump US militarys own considerations.. we wouldn't have Taliban today. What we need in increased engagement between US forces and Indian military, to have an in with them. That too is a decades long endeavor and there's no lack of mistrust between IA and USF, given the history. Similarly, IA have a decades long in with Russian army, hence you see Indian Army optimising itself in past 3-4 years ever since russia-ukraine war started. Cause they are in touch with Russian counterparts and learning the evolving nature of warfare. If you have doubts, I would urge you to look at conferences and public anecdotes from senior officials of military.
3. Just look at history. The first active restriction from west towards pak military came in 2016. Which is essentially still in place. For the rest, don't buy into the narrative that Chinese systems are lacking. Pak just doesn't have the resources to acquire them or use them in the numbers required. And in west, only US can outclass Chinese systems which it will be hard pressed to provide to a Chinese infiltrated pak military-industry( whatever scale it is) and risk further leakage. And don't forget the israeli influence either. As if they will let pak have advanced weaponry. Even the F-16s pak got were below subpar compared to operated by US & Israel.
No European country is going to sell big ticket items to Pakistan, risking big purchases of India. And there are few who have the cutting edge tech which can have any effect on field ( France, Germany, UK very limited). So, focus on substance rather than anxiety and panic peddled by the same group which did nothing when it was their turn. Especially developing self reliance.
4. No surprises there. Good thing imo since it can lot fire under IAFs, DRDO, MoD, HALs *censored* to develop our own systems to counter them.
5. A very false assumption to make. Hydra, I don't know if you're doing it deliberately or really panicking/worrying. You need to know that there is world outside India. As much as pak would like to make it india centric to placate it's domestic population, only a fool or malicious interest in India will buy into that narrative actively.
Rather , just go through the thread made for it specifically, and you will find the real implications for us and the history of cooperation bw pakistani army and saudi royalty. Things just went from informal to formal.
As for NATO.. It's like saying NATO is formed to fight against NATO itself... None ( except pak) of the west asian muslim nations have primary enmity with India or israel even. There threat and enmity is within themselves. Shia fight sunnis, whabi ideology fights with others while small sectarian groups always keep it burning. Islam is very fragmented on ground.. even the idea of caliphate goes through conquest of other islamic nations. Not Christians, jews or Hindus. So, who will they form NATO against. Even OIC is more show than substance, otherwise a grouping of 57 nations filled with oil money would've far greater presence then they do now. All they've done is allowance of use by CIA to create a shadow network that even bypasses their royals.
6. Russia: A declining power? Two very interesting thing to note here.. first, not just a shadow off USSR.. but a resource constrained state with access to high end technology that we still lack. A nation which have been historically agreeable for sharing it, let alone now when we can get more for less. " The 100% ToT offer for Su-57E" has a reason behind it other than goodwill. And we haven't increased any cooperation.. it's all there since ages now. Look at substance.. not headlines. Second, very crucial factor is if we don't provide an option to Russia, then Russia and it's sensitive tech will go into Chinese control to an extent which will be impossible to take back in near term. Russia is still resisting where it matters. And Chinese are eyeing that cake. Abandoning Russia would be the biggest strategic disaster, not hedging against USA ( which so far haven't given anything which can be said transformational).
7. That would be your pov of you're inclined to believe so. But it rattles US. Remember, the fight is b/w USA & China. And don't underestimate the importance and paranoia Chinese held in US' intelligence and policy. Just look at their paranoid with Russia.. a declining power they can't not focus on, let alone China which is increasingly a threat to their security and economic interests. ( Deep sea exploration and west asia) . Rest, geo-politics is ever evolving. What's today will be different Tommorow, let's see how it unfolds. What we know for sure is that India is not a meek observer as before anymore. Participation means greater volatility but greater skin in the game and resources too.
Pak took part right after independence.. and it got rewarded which was unfortunately for them squandered by their ruling class.
And we know who is more likely to squander resources for personal gain in India.
8. A very deep security problem for India. But hardly what we can stop without taking it upon us and do US' bidding in the region vis a vis Myanmar against China. Not a very good idea. We have experience in dealing with US' base in our neighborhood but LLTE was a disaster.
Notwithstanding the fact that Bangladesh is also supposedly in talks with Chinese for reopening it's based near our chicken neck... Inviting dragon and the eagle in your own soil to fight.. lmao, as if that will turn out to be good. They don't even have the limited depth and foundation which pak has to survive it.
Rather than bending over backwards..
I believe we should criticise and hold our govt upto task on what it is doing to keep our northeast safe. That, I will say will be the right and proactive direction.
9. Yeah. The solution is make in India 2.0, increase purchasing power of Indians, build logistics. The solution is not, buying tons of corn and soyabean from US. Just look at how other nations got royally fked in their deals. Bangladesh is importing things it can hardly afford, vietnam is displaying its own citizens to pave way for Trump, pak is all there to see, EU will have to buy costlier energy and weapons when it's economy is already constrained due to double whammy from Russia & Chinese supply chains, japan imported "Rice"!!. Heck, even the quataris had to give a *censored*ing plane as gift made by us company with close association with Trump
. Imagine buying from someone and gifting it back to them, to get bombed. We can afford tarrifs but can't afford a bad deal. Short term vs long term. The opposition is testing govt mettle by trying to create domestic pressure and hoping it will slip up and sign a bad deal. The ones who made India-ASEAN FTA and consequences borne by India in long term. Too much idealism over realism.
Better scrutiny should be on India-UK FTA and it's detailed provisions. So let's wait for the whole document to be out for public. I like the India-EFTA deal though, but it comes with huge risk and reward scenario.
10. Yeah. It's another measure in maximum pressure for trade deal. Just got chabahar port waiver cancelled. US is leveraging it's cards right now. Who it will hurt more, remains to be seen and depends on domestic policy of government in utilising the talent and keep them in India.
H1-B visa is for skilled professional and pays good sum. Skills that sillicon valley can hardly replace without increasing their dependence on Chinese workers and risk further proliferation in such a contested race for ASI. Let alone US universities which will see their competitors edge them out. Hopefully, that infact will turn them towards opening a campus in India. Which India has liberalised very much and European, Australian unis already in works to open a campus here.
Look at zuckerberg's statement that he will rather lose hundreds of billions in bad investment than lose the AI race. The more market Chinese encroach, is less market for big tech.
Everything has nuances.. your points make for a great short term panic and proposed solution for short term benefits. But not the solution for long term. History is best example of it. And Congress the biggest example on what not to do.
. 
