Completely agree. The Rafale and CE are closely enough matched that the rest of the network resulted in those differences becoming negligible. If IAF flew CE and PAF flew Rafales, PAF would still have won.
Yep... GCAP is the trap. Indian aerospace would be out of the fight for another generation if they pick the GCAP route but their insecurity and pride in possessing "top of the line" weapons even if foreign will mean they pick GCAP.
AMCA would take them another 15 years to complete to LRIP give or take 5 and another 15 years to complete orders for. By then Chinese 7th gen would have a decent chance at being in prototyping. They will never pick AMCA as a focus of resources. It'll be one more of the pandering line for domestic MIC while pouring the lion share of resources into buying 5x overpriced foreign warplanes.
GCAP wouldn't be so controversial of an investment if the consortium that is tasked with developing it had a track record of developing and manufacturing multiple aviation projects of the "high-end" tier. Only BAe and Leonardo have experience with this sort of thing (Eurofighter), but even with that factored in, sharing the development/R&D with Mitsubishi (and potentially HAL) adds a new level of complexity to the entire project. In that regard, France made the correct decision to pull out of the Eurofighter program in its early phase and proceed with its own in-house project that ultimately became the Rafale.
I actually do think that AMCA should be the main focus of the IAF. It is the only project that won't face the prospect of near-term obsolescence when it enters service according to its planned timeline. It may be a tough road ahead but one that the IAF and HAL should take given the valuable experience that the project offers even in the eventuality of failure. They could really give the project a boost if they would hold off on purchasing off-the-shelf foreign airframes and reappropriate the funds to the AMCA development team instead.