Tripura police initiate investigation against former deputy chief for pro-Pakistan posts
States » East
Agartala, May 11 (UNI) Tripura police launched an investigation against a former Upa-Pradhan (Deputy Chief of Panchayat) of Nurpur village of Kailashahar in Tripura's Unokoti district for his pro-Pakistan post following a complaint lodged by Tripura Pradesh Congress on Saturday.
Police said the accused, Achhad Miah, was summoned to the police station and questioned for a long time. Although he deleted the post and sought mercy for the misdeed, police are investigating his connection to other countries and groups.
'He has been asked to appear at the police station daily until further notice,' police said.
The controversy erupted after Miah made social media posts that implicitly criticised India and praised Pakistan amid tensions between the two countries. The posts quickly went viral, triggering communal tension in the district. Kailashahar is the bordering town of Tripura where a large number of populations belong to the Muslim community, and the place remains tense.
Tripura Pradesh Youth Congress President Neel Kamal Saha had filed a formal complaint against Miah at West Agartala Police Station. Subsequently, saffron organisations also submitted complaints at the Kailashahar Police Station seeking action against him.
UNI BB ARN
More News
Wakro sisters dedicate Tezu Carnatic recital for armed forces & martyrs
11 May 2025 | 2:18 AM
Itanagar, May 10 (UNI) In a moving tribute to the nation's bravehearts, the Wakro Sisters - Ashapmai Dellang and Behelti Ama - dedicated their public recital in Tezu, Lohit district, to the Defence Forces and the martyrs who have laid down their lives defending India's borders.
see more..
All political parties in Manipur extend support to Armed Forces
11 May 2025 | 2:17 AM
Imphal, May 10 (UNI) Leaders representing various political parties extended support to the Armed Forces during a solidarity meeting held on Saturday at Raj Bhawan.
see more..
Amid Indo-Pak tension, Bihar districts bordering with Nepal put on high alert
11 May 2025 | 2:14 AM
Patna, May 10 (UNI) Bihar districts bordering with Nepal have been placed on high alert amid the heightened India-Pakistan tensions. Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar held a high level review meeting with senior officials of the districts concerned.
see more..
Arunachal Guv hosts 'Sarva Dharma Meet' at Raj Bhavan amidst 'Operation Sindoor'
11 May 2025 | 1:26 AM
Itanagar, May 10 (UNI) In a thoughtful and inclusive initiative, Arunachal Pradesh Governor Lt. General (Retd) K.T. Parnaik convened a 'Sarva Dharma Meet' at Raj Bhavan here on Saturday to promote unity and clarity in the wake of Operation Sindoor, India's recent counter-terror operation.
see more..
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
16 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Remaining S-400 defence system coming on time, says Russian envoy as he cites India-Pakistan conflict
Russian deputy ambassador Roman Babushkin to New India on Monday said India will receive the remaining regiments of the S-400 strategic air defence missile system by 2026, as scheduled. The S-400 missile system performed well in India's Operation Sindoor against Pakistan, intercepting Pakistani drones and missiles. There have been talks of an additional batch of the missile system. 'We heard that S-400 performed very efficiently during the situation between India and Pakistan,' Roman Babushkin told news agency PTI. Acknowledging that India and Russia have a long history of collaboration, Roman Babushkin said the air defence systems, 'according to what we are experiencing, the situation in Europe, here, this is one of the promising topics of our partnership in defence preparation in general'. "As far as my knowledge goes, the contract for the remaining S-400 units will be according to the schedule. We are open for a promotion of this partnership for the discussion of the expansion of dialogue on air defence system... I think it will be done in 2025, 2026," he added. India inked a $5.43 billion contract with Russia in 2018 for five regiments. Of the five, three have been deployed along the western and northern fronts, bordering Pakistan and China, respectively. India had received the first regiment in December 2021, while the second and third were delivered in April 2022 and October 2023, respectively. Re-christened as 'Sudarshan Chakra', the S-400 can detect, destroy hostile strategic bombers, jets, spy planes, missiles and drones at a range of 380 kilometres. Going by information shared by the Indian government, the acquisition was to be completed by 2023, The New Indian Express reported, citing unnamed sources. The S-400 system's delivery schedule got delayed due to the Russia-Ukraine conflict which affected supply chains and production, the report added. 'The S-400 Missile is a potent system in terms of its operational capability to provide a continuous and effective air defence system to a very large area. With the induction of this system, air defence capability of the nation will be significantly enhanced,' the ministry of defence had said in a statement in 2021. The S-400 system is capable of engaging multiple targets simultaneously, including aircraft, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles, at varying ranges and altitudes. It consists of three main components: missile launchers, a powerful radar, and a command centre. It is capable of targeting aircraft, cruise missiles, and even high-speed intermediate-range ballistic missiles. The S-400 is seen as a major threat by NATO members due to its impressive long-range capabilities. It can engage almost all types of modern combat aircraft.
United News of India
24 minutes ago
- United News of India
US envoy to Ukraine backs Putin's claims of NATO using Russia-Ukraine conflict as a proxy war
Washington/Kyiv/Moscow, June 2 (UNI) The US special envoy to Ukraine, Keith Kellog, in a surprising move backed Russian President Vladimir Putin's claim that NATO is using the ongoing war between the two countries, to wage a proxy war against Moscow. Commenting on the way Europe has been using the war, Keith in an interview with Fox News said 'Putin made these comments, 'if you are going to supply them (Kyiv) with weapons, we will continue to be part of the aggressor,'" he said, reports Russian-state-media-TASS. "And he (Putin) considers this a proxy war with NATO as well right now. And frankly, in a way it is. Look at what the Europeans nations have done with support. It is clearly Putin sees this." Russia had earlier issued staunch warnings to countries, that any supply of long-range missiles to Ukraine would make those nations active participants in the war, and therefore, potential targets for Russian counterattacks. This has particularly true for Germany, with the Kremlin repeatedly issuing warnings of stark retaliation to Berlin, if it even attempts to supply its Taurus missiles to Ukraine. Speaking about the progress of Russian-Ukrainian negotiations, Kellogg said as for Russia's term sheet for a memorandum the United States "have not got it yet." However, he said that after contacts with the Europeans in London, a 22-point document was prepared, which includes a ceasefire in the air, on land and at sea, but neither side was completely satisfied with it. Kellog further expressed his confidence in the Trump administration's ability to end the long-protracted war. "Yes, I am confident. If anyone can do it, it's US President Donald Trump. Everyone is working very hard to make that happen", the special envoy stated. According to TASS, back in 2024, Putin recalled the CSTO (Collective Security Treaty Organisation) summit in Moscow, where he had repeatedly warned that the use of long-range weapons from the West on Russian territory would mean direct involvement of NATO in the conflict. UNI ANV GNK
Indian Express
25 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Framing the narrative war against Pakistan
Nobody ever really wins the war of narratives. Each side tells its own story — shaped by perceived triumphs, real or imagined — and believes in the glory of its version. No one cares what the other side claims, unless one side was materially and visibly vanquished in a physical fight. That rarely happens. Sample this: As India began striking terror infrastructure across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir on May 7, Pakistan claimed it had shot down six Indian aircraft. India denied it. In fact, New Delhi refused to confirm any losses until last week, when the Chief of Defence Staff tacitly acknowledged that a jet (maybe more, unspecified) had been downed, but that 'the tactical mistake was remedied, and the plan reimplemented' — an implicit way of saying: 'It matters not what we lost, as long as we ultimately won.' The standoff ended in a ceasefire, with each side walking away convinced it had the better of the exchange. India believes it called out Pakistan's nuclear bluff; Pakistan insists it gave as good as it got — claims that remain unverifiable in the fog of war. Meanwhile, Pakistan says little about the pounding its airbases received in the Indian response. So steeped in denial is the country's military establishment that its Army Chief has assumed the rank of Field Marshal — an honorific that reveals more about narrative vanity than battlefield reality. For its part, Delhi is convinced it humbled Pakistan. Islamabad, however, couldn't disagree more. 'We have shattered India's illusion of superiority,' says Pakistan's PM. 'New Delhi has been taught a lesson in respecting the sovereignty of its neighbours.' Even Washington had its version of events. President Trump triumphantly claimed that he convinced both countries to back off. 'I talked trade with them,' he said. India denies it. Pakistan agrees. Who's telling the truth? Hard to say. Perhaps none of them care. Each sticks to its own version. Last week, seven multi-party Indian delegations visited global capitals to explain Delhi's position. Many in the West are sympathetic to India's position — its long-standing concerns about cross-border terrorism and Pakistan's duplicity in dealing with extremist groups. They recognise the provocations India faces and the public pressure on Delhi to respond. Even so, some take India's account with a pinch of salt. Yes, Pakistan was complicit in the Pahalgam terror attack — but why didn't India go after the real perpetrators? Why not share intelligence? Why the secrecy, the social media bans, the coyness in accepting losses, and the reluctance to engage with the international media? Back home, a few seem interested. Most people are content with the version of events presented to them. Perhaps that's the point of a good narrative — to remove the burden of inquiry, so the prevailing storyline is accepted, repeated, and quietly folded into national pride. And therein lies the rub. Narratives are, by their very nature, misleading. They mix fact, half-truth, and convenient fiction to produce a favourable picture. In the end, they mostly convince only the teller. You can believe deterrence has been restored — but it means little if your adversary doesn't agree. The deeper challenge lies in coming to terms with Pakistan's strategic culture. As Christine Fair, Professor at Georgetown University and a keen Pakistan watcher, has long argued, the Pakistan Army operates with an insurgent mindset. It wins simply by not losing. It thrives on confrontation and political relevance. That makes it almost immune to traditional deterrence logic. This is what India must keep in mind. The next time there's a provocation from Pakistan — and there might well be another — New Delhi would do well to resist the urge for political signalling. It's this compulsive need to cater to public opinion and control the narrative that often gets us into trouble. Showing resolve is tricky because it casts restraint as weakness and risks turning action into theatre. The smarter course is to hold fire, stay alert, and choose response over optics. For that, it's important to retain the element of surprise. In the days following the start of the operation, Pakistan's military claimed it had anticipated an Indian strike and was lying in wait. While the details remain unclear, Islamabad suggested it had adopted a restrained posture until Indian aircraft reportedly struck what it described as civilian targets, after which Pakistani forces retaliated by targeting Indian jets. Whether this sequence played out exactly as claimed is open to question. It's also unclear if not targeting the Pakistan military in the opening salvo was a strategic misstep. Yet the broader point stands: Military action, meant more as political messaging, is a risky undertaking. Combat aimed mainly at signalling, not effect, is almost always a mistake. It's worth bearing in mind that in conflicts like the four-day engagement in May, narrative dominance is an illusion. The real contest is not about who speaks loudest, but who adapts, who endures, and who denies the adversary what it wants most: Relevance. The writer is a retired naval officer and strategic affairs commentator based in New Delhi
