Army officer martyred, 3 terrorists killed in Balochistan's Awaran: ISPR
According to the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), the security forces conducted the operation on confirmed intelligence regarding the presence of terrorists. During the ensuing exchange of fire, the troops effectively engaged the terrorists' hideout, killing three militants.
Major Syed Rabnawaz Tariq, 34, a resident of Muzaffarabad, embraced martyrdom while leading his men from the front, the ISPR stated. 'The officer fought gallantly and paid the ultimate sacrifice for the motherland,' the statement added.
A sanitisation operation is underway to eliminate any remaining threats in the area.
'The security forces of Pakistan remain committed to eradicating the scourge of Indian-sponsored terrorism, and such sacrifices of our brave soldiers only strengthen our national resolve,' the ISPR said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Modi narrative: no takers
Listen to article Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is being slapped around by friends and foes alike, perhaps for the first time in his premiership. A parliamentary debate on Tuesday quickly saw the Modi government's propaganda around the Pahalgam attack and Operation Sindoor crumble, as Opposition Leader Rahul Gandhi and others slammed Modi's use of India's military for political optics and the disinformation campaign about all aspects of the war, which has made India's foreign ministry and media into laughing stocks. One opposition member said that Modi should prove his claim that no Rafale jets were shot down — a fact confirmed by international media and French officials — by having all 36 of India's Rafales lined up for a photo op. Gandhi said Modi should back up his claim that he did not agree to a ceasefire under US pressure by calling President Donald Trump a liar. And in a 'response' to the convenient claim that three "terrorists" recently killed in Kashmir were the Pahlgam attackers, Home Minister Amit Shah said he had solid evidence of a Pakistan connection, because the men allegedly had "Pakistani" chocolates in their possession. Later, one of the Pahlgam attack survivors — whose husband was murdered in front of her — also criticised Modi for failing to even once reference the 26 victims in whose name Operation Sindoor was conducted. Though she did not go as far as accusing him of using the victims' deaths for political gain, we will. For his entire political career, Modi has happily used the blood of his fellow Indians for political gain. Unfortunately, because of Modi's success at turning India into an oligarchy where all media is run by his billionaire allies and dissent is crushed through a combination of draconian laws and violent Hindutva mobs, most Indians are unaware of the world around them, including the fact that the Indian economy has severely underperformed, relative to what economists had projected before Modi took office, or that it is sliding on several human rights indicators. All the while, Modi remains unassailably popular and sits on his throne atop a tower of lies.
Express Tribune
an hour ago
- Express Tribune
Operation Mahadev and India's shifting role in South Asia
The writer is a public policy analyst based in Lahore. She can be reached at durdananajam1@ Listen to article India recently launched Operation Mahadev in Lidwas, near Srinagar, targeting militants allegedly involved in the April 22 Pahalgam attack. While the government called it a success, there is still no verified evidence linking those killed to the Pahalgam attack. This recurring gap between military actions and verifiable outcomes is eroding India's credibility, both domestically and internationally. What complicates matters further is the abrupt transition from Operation Sindoor to Operation Mahadev, not due to a strategic pause initiated by India, but because of a ceasefire — one reportedly brokered by the United States. This shift in the tempo of military actions highlights something deeper: India's discomfort in navigating a region where it is no longer the sole power broker. And that discomfort has only grown more visible as India struggles to balance its internal political narrative with external strategic realities. In the ongoing Monsoon Session of Parliament, the Pahalgam attack and India's retaliatory actions have sparked heated debate. Home Minister Amit Shah claimed those killed in Operation Mahadev were carrying Pakistani voter IDs and — oddly enough — Pakistani chocolates, as supposed proof of foreign involvement. But across the aisle, former Home Minister P Chidambaram cautioned against drawing premature conclusions. He pointed out that no independent investigation had yet established Pakistan's direct role in the Pahalgam attack. His remarks echoed concerns of many analysts who questioned whether India had once again rushed into a military response without solid ground. Rahul Gandhi added fuel to the fire, claiming that Indian pilots were given strict instructions not to engage Pakistan's defence systems, and that Islamabad had prior knowledge of the strike's limits. Whether these claims are fully accurate or politically motivated, they raised doubts over the true intent and efficacy of Operation Sindoor — was it a military response or a public performance? The four-day standoff between May 7 and May 11 brought South Asia to the brink. India claimed to have struck nine terror sites and disrupted eleven Pakistani air bases. Pakistan responded with Operation Bunyan-ul-Marsoos, claiming it had downed six Indian jets, including Rafales, and intercepted several drones. Then came a sudden ceasefire — not the result of bilateral talks, but reportedly due to US intervention. Former President Donald Trump didn't hesitate to take credit, claiming it was his diplomatic pressure that ended the hostilities. He even endorsed Pakistan's claim of shooting down Indian jets. Strikingly, New Delhi offered no rebuttal, no clarification, not even a token denial. That silence was more than a diplomatic gesture. It suggested an unease within India about how to handle its diminishing ability to control the narrative - both at home and abroad. India has long projected itself as South Asia's natural leader — economically, militarily and diplomatically. But in this episode, the heavy lifting to halt escalation came not from New Delhi, but from Washington. That exposed a growing dependency on Western partners to manage regional crises, calling into question India's cherished notion of "strategic autonomy." The broader message from this episode is that South Asia is no longer India's undisputed sphere of influence. The region has entered a new phase, where external actors like the US — and increasingly, China — shape events with more agility than India does. China, while officially silent during this latest crisis, remains a critical player. Its growing ties with Pakistan, military infrastructure in disputed regions and deep economic engagement with South Asian countries make it a strategic counterweight to India. While New Delhi focuses on containing Pakistan, Beijing continues to expand its footprint — not just in military terms, but also through economic corridors, port access and diplomatic alliances. India's strategic myopia risks ceding more ground to China than it can afford. India stands at a crossroads. Its aspiration to lead South Asia is real — and achievable. But that requires shifting from theatrics to transparency, from overstatement to credibility. Here's what New Delhi should consider moving forward: If military operations are to gain public and global support, India must present transparent, independently verifiable proof. That includes forensic intelligence, clear identification of targets and post-operation disclosures. The age of unquestioned nationalistic fervour is waning — citizens and allies alike demand facts. India needs to redefine what autonomy means in a multipolar world. Relying on US intervention, while convenient, cannot be the default. Strategic autonomy doesn't mean going solo; it means building coalitions that share your long-term vision. That includes mending ties with neighbours rather than attempting to dominate them. India's greatest challenge today is not Pakistan. It is in managing its own ambitions in a region that is no longer playing by the old rules. Operations like Sindoor and Mahadev may offer political capital in the short run, but true leadership will come only when India chooses clarity over confusion, and substance over showmanship.
Business Recorder
3 hours ago
- Business Recorder
India reacts to Trump's 25% tariff on exports to US
U.S. President Donald Trump announced on Wednesday a 25% tariff on goods imported from India starting August 1 and an unspecified penalty for buying Russian weapons and oil. Trump's decision dashes hopes of a limited trade agreement between the two countries, which had been under negotiation for several months. Here are some reactions: Madhavi arora, economist, emkay global 'While the negotiations seem to have broken down, we don't think the trade deal haggling between the two nations is over yet. We see it more from the lens of geopolitics than purely economics and see both sides striving to get the deal done, even as the power equations may change a bit in U.S. favour.' Ranen banerjee, partner of economic advisory, pwc India 'Higher tariffs for India compared to countries it competes with, for exports to the U.S., are going to be challenging. However, the expectation is that the trade deal is likely to be finalised shortly and hence the period of applicability of these higher tariffs could be short.' Nilesh shah, md kotak mahindra amc 'Despite the unpredictable policy making of the U.S., the market was expecting a tariff deal to work out as longer-term U.S.-India strategic interests are aligned. Markets will hope for a 'TACO' trade if better senses prevail. India, US trade talks face roadblocks ahead of tariff deadline, Indian sources say China is defying U.S./UN sanctions on Iran oil, Myanmar and Russia trade and North Korea support. Size and the competitiveness of the economy has its advantages. I hope and pray that this unilateral imposition should accelerate Indian policy making to be growth supportive. Our biggest deterrence continues to remain GDP size and competitiveness.' Agneshwar sen, trade policy leader, ey India 'The decision to raise the U.S. tariff to 25% on Indian exports is an unfortunate development, particularly given the strong strategic partnership that has been steadily built between India and the USA in recent years. However, it's important to note that both countries remain positively engaged in active negotiations with the U.S. team expected in India later in August to finalize a comprehensive trade agreement.' Kirit bhansali, chairman, gem and jewellery export promotion council India 'This is a deeply concerning development. The Indian gem and jewellery sector, in particular, stands to be severely impacted. The United States is our single largest market, accounting for over $10 billion in exports - nearly 30% of our industry's total global trade. A blanket tariff of this magnitude will place immense pressure on every part of the value chain. We recognise the need to address trade imbalances, but such extreme measures undermine decades of economic cooperation. We urge the U.S. administration to reconsider, and call on both governments to engage in constructive dialogue that safeguards bilateral trade and protects the millions of jobs that depend on it on both sides.' N. Thirukkumaran, general secretary of tiruppur exporters' association 'It is just a negotiation tactic. Trade negotiations are ongoing. The Indian government is tough on certain terms like agriculture and dairy — India isn't opening up. If it goes through, U.S. exports from the association will be affected, because Vietnam has lower tariffs. We will be losing our competitive edge. India prioritises national interest in US trade talks, trade ministry source says We are optimistic that an imminent trade agreement will be on the lines of the one with the UK. We have to wait and watch, and not panic. There is no reason to panic.' Garima kapoor, economist, institutional equities, elara securities, mumbai 'Overall, we continue to see a deal by end Q3 but, a kneejerk reaction in Indian asset classes is likely in the near term.' S.C. ralhan, president of the federation of Indian export organisations 'This is a major setback for Indian exporters, especially in sectors like textiles, footwear, and furniture, as the 25% tariff will render them uncompetitive in the US market against rivals from Vietnam, China, and elsewhere. However, we remain hopeful that both countries will work towards a bilateral trade agreement.' Avinash gorakshakar, director of research at profitmart securities 'Until the final document is released, it's all speculation. India is a large, attractive market that the U.S. cannot afford to ignore, so any move will ultimately be weighed against long-term interests. My sense is that the August 1 deadline may itself be flexible and India is unlikely to budge easily. In the short term, the announcement could trigger some selling pressure, but in the longer term, I expect the impact to neutralize. India's market attractiveness remains intact.' Colin shah, md, kama jewelry 'With U.S. being one of the key export destinations, this will severely impact the sectors like gems and jewellery that are heavily dependent on exports. Going ahead, we expect trade activities to remain muted with U.S. However, we also need to wait and watch how the situation unfolds.' Rahul mehta, chief mentor, clothing manufacturers association of India 'Having seen the several about turns on the tariff front in the case of other countries, I would not press panic buttons right now. But, if the proposed terms do come into effect, it will make our products 7% to 10% more expensive than some of our competitors, and it will certainly hurt our apparel exports to the U.S. India and US advance toward interim trade deal after four-day talks Fortunately, this set-back has come at the time when we have just signed an FTA with UK, and are proceeding rapidly with an FTA with EU.' Sakshi gupta, principal economist, hdfc bank, gurugram 'For now, the announcement of 25% tariffs is likely to cause volatility in the FX market with mounting depreciation pressure on the rupee. Although the RBI is likely to intervene tomorrow to tamp down the depreciation pressure.' Aditi nayar, chief economist, icra 'When the U.S. had initially imposed tariffs, we had lowered our forecast of India's GDP expansion to 6.2% for FY2026, presuming a tepid rise in exports and a delay in private capex. The tariff (and penalty) now proposed by the U.S. is higher than what we had anticipated, and is therefore likely to pose a headwind to India's GDP growth. The extent of the downside will depend on the size of the penalties imposed.' Ashok chandak, president, india electronics & semiconductor association 'The imposition of a 25% tariff by the U.S. on Indian goods will be short term. Indian electronics exports is a short-term challenge that could disrupt supply chains and dent price competitiveness. India does not have any major advantage compared to other Asian countries anymore if 25% tariff above baseline 10% is continued. However, it also underlines the urgency for India's electronics sector to diversify export markets, deepen domestic markets, develop Indian brands and products, and move up the value chain to reduce dependency on price-sensitive, tariff-exposed exports.' Rishi shah, partner and economic advisory services leader, grant thornton bharat 'Given the escalating rhetoric around Russia-Ukraine negotiations, some form of adverse development was anticipated… the specifics of the additional 'penalty' beyond the 25% tariff may determine the actual economic impact.' Harsha vardhan agarwal, president, federation of indian chambers of commerce and industry 'We hope that this imposition of higher tariffs will be a short-term phenomenon and that a permanent trade deal between the two sides will be finalised soon. The aim is to secure a beneficial pact rather than a hurried deal that gives short term benefit but may result in adverse outcomes in the long term. It is also important to note that India offers a large market for U.S. businesses and many of the large companies from the U.S. benefit from leveraging the demand as well as the skills and talent pool that we have to offer.'
