Russia backs Donald Trump's claim that he helped settle India-Pakistan conflict
Russian President Vladimir Putin and United States President Donald Trump during their recent phone call discussed the military conflict between India and Pakistan, which was halted due to the ' personal involvement ' of the Republican leader, a senior Moscow official said on Thursday.
Yuri Ushakov, a key aide to Putin, made the statement during a press briefing after the conversation between the two leaders on Wednesday, which lasted about 70 minutes.
This is the first time that Russia has spoken about Trump's role in halting the military conflict between the two countries. The US president has repeatedly claimed that he helped settle the tensions between India and Pakistan – an assertion that India has pushed back against.
Ushakov stated that the primary focus of the call between Putin and Trump was Russia's war with Ukraine. However, they also discussed other geopolitical developments, added the official.
'Additionally, the Middle East was discussed, as well as the armed conflict between India and Pakistan, which has been halted with the personal involvement of President Trump,' said Ushakov.
The tensions between New Delhi and Islamabad escalated on May 7 when the Indian military carried out strikes – codenamed Operation Sindoor – on what it claimed were terrorist camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
The strikes were in response to the terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam, which killed 26 persons on April 22.
The Pakistan Army retaliated to Indian strikes by repeatedly shelling Indian villages along the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir. At least 22 Indian civilians and seven defence personnel were killed.
On May 10, India and Pakistan reached an 'understanding' to halt firing following a four-day conflict.
New Delhi's announcement on the decision to stop military action came minutes after Trump claimed on social media that India and Pakistan had agreed to the ceasefire.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio had also claimed at the time that New Delhi and Islamabad had agreed to ' start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site'.
However, India has said that the decision to stop firing was taken bilaterally and that there was no intervention by the US. New Delhi has also maintained that ' the issue of trade did not come up ' in any discussion between Indian and US leaders.
On Thursday, the Congress asked Prime Minister Narendra Modi to issue a clarification about Trump's role in halting the conflict.
'President Putin's aide Yury Ushakov has just revealed that the four-day India-Pakistan conflict came up in the 75-minute telephonic conversation of President Putin and President Trump on June 4,' Congress leader Jairam Ramesh said on X. 'Mr Ushakov has let it be known that it was the personal involvement of President Trump that halted the armed hostilities between India and Pakistan.'
President Putin's aide Yury Ushakov has just revealed that the 4-day India-Pakistan conflict came up in the 75-minute telephonic conversation of President Putin and President Trump on June 4th. Mr. Ushakov has let it be known that it was the personal involvement of President…
— Jairam Ramesh (@Jairam_Ramesh) June 5, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
22 minutes ago
- Mint
How John Matthai became a leading light of economic policy in independent India
The biographer is a bit like the cat burglar, stealthily climbing up the scaffolding of a person's life, breaking in, surveying the assortment of riches and then leaving with only a few select, precious elements. This sounds easier on paper than in practice. The biographer starts his or her undertaking with an inherent handicap, given the limited access to a subject's life (especially if the subject is long deceased), and is forced to temper vaulting ambition with discretion. It is in the choice of things the author focuses on—the life lived and the circumstances surrounding that life—that determines what makes for a good biography. What finally makes a biography truly stand out is the craft of storytelling, transforming the tedium of chronology into a compelling narrative. Bakhtiar K. Dadabhoy's biography of John Matthai, Honest John, is an object study of how an author has to perform an intricate balancing act between the different elements of a subject's life: unspooling the various milestones, his professional progression, the contexts (economic, social and political) defining his professional choices and, finally, how the interplay between the subject's personal events, or emotional growth, determine some life choices or professional achievements. John Matthai is, admittedly, an interesting choice—independent India's first railways minister and its second finance minister—though charting his life holds myriad challenges and Dadabhoy's courageous enterprise manages to score on some counts but comes up empty on many others. Also reads: My mother, the family's memory-keeper Matthai's life became manifestly fascinating by first moving from the private sector to the government, and then becoming a core member of the policy circle that watched over the transition of India from a colony to an independent republic. Matthai had till then shifted from academia to policymaking before settling down at the Tata Group. As a professor of economics at Madras Presidency College, he was nominated to the Madras legislative council in November 1922, affording him first-hand experience in bridging the distance between theory and practice. This brought him to the notice of the Tata Group which pursued him and convinced him to join. Matthai's work on the Bombay Plan—drafted under the imprimatur of J.R.D. Tata and G.D. Birla, among others—had caught the attention of both Congress party leaders as well as the colonial administration. Matthai's graduation into national-level policymaking happened when he was invited to join the interim government in August 1946. It is here that Matthai bumped up against national politics, preparing him for long debates, contentious arguments and partisan broadsides against his policy choices. Initially approached for the finance portfolio, the political exigency of having to accommodate Muslim League's Liaquat Ali Khan forced Matthai to console himself with the industries and supply portfolio. From here to railway minister during independence, which literally had to transport the horrors of Partition across borders, and finance minister thereafter, Dadabhoy's biography is like a luxury train, affording readers a fleeting view of modern India's economic history as it passes by. Dadabhoy diligently excavates official memoranda, policy briefs, letters, Parliament records and debates to provide a glimpse of how a newly-formed republic, recovering from decades of surplus extraction while grappling with widespread poverty and the after-effects of a devastating communal carnage, was trying to craft a sustainable and equitable policy architecture. Statements from leaders with contesting views provide an interesting dynamic, showcasing some of the moral and ethical dilemmas in constructing a democratic, empathetic and secular republic from scratch. Matthai's biography as a vehicle provides an excellent vantage view. But herein lies the nub. There is a lot going on outside that is covered meticulously and, yet, the tumult and turmoil occurring inside the vehicle goes completely undocumented. This is a large, noticeable gap; Dadabhoy has fastidiously mounted flesh and bones to a skeletal framework but forgotten to add a soul to the end-product. It is this conspicuous omission that robs the biography of meaning. Writing about the art of writing biographies, specifically Lytton Strachey's biography of Queen Victoria, author Virginia Woolf had commented: 'Could not biography produce something of the intensity of poetry, something of the excitement of drama, and yet keep the peculiar virtue that belongs to fact—its suggestive reality, its own proper creativeness?" This 'suggestive reality" is perhaps the secret sauce that could have helped Honest John become a compelling narrative, instead of just an interesting read. For example, close to 100 pages are dedicated to tracing the debates, question-and-answers, budgetary allocations after Matthai joins the interim government and later assumes office as railways minister. It is an informative interlude, providing readers a view of India's modern economic history in the making. But, then, readers come away not any wiser about the dramatis personae, specifically John Matthai, scripting this important chapter in India's history. In the preface to American Prometheus, a biography of scientist Robert Oppenheimer, authors Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin confess that, 'It is a deeply personal biography researched and written in the belief that a person's public behaviour and his policy decisions (and in Oppenheimer's case perhaps even his science) are guided by the private experiences of a lifetime." There are multiple instances in Honest John which cry out for some understanding of Matthai's 'private experiences". The first, and most obvious, missing link in the book is the influence of Achamma Matthai. Apart from a perfunctory mention in the book as John Matthai's wife, Achamma deserved some more exposure. She was one of the early female graduates in India, having graduated with a bachelor of arts degree from St John's Diocesan College, Kolkata, in 1920. The relationship between Achamma and John needed to be explored in more granular detail and not the boilerplate statement, 'It proved to be a happy marriage". Achamma's influence on John Matthai's career trajectory, his professional choices and his moral journey looms over the book like some nebulous spirit, palpable yet undefined. This becomes evident in March 1944, when both John and Achamma are distraught after their daughter Valsa dies under mysterious circumstances in the US. This is soon after the Bombay Plan is announced and two years before Matthai resigns from the Tatas to join the interim government. The interim period is intensely important but Dadabhoy provides little for us to understand Matthai's state of mind, how he manages to tackle the demons or how the tragedy shaped his personality thereafter. In the foreword to the book, Matthai's daughter-in-law Syloo (married to Ravi Matthai) describes the man: 'Daddy was seen as being a formidable person, a man with a serious demeanour and an eminence which many thought precluded intimacy or even small liberties. But, at home, he was an entirely different person." In other words, Matthai, like everybody else, was human with the usual flaws and frailties. Dadabhoy provides a brief glimpse of the man's faultlines by recounting the episode where Matthai seeks Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru's intervention after Matthai's son reportedly runs over and kills a pedestrian in Allahabad. This is the only instance when readers catch sight of the great man's feet of clay; Dadabhoy's hands may have been forced here by an earlier book which first recounted the incident. But barring this single incident, there is scarce little to sketch out the man's personality. This shortcoming is perhaps born out of necessity. While Parliamentary records and inter-ministerial archives have become much more accessible, we do not know if Dadabhoy had similar luck with John Matthai's personal documents and letters. Also, to be fair to Dadabhoy, many of the people who knew Matthai personally have all passed on, adding another layer of insurmountable constraints. This biography, therefore, apart from being a valuable document for understanding how some of India's policy contours unfolded in the first decade after independence, adds little to the mystique of John Matthai as one of India's leading post-independent policy architects. The author is a senior journalist and author of Slip, Stitch and Stumble: The Untold Story of India's Financial Sector Reforms. He posts @rajrishisinghal 'Honest John: A Life of John Matthai': By Bakhtiar K. Dadabhoy, Penguin Random House India, 396 pages, ₹999 Also reads: India's growth and urban planning: On different planets
Mint
23 minutes ago
- Mint
How the cybertruck came to embody Tesla's problems
The bromance between Elon Musk and President Trump is ending at a difficult time for Tesla. The electric-vehicle maker lost roughly $150 billion of market value Thursday—its biggest ever drop—after the Tesla CEO and Trump traded insults. Sales of Teslas have slumped this year. Tariffs could disrupt the supply of key components. The sprawling Republican tax-and-spending bill would end tax credits for EV buyers. And Tesla's Cybertruck has been a disappointment. Musk set high expectations for the Cybertruck, telling investors it would be Tesla's 'best product ever." The angular, stainless steel pickup was supposed to generate buzz for Tesla by showcasing new technology and unlocking the lucrative truck market. Instead, it has become synonymous with Musk's polarizing stint in politics, exposing some owners to graffiti or middle fingers from other drivers. And its reputation has been tarnished among Tesla fans because of a spate of recalls and manufacturing issues that have resulted in cycles of repairs. In the U.S., the company sold fewer than 40,000 Cybertrucks in 2024—well below Musk's ultimate goal of 250,000 a year. In the first quarter of 2025, Tesla sold around 7,100 Cybertrucks in the U.S., according to registration data from S&P Global Mobility. Ford's F-150 Lightning pickup outsold it. In an effort to boost sales, Tesla has rolled out lower-price versions of the truck and started offering buyers incentives such as 0% financing and free upgrades. Almost as soon as the $100,000 Cybertruck hit the road, quality problems began to multiply. Reports on social media cited cracked windshields and spotting from so-called rail dust, orange discoloration similar to rust. In its first year, Tesla recalled the truck seven times to fix dangerous defects. In March, with large metal panels falling off the trucks, the tally rose to eight. Some of the quality problems were known and documented internally before the truck went on sale, including issues with the accelerator pad and windshield wiper that later triggered recalls, said former employees who worked on the Cybertruck. But there was pressure inside Tesla to get the truck to market quickly, according to these employees. Tesla didn't respond to requests for comment. 'Elon Musk will tell you the biggest professional mistake was the falcon doors on the Model X," said David Fick, a longtime Tesla owner who got his Cybertruck in March. He referred to the complex door design that opens upward and hinges at the roof. 'I believe that the Cybertruck is going to go down as an even bigger corporate stumble." The retired banker in Boynton Beach, Fla., chose to wait more than a year to buy his Cybertruck, hopeful that many of the biggest issues would be identified before he drove his off the lot. 'They do a lot of bleeding-edge stuff where they rush to the market and then you're a beta tester as an owner," Fick said. He paid about $72,000 for the car, plus $7,300 for window tinting and a custom wrap for exterior trim panels known as cant rails, covering his new car in a metallic maroon color. Soon after, Tesla recalled cant rails because they could become unglued. 'I've had tons of recalls on my Teslas over the years," said Fick, who added that the cars are worth the hassle. 'Eighty percent were fixed by [software] updates, but these are physical things we are dealing with now." Musk unveiled the prototype for the Cybertruck in 2019. At the time, he said it would cost $39,900, with a battery range of up to 500 miles—an ambitious combination that would be a stretch for any EV maker. Work on the vehicle was delayed a couple of years, leaving engineering and manufacturing teams with only a few months to do final testing before the trucks went to customers, former employees said. Musk tried to temper expectations around how quickly Tesla could increase production, given its unique design. 'There is always some chance that Cybertruck will flop, because it is so unlike anything else," he wrote on social media in July 2021. Still, he promoted some of its most unusual features, including his dream of making the car amphibious. Former employees said they took Musk's social posts as orders, but the engineering proved difficult. By 2022, it was clear internally that Cybertruck wouldn't be able to meet all Musk's criteria, so engineers scrapped an early design and started over—developing a smaller, landlocked version of the truck, the people said. After about a year and a half of testing, Tesla delivered the first Cybertrucks to a dozen or so customers in late November 2023. An early version of the truck started at $100,000 and had an estimated range of 318 miles. Two months later, Tesla issued its first recall on the vehicle: a software update that required the company to increase the size of the font on a warning system used across its fleet. It was the first of three recalls that Tesla addressed on the Cybertruck through over-the-air updates to its software. Cybertruck's problems couldn't be fixed by software updates alone. In April 2024, Tesla issued a recall for the accelerator pedal. The company had received a notice from a customer complaining that the accelerator had gotten stuck. Tesla found that the pad attached to the long pedal could dislodge and get stuck in the trim above the pedal, causing the car to accelerate. An internal investigation found the issue was the result of an 'unapproved change," in which Tesla employees used soap as a lubricant to attach the pad, according to the recall notice. Inside Tesla, the accelerator pad had been a known issue starting with the prototype, according to an employee who worked on the part. The manufacturing team also identified the part as problematic, this person said. Tesla also had problems with the Cybertruck's expansive windshield, which measured nearly 6 square feet. Sometimes the heavy glass would break, two employees said. The glass either arrived cracked from the supplier in Mexico or from handling at the Austin, Texas, facility, they said. Some owners took to social media to describe the glass cracking as soon as they drove off the lot, or while they wiped the inside of their windshield. The windshield required a large windshield wiper measuring 50 inches long. In June 2024, Tesla issued a recall on the wipers, whose motors Tesla found had been overstressed by testing. The wiper had been flagged nearly a year before, two people who worked on the Cybertruck said. It was one of the first issues identified on the vehicles, at which point it was classified as a 'gating issue," which meant that it needed to be resolved before production could move forward. Reid Tomasko, a 25-year-old YouTube creator, took his Cybertruck on a cross-country trip, during which it performed perfectly, he said. Then came winter in New Hampshire. He was driving near his home in Lebanon, N.H., in February when a metal panel flew off the side of his truck. In March, Tesla issued a recall affecting most of the Cybertrucks it had produced—more than 46,000. The problem involved adhesive that could become brittle in extreme weather, causing exterior trim panels called cant rails to dislodge. Inspecting his truck, Tomasko said he found loose connections on almost every panel that used the adhesive, including the large pieces of stainless steel over the rear wheels, the front fender and the front doors. 'I was wondering, why are they not recalling the other panels?" Tomasko said. After replacing several panels, Tesla offered to buy back Tomasko's truck for nearly all of the $102,000 that he paid, he said. He accepted. 'I am planning on getting a newer one for cheaper soon," he said. Write to Becky Peterson at
Indian Express
23 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Trump vs Musk: Call the breakup poetic justice. Call it karmic crypto-collapse. Just don't call it surprising
Some alliances hum like clockwork. Others tick like time bombs. This one? It was always a countdown. When two men believe the world revolves around them, it's only a matter of time before their orbits collide. And when they do, the explosion isn't quiet. Rather, it's a full-blown Twitter meltdown with echoes loud enough to rattle both Wall Street and Mar-a-Lago. And boy, we are watching the best cosmic collision since Pluto got downgraded. Welcome to the spectacular implosion of the Trump–Musk bromance. What began as a mutual admiration society of billionaire chest-thumping and red-hat flirting has now devolved into the kind of public breakup even the Real Housewives would find a bit too messy. Let's rewind. Once upon a time, in the golden age of post-truth politics, Elon Musk, the tech messiah, meme lord, and part-time Mars enthusiast, decided to dip his toes into political kingmaking. A neat little $277 million was funnelled into the Donald Trump campaign machinery. In any other part of the world, this would be called oligarchic meddling. In the United States, it's called 'Super Tuesday'. Trump, ever the transactional romantic, reciprocated by giving Musk a cosy seat at the regulatory table named DOGE, where he could quietly dismantle watchdogs, neuter climate policies, and make capitalism great again (for Tesla stock). Love was in the air. Or maybe, it was just the fumes from Musk's Boring Company flamethrowers. But like all ill-fated love stories, this one came with red flags. Musk's reputation, once burnished with visions of space colonies and clean energy, began to crumble under the weight of layoffs, lawsuits, and livestreamed tantrums. Turns out, being the adult in the room is hard when you're too busy rebranding Twitter into an unpronounceable algebra problem. Enter phase two: Reputation rehab. Suddenly, Musk was 'distancing' himself from the Trump administration. He quit councils, tweeted vaguely progressive things, and flirted with the idea of centrism, all while pretending he hadn't spent the past four years quietly enjoying deregulation like a raccoon in a trash buffet. But this Thursday? The façade shattered. In a tweet that will one day be studied in both communications courses and FBI depositions, Musk posted: 'Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files.' He even had the gall to add: 'Have a nice day, DJT!' That wasn't a mic drop. That was a nuke in 280 characters. And let's be honest: If anyone was going to try to cancel someone else using Jeffrey Epstein, it was always likely to be Musk. Trump, unsurprisingly, didn't take it well. His reply was less subtle than a red tie in a wind tunnel: Musk is 'crazy,' and perhaps more worryingly for SpaceX investors, he threatened to cut off government contracts. Suddenly, two men who once shared bromantic photo ops and mutual disdain for accountability were hurling legal threats across a billion-dollar battlefield. Kanye West (of course) tried to play counsellor, tweeting something along the lines of 'bros don't fight, we love you both'. Unfortunately, love is dead and so is Kanye's credibility. And yet… are we really witnessing the final act? Let's not forget: Trump has made up with worse. Just ask Marco 'sweaty little man' Rubio or Ted 'your wife is ugly' Cruz. With Trump, personal insults are just foreplay. It's politics as WWE: Everyone's bleeding, but it's still part of the script. Still, there's something deliciously different this time. This feud doesn't feel like kayfabe. It feels real. Real messy. Real vindictive. Real stupid. And that makes it… kind of beautiful? Because if 2025 is going to be yet another parade of rich men yelling into microphones about how oppressed they are, the least we can ask for is a little entertainment. Preferably the kind that ends in lawsuits and meme wars. So, grab your popcorn. Watch the world's richest man implode on the platform he owns, while being roasted by the guy he helped elect. Call it poetic justice. Call it karmic crypto-collapse. Call it what you will. Just don't call it surprising. After all, in the immortal words of the internet, 'This you?'
