PIB debunks fake claim that Pakistani forces destroyed India's S-400 defence system
Fact check by PIB
NEW DELHI: The
Press Information Bureau
(PIB) on Saturday debunked the
fake news
claiming that Pakistan destroyed India's air defence system S-400.
In a post shared by the Brics news, it was claimed that S-400 was destroyed by Pakistani armed forces, which was absolutely fake.
"S-400 Destroyed by Pakistan? Here's the Truth! Posts circulating on social media claim that Pakistan has destroyed an Indian
S-400 air defence system
.
Operation Sindoor
India's air defence systems shoot down Pak drones in J&K, Punjab & Rajasthan
India-Pakistan tensions: Delhi airport issues travel advisory
Operation Sindoor: Multiple explosions heard at several Pakistan air bases
This claim is FAKE. Reports of destruction or any damage to an S-400 system are baseless," the PIB posted on X.
PIB fact check
India used the
S-400 Sudarshan Chakra
defence missile systems to take down Pakistani drones and missiles fired towards Indian cities, thwarting Islamabad's attempt to damage military installations.
India's Integrated Counter-UAS Grid and Air Defence systems successfully neutralised multiple attempted attacks, preventing any damage to Indian assets. Officials confirmed that debris from Pakistani drones and missiles was recovered at several locations, serving as concrete evidence of the assault.
What is S-400 Sudarshan Chakra?
The S-400 "Sudarshan Chakra" is an Indian name given to the S-400 Triumf air defence missile system acquired from Russia. The term "Sudarshan Chakra" draws from the Epic Mahabharata, symbolising precision, speed, and lethal capability, qualities that closely reflect the S-400's operational strengths.
Developed by Russia's Almaz-Antey, the S-400 is among the most advanced
long-range surface-to-air missile
systems in the world. India signed a $5.43 billion deal with Russia in 2018 to procure five S-400 units, with the first system deployed in Punjab in 2021 to bolster defences against threats from Pakistan and China.
The S-400 can engage aerial targets at ranges of up to 400 km and detect threats as far as 600 km away. It supports four different types of missiles, enabling it to target everything from aircraft and drones to cruise and ballistic missiles.
Equipped with sophisticated phased-array radar, the system can track over 100 targets simultaneously and is mounted on mobile launchers for rapid repositioning. The deployment of the S-400 significantly strengthens India's multi-layered air defence capabilities, offering a strategic edge in protecting key military and civilian assets. It is widely regarded as a game-changer in South Asia's aerial defence landscape.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
30 minutes ago
- Hans India
Pakistani army acts as custodian of ideologies, religion: Former diplomat DP Srivastava
Former Indian diplomat D.P. Srivastava stated that Pakistan's Army challenges the concept of sovereignty by acting as a custodian of ideologies and religion, rather than focusing on national frontiers like the military forces of other nations. Srivastava also slammed the radical Islamist ideology in Pakistan, which pits the nation against its neighbouring countries, including India. In an interview with IANS, the former diplomat also talked about Pakistani Army's Field Marshal General Asim Munir's April 16 speech, just days before the Pahalgam terror attack, in which 26 innocent people lost their lives at the hands of terrorists belonging to The Resistance Front (TRF), an offshoot of Pakistan-based terror outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba. He hailed Operation Sindoor and said that it reflected a major shift in India's security doctrine. He also commented on Prime Minister Narendra Modi's G7 invite. The following are the excerpts from the interview: IANS: Could you tell us something about your book "Pakistan -- Ideologies, Strategies and Interests"? D.P. Srivastava: My postings took me to Karachi, Pakistan, and the early 1990s. I dealt with Pakistan, among other issues, in the UN division of the Ministry of External Affairs for eight years in the '90s, and during this, I dealt with Kashmir talks to the Pokhran nuclear test and Kargil. The inspiration for the book came from my posting to Karachi, where I heard the phrase 'Nazaria-e-Pakistan', which means the ideology of Pakistan. This is the very phrase used by Gen Munir, who mentioned this in his speech on April 16, days before the Pahalgam terror attack. My book traces the interpretation of ideology and elite interest in the making of Pakistan's domestic and foreign policy. IANS: What is the ideology of Pakistan? Gen Asim Munir mentioned "superior ideology" and the two-nation theory in his speech on April 16. What is this ideology? D.P. Srivastava: The ideology of Pakistan remains vague due to various influential factors within the country. In 1972, two provincial governments were dismissed, and the principal opposition party, the National Awami Party, was banned after the Supreme Court of Pakistan stated that the party was contrary to the ideology of Pakistan. Notably, this occurred before the formation of the country's new constitution, indicating that the ideology preceded the Constitution in Pakistan. There are different views of what this ideology is. Iqbal, who is known as the best explainer of Pakistani ideology, said that in Islam, religion and state are integral to each other, so he ruled out the idea of secularism, and he also opposed the idea of nationalism. Iqbal also stressed the concept of Umma, which is pan-Islamism, and these are the concepts at the root of Pakistan's current trouble where the jihadi groups do not accept the supremacy of the Parliament, the sovereignty of which, is also challenged by the Army. The jihadi philosophy has always pitted Pakistan against its neighbours, including, what they call "the Hindu India, Shia Iran, and Sunni Afghanistan". IANS: What is the mindset of the Pakistan Army? D.P. Srivastava: To understand the mindset Pakistan Army, one should go back to Gen Asim Munir's April 16 speech, where he reminded his Pakistani audience that they belong to a superior ideology. What is this ideology, one may ask? (Former Pakistani President) Ayub Khan described it as Islam. It is very strange that the Pakistani army chiefs talk about ideology and Islam. In other nations, the armies protect the national frontiers, while in Pakistan, the army has become a custodian of ideologies and religion. Seems like Gen Munir has assumed the priest and a general. The Pakistani army has institutionalised its role in the running of the government, where the civilian parties have taken the backseat. This mindset is also reflected in the neglect of socioeconomic indicators. Pakistan's army regards itself as the state, and it has this mindset has led to excessive defensive expenditure to the neglect of economic indicators. IANS: How do you see Operation Sindoor? Is it part of a larger strategic shift in India's security policy against Pakistan-sponsored cross-border terrorism? D.P. Srivastava: Operation Sindoor represents a strategic shift in India's security doctrine, as the Prime Minister has underlined. Pakistan has used the threat of escalation to the nuclear level in the case of India's conventional response to subconventional threats like terror attacks. This time, however, there was no statement from the Pakistani side about nuclear escalation during Operation Sindhoor. So Pakistan's bluff has been called, that it cannot escalate a local conflict or deter India from a military response to a terror attack, and this is a major shift in the paradigm. It also sends a message to the global community that India will exercise its right of self-defence, and we have the strength to do so. We did that in a very responsible manner. We avoided escalation. The escalation came mostly from the Pakistani side. India's initial strike was only against the terror camps. We avoided hitting any Pakistani, civil or military installation. It was Pakistan which attacked Indian Air Force bases, and that forced India to attack Pakistani military installations, and that brought Pakistan quickly to its knees. The Pakistani DGMO called his Indian counterpart, begging for a ceasefire. This message has also gone home and has been understood well by the international community. IANS: Prime Minister Modi has accepted an invitation by Canadian PM Mark Carney to the G7 Summit. Do you think this will help mend the strained India-Canada ties? D.P. Srivastava: The Prime Minister has accepted the invitation to go to the G7 summit. So the focus will be on global issues, not on bilateral relations. But, of course, when the leaders meet, they discuss the entire range of issues, and this will be a good opportunity to bring the bilateral relations back on an even keel. We had good relations with Canada, and I believe, there's a better understanding of the Indian position in the new government there, about the impact of terrorism. And, I think the new government is unlikely to use these incidents as an electoral card. So we hope that this visit will bring about a clearer understanding between the two countries.
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Pakistan's Washington Outreach Against India Backfires: Public Humiliation, Zero Traction
Last Updated: Rebukes from US officials to being grilled over its human rights, Pakistan's latest diplomatic adventure opened a can of worms, leaving behind bigger mess than it set out to clean Pakistan's latest outreach to Washington, led by former foreign minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, was meant to counter India's global campaign to expose Islamabad's role in cross-border terrorism. But it backfired. What unfolded was a series of public embarrassments — from being scolded by US lawmakers, to being fact-checked by a journalist at the UN, and being completely ignored on key agenda items like the Indus Waters Treaty. After India announced a cross-party delegation to multiple countries to build consensus against Pakistani terrorism, Islamabad rushed to mount a smaller, reactive mission focused on the United States. The aim was to challenge India's narrative, whitewash Pakistan's use of terror as state policy, and project itself instead as a victim of terrorism. But the strategy was flawed. The facts were on India's side, not Pakistan's. What followed was a series of public relations disasters for Islamabad. Let's start with US Congressman Brad Sherman. Having met the Pakistani delegation, Islamabad expected support. Instead, Sherman publicly demanded on X (formerly Twitter) that Pakistan eliminate Jaish-e-Mohammed — the terror group responsible for the brutal 2002 murder of journalist Daniel Pearl, who was Sherman's own constituent. 'Pakistan should do all it can to eliminate this vile group and combat terrorism in the region," Sherman posted. This wasn't a private remark — it was a public rebuke. But Sherman didn't stop there. He raised the continued imprisonment of Dr Shakil Afridi — the physician who helped the US locate Osama Bin Laden. 'Freeing Dr Afridi represents an important step in bringing closure for victims of 9/11," he said. On water disputes, Sherman made an even more telling statement: 'China should not nick India's water, India should not nick Pakistan's water, and Pakistan's Punjab should not nick Sindh's water." That exposed the hypocrisy of Pakistan's position on water-sharing, not just regionally but domestically. Sherman then landed a final blow — highlighting Pakistan's persecution of minorities. 'Christians, Hindus, and Ahmadiyya Muslims living in Pakistan must be allowed to practice their faith and participate in the democratic system without fear of violence, persecution, discrimination, or an unequal justice system." For years, Pakistan has managed to escape serious scrutiny on such human rights violations. A direct and public critique from a senior U.S. lawmaker marks a sharp shift — and should serve as a warning. Sherman also spotlighted one of Pakistan's most suppressed issues: enforced disappearances in Sindh. 'For years, the people of Sindh have faced political repression through enforced disappearances and extrajudicial killings. Since its founding in 2011, Pakistan's own Human Rights Commission has documented over 8,000 such cases, many of which have never been properly investigated," Sherman said. Talk about opening a can of worms. Islamabad had more to worry about than just diplomatic messaging — it now faced the international spotlight on its own governance failures. Meanwhile, the Pakistani delegation's attempt to raise the Indus Waters Treaty got no traction. Their plea to pressurize India over hydropower projects on the western rivers was met with silence. No statements. No pressers. Not even polite acknowledgement. The U.S. wasn't buying it — a clear signal that Washington no longer has time for Pakistan's grievance theatre. Then came another embarrassment. At a press conference at the United Nations, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari attempted to portray India as anti-Muslim, only to be corrected by a journalist. 'Sir, I've watched briefings from both sides. Muslim military officers were conducting the briefing for India," the journalist pointed out. Caught off guard, Bhutto simply nodded and admitted, 'As far as the operations are concerned, you're absolutely right." Humbled in seconds — a symbolic moment in a trip that offered Islamabad little more than a diplomatic scolding. But true to form, Pakistan didn't retreat or reflect. Instead, it doubled down. In yet another blunder, Bilawal Bhutto defended Hafiz Abdur Rauf — the man seen leading funeral prayers after India's Operation Sindoor airstrikes targeted terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Bhutto claimed Rauf merely shared a name with a designated terrorist. However, Pakistan's own military media wing, ISPR, released a CNIC that directly matched U.S. Treasury records, confirming Rauf's identity and his role in the Lashkar-e-Toiba-linked Pakistan Markazi Muslim League (PMML), a party designated as a terror proxy by the U.S. in 2018. Few individuals, as per the US Treasury, are more integral to LeT's fundraising than Rauf. Yet Pakistan chose to defend him. Finally, in a bizarre twist, Bilawal Bhutto floated the idea of cooperation between India's RAW and Pakistan's ISI. 'I am completely confident that if ISI and RAW sat down to work together, we'd see a significant drop in terrorism on both sides," he said. A strange proposition, considering Pakistan's long record of harbouring terror outfits — 83 proscribed organisations at last count, with 45 still active. These include transnational networks like the Haqqani Network, ISKP, and al-Qaeda, alongside India-focused groups like Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed. Most operate with the knowledge — if not direct support — of the Pakistani state and military. The only group that consistently targets Pakistan is the Tehreek-e-Taliban — a blowback of Islamabad's own strategic games. So far, Pakistan has used diplomatic platforms to either deny or deflect these truths. But it is becoming more and more difficult for the world to overlook Pakistan's brazen support of terror. Even the religion card is being declined. Trying to play the religion card, the Pakistani embassy even asked Malaysia to cancel all ten events scheduled by India's delegation. 'We are an Islamic country, you are an Islamic country," the embassy pleaded. Malaysia declined the request. All ten events went ahead as planned. Humiliation. Public embarrassment. Strategic disgrace. Operation Sindoor has left a giant crater in Pakistan's global image—a blemish no amount of denial, whitewashing or spin can conceal. It's karma in all its glory and it has been duly noted by the world. Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: June 08, 2025, 18:38 IST News opinion Pakistan's Washington Outreach Against India Backfires: Public Humiliation, Zero Traction | Finepoint
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
US trade team extends India stay as talks gather momentum
A US trade team that's currently in India for negotiations has extended its stay, according to people familiar with the matter, in a sign talks are progressing ahead of a July deadline. The team, which was initially scheduled to hold talks with Indian officials on June 5-6, will now be staying till Tuesday to continue discussions, the people said, asking not to be identified because the information isn't public. Most of the issues may get finalized within a week, the people estimated. India and the US are working on a phased trade deal with an early agreement targeted for July, the deadline for implementation of the so-called reciprocal tariffs. At the same time, those tariffs are facing legal challenges in Washington. India's Commerce Ministry and the US Trade Representative's office in Washington didn't respond to email requests for comment outside of regular business hours. Local Indian media earlier reported the extension of the visit. Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal described his meeting with US counterpart Howard Lutnick during a visit to the US in May as 'constructive.' Earlier this month, Lutnick said he's 'very optimistic' about prospects for a trade deal between the US and India 'in the not-too-distant future.' India was one of the first countries to begin negotiating a trade deal with the US, hoping to avert President Donald Trump's reciprocal tariffs, which are scheduled to kick in on July 9. The talks come against the backdrop of recent statements by Goyal in Paris on June 1, where he outlined that India and the United States are working toward providing preferential market access to their respective businesses. On Trump's plan to increase tariffs on steel and aluminium to 50%, Goyal told ANI that both countries remain committed to addressing trade issues through bilateral dialogue. "Let us wait and watch... both the US and India share good relations and we will continue to work together to resolve all these issues bilaterally," Goyal said.
