logo

Newscast India and Pakistan Agree Ceasefire

BBC News10-05-2025

Today, we look at the ceasefire agreement between India and Pakistan.
The US President Donald Trump announced the news to the world via social media and it was his secretary of state and vice president doing the mediation.
International editor Jeremy Bowen joins Laura and Paddy to talk about how the agreement was reached.
They also talk about a possible ceasefire in Ukraine, where European leaders including UK PM Keir Starmer are meeting today. They're asking Russia to stop attacks for 30 days from Monday.
You can now listen to Newscast on a smart speaker. If you want to listen, just say "Ask BBC Sounds to play Newscast'. It works on most smart speakers.
You can join our Newscast online community here: https://discord.gg/m3YPUGv9
New episodes released every day. If you're in the UK, for more News and Current Affairs podcasts from the BBC, listen on BBC Sounds: https://bit.ly/3ENLcS1
Newscast brings you daily analysis of the latest political news stories from the BBC. It was presented by Laura Kuenssberg and Paddy O'Connell. It was made by Chris Flynn with Rufus Gray. The technical producer was Michael Regaard. The weekend series editor is Chris Flynn. The assistant editor is Chris Gray. The editor is Sam Bonham.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Has Ukraine proved Trump wrong?
Has Ukraine proved Trump wrong?

Sky News

time32 minutes ago

  • Sky News

Has Ukraine proved Trump wrong?

👉Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim on your podcast app👈 This week, Richard and Yalda talk about 'Operation Spiderweb' - the Ukrainian drone attack that is being described by some analysts as 'Russia's Pearl Harbor'. How did Ukraine pull this unprecedented attack off? Where does this leave peace talks? And how might President Putin respond? Richard and Yalda also reflect on the difficulties of not being able to report from inside Gaza. Israel has previously said it has escorted journalists to Gaza to allow them to report safely. Yalda also dissects the Gaza special programme she fronted and dissects two of the interviews she did. One which saw a former UN humanitarian chief use the word genocide to describe Israel's actions in Gaza, and the other which saw a heated debate with Netanyahu's former adviser. You can watch Yalda's special programme here: Episodes of The World With Richard Engel And Yalda Hakim will be available every Wednesday on all podcast platforms.

Expanding missile threats and airspace closures are straining airlines
Expanding missile threats and airspace closures are straining airlines

Reuters

time40 minutes ago

  • Reuters

Expanding missile threats and airspace closures are straining airlines

NEW DELHI, June 4 (Reuters) - Proliferating conflict zones are an increasing burden on airline operations and profitability, executives say, as carriers grapple with missiles and drones, airspace closures, location spoofing and the shoot-down of another passenger flight. Airlines are racking up costs and losing market share from cancelled flights and expensive re-routings, often at short notice. The aviation industry, which prides itself on its safety performance, is investing more in data and security planning. "Flight planning in this kind of environment is extremely difficult … The airline industry thrives on predictability, and the absence of this will always drive greater cost," said Guy Murray, who leads aviation security at European carrier TUI Airline ( opens new tab. With increasing airspace closures around Russia and Ukraine, throughout the Middle East, between India and Pakistan and in parts of Africa, airlines are left with fewer route options. "Compared to five years ago, more than half of the countries being overflown on a typical Europe-Asia flight would now need to be carefully reviewed before each flight," said Mark Zee, founder of OPSGROUP, a membership-based organisation that shares flight risk information. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the Middle East since October 2023 led to commercial aviation sharing the skies with short-notice barrages of drones and missiles across major flight paths – some of which were reportedly close enough to be seen by pilots and passengers. Russian airports, including in Moscow, are now regularly shut down for brief periods due to drone activity, while interference with navigation systems, known as GPS spoofing or jamming, is surging around political fault lines worldwide. When hostilities broke out between India and Pakistan last month, the neighbours blocked each other's aircraft from their respective airspace. "Airspace should not be used as a retaliatory tool, but it is," Nick Careen, International Air Transport Association (IATA) senior vice president for operations, safety and security, told reporters at the airline body's annual meeting in New Delhi on Tuesday. Isidre Porqueras, chief operating officer at Indian carrier IndiGo ( opens new tab, said the recent diversions were undoing efforts to reduce emissions and increase airline efficiencies. Finances aside, civil aviation's worst-case scenario is a plane being hit, accidentally or intentionally, by weaponry. In December, an Azerbaijan Airlines flight crashed in Kazakhstan, killing 38 people. The plane was accidentally shot down by Russian air defences, according to Azerbaijan's president and Reuters sources. In October, a cargo plane was shot down in Sudan, killing five people. Six commercial aircraft have been shot down, with three near-misses since 2001, according to aviation risk consultancy Osprey Flight Solutions. Governments need to share information more effectively to keep civil aviation secure as conflict zones proliferate, IATA Director General Willie Walsh said this week. Safety statistics used by the commercial aviation industry show a steady decline in accidents over the past two decades, but these do not include security-related incidents such as being hit by weaponry. IATA said in February that accidents and incidents related to conflict zones were a top concern for aviation safety requiring urgent global coordination. Each airline decides where to travel based on a patchwork of government notices, security advisers, and information-sharing between carriers and states, leading to divergent policies. The closure of Russian airspace to most Western carriers since the outbreak of war in Ukraine in 2022 put them at a cost disadvantage compared to airlines from places like China, India and the Middle East that continue to take shorter northern routes that need less fuel and fewer crew. Shifting risk calculations mean Singapore Airlines' ( opens new tab flight SQ326 from Singapore to Amsterdam has used three different routes into Europe in just over a year, Flightradar24 tracking data shows. When reciprocal missile and drone attacks broke out between Iran and Israel in April 2024, it started crossing previously avoided Afghanistan instead of Iran. Last month, its route shifted again to avoid Pakistan's airspace as conflict escalated between India and Pakistan. Flight SQ326 now reaches Europe via the Persian Gulf and Iraq. Singapore Airlines did not respond immediately to a request for comment. Pilots and flight attendants are also worried about how the patchwork of shifting risk might impact their safety. "IATA says airlines should decide if it's safe to fly over conflict zones, not regulators. But history shows commercial pressures can cloud those decisions," said Paul Reuter, vice president of the European Cockpit Association, which represents pilots. Flight crew typically have the right to refuse a trip due to concerns about airspace, whether over weather or conflict zones, IATA security head Careen said. "Most airlines, in fact, I would say the vast majority of them, do not want crew on an aircraft if they don't feel comfortable flying," he said.

Labour's defence document exposes some major cracks
Labour's defence document exposes some major cracks

The National

timean hour ago

  • The National

Labour's defence document exposes some major cracks

However, the document itself makes no reference to it. There are important reasons for that, not least of which is the cost. But the danger and threat still lurks. It is technically credible that the UK's 30 (soon to rise to 47) F-35 multi-role fighters be fitted to carry nuclear bombs. The F-35 has that capability as does some other aircraft and there are more than 100 US-controlled gravity bombs stored in Europe stationed in several Nato countries. But the US nuclear control of the bombs would be a sticking point that deal-maker Donald Trump would not miss. Even faux British operational independence would up the cost of the F-35 option. READ MORE: Leading pro-indy figures write to Keir Starmer over referendum 'snub' An explicit endorsement of the re-introduction of tactical nuclear bombs carried aboard the F-35 multi-role fighter would signal a significant change to British nuclear policy. It would be seen by the 94 member states of the UN who support the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW) as a destabilising move by the UK. That includes the 73 whose sovereign legislatures have ratified it into international law and chose to abide by its terms. Indeed, the non-nuclear nations could throw sections of the SDR back in Britain's face as the document makes much of – possibly even overhypes – global insecurity – a selling point for those arms companies that received advanced copies before even the shadow defence secretary. This was revealed when Defence Secretary John Healey finally deigned to brief parliament, late in the afternoon. To openly re-introduce British tactical nukes in a document which claims that one of its key aims is to de-escalate international tension would be the equivalent of the fire brigade claiming, with a straight face, that pouring rocket fuel on a fire would help put it out. However, the prepublicity over the weekend has ensured that notion of the reintroduction of British tactical nuclear weapons is still out there, mostly likely to test the political temperature. Indeed, within the document itself, Russia is rightly criticised for retaining the possible use of tactical nukes. Looking both ways at once is not a novel idea. But even by the standards of the Starmer administration, to do so in writing in the same document would be a bit of a stretch. The military dangers of devolving a degree of command and control of nukes from the political leadership to generals of at least four-star level is fraught with risk, though most top brass are usually near their political leadership. To devolve control three steps away further to one-star level is asking for trouble. Going even further, handing control of a nuclear weapon to a lowly pilot in a cockpit is more than a bit of a gamble. Maybe the naive LibDems had not thought that through when they briefly floated the idea of replacing the clapped-out Vanguards with nuclear-capable F-35s a few years ago. For the same reason, I find it hard to believe that a group with the ear of Keir Starmer are punting an F-35 option. But maybe it is to divert attention from the increasingly clapped-out Vanguards – something, inadvertently, that the Prime Minister made mention of in his Govan shipyard speech. However, the SDR did touch upon the increasing costs of the maintenance and potential expansion of the UK's nuclear arsenal with reference to £15 billion earmarked for the 'sovereign warhead programme'. READ MORE: 'A bit rich': Kate Forbes responds to Keir Starmer ruling out referendum That it is given a title with the word 'sovereign' in it, rather than just 'warhead programme' or 'new' or 'replacement' warhead programme, suggests that recent work by the anti-nuclear movement on the fact that President Trump actually owns the Trident missiles is impacting on public perception, or risks doing so. Starmer was surely on thin ice (and some military brass must have been nervous) when the Prime Minister mentioned that during his last visit to Scotland, he was aboard a Vanguard coming off patrol. Yesterday he said that the length of the patrol was a record breaker, implying that this was something to be proud of, when in fact it was the exact opposite. The Prime Minister did not reveal the real cause of the over-lengthy deployment, though he inadvertently revealed that the Continuous At Sea Deterrent (CASD) concept is under severe strain. The deployment of Vanguards is getting longer and longer. That's because it appears there are not four boats in various states of readiness, but three, or even less. In his widely viewed Rented Missiles And Worn Out Submarines YouTube presentation, military historian Mark Felton succinctly explains why. He even speculates that at times no Vanguard has been at sea at all. Behind the SDR lurk many questions, problems and dangers. We should not let the UK Government hide them. Bill Ramsay is secretary of SNP CND and convener of the SNP Trade Union Group

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store