Pakistan Says It Has ‘Credible Intelligence' India Will Attack within Days
The Associated Press
Pakistani national Sara Khan, left, married to Indian citizen Aurangzeb Khan, right, holding their children prepares to leave for Pakistan without her husband from the Attari-Wagah border between India and Pakistan, following New Delhi's decision to order almost all Pakistani citizens to leave the country after last week's deadly attack in Indian-controlled Kashmir, Wednesday, April 30, 2025.
ATTARI, India (AP) — Pakistan said Wednesday it had 'credible intelligence' that India is planning to attack it within days, and vowed to respond 'very strongly,' as soldiers exchanged gunfire along borders and Pakistanis heeded New Delhi's orders to leave the country following last week's deadly attack in Indian-controlled Kashmir.
India has moved to punish Pakistan after accusing it of backing the attack in Pahalgam, which Islamabad denies, driving tensions between the nuclear-armed rivals to their highest point since 2019, when they came close to war after a suicide car bombing in Kashmir. The region is split between India and Pakistan and claimed by both in its entirety.
Calls for de-escalation
Pakistan said the intelligence shows that India plans military action against it in the next 24 to 36 hours 'on the pretext of baseless and concocted allegations of involvement.'
There was no immediate comment from Indian officials. However, Indian government officials said Prime Minister Narendra Modi has 'given complete operational freedom to the armed forces to decide on the mode, targets and timing of India's response to the Pahalgam massacre.' They spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive deliberations.
Last week's attack that killed 26, most of them Indian tourists, was claimed by a previously unknown militant group calling itself the Kashmir Resistance. New Delhi describes all militancy in Indian-controlled Kashmir as Pakistan-backed terrorism. Pakistan denies this, and many Muslim Kashmiris consider the militants to be part of a homegrown freedom struggle.
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, in separate calls with India and Pakistan, stressed the need to 'avoid a confrontation that could result in tragic consequences.' U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke to Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and 'emphasized the need for both sides to continue working together for peace and stability in South Asia,' according to a Pakistan statement.
Earlier, Pakistan's Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar told reporters that 'I have made it very clear, on behalf of the government and the nation, that Pakistan will not be the first one to resort to any escalatory move. However, in case of any escalatory move by the Indian side, we will respond very strongly.'
The army spokesman, Lt. Gen. Ahmad Sharif, added, 'If they think that aggression is the path forward, our message is only this: We are ready, don't test it.'
Pakistan didn't elaborate on the 'credible intelligence' it cited.
Pakistanis forced to leave
The deadline for Pakistani citizens to leave India, with exceptions for those with medical visas, passed on Sunday, but many families were still scrambling to the border crossing in Attari town in northern Punjab state.
Some arrived on their own. Others were being deported by police.
'We have settled our families here. We request the government not to uproot our families,' said Sara Khan, a Pakistani who was ordered back without her husband, Aurangzeb Khan, who holds an Indian passport. She carried her 14-day-old child and said she had been living in Indian-controlled Kashmir since 2017.
'They (Indian authorities) told me you are illegal and you should go,' said Khan, while waiting on the Indian side of the border crossing.
Other tit-for-tat diplomatic measures have included the cancellation of visas and a recall of diplomats. New Delhi suspended a crucial water-sharing treaty with Islamabad and ordered its border with Pakistan shut. In response, Pakistan has closed its airspace to Indian airlines.
India late Wednesday announced the closure of its airspace to all Pakistani aircraft until May 23.
Cross-border exchanges of gunfire between soldiers have increased along the Line of Control, the de facto frontier that separates Kashmiri territory between the two rivals.
Fire along the frontier
On Wednesday, India and Pakistan accused each other of initiating the gunfire.
Pakistan's state-run media said Indian forces violated the ceasefire agreement along the Line of Control by initiating fire with heavy weapons. According to Pakistan Television, Pakistani troops returned fire after coming under attack overnight in the Mandal sector of Pakistan-controlled Kashmir.
Meanwhile, the Indian army said it responded to 'unprovoked' small arms fire from Pakistan in the Naushera, Sunderbani and Akhnoor sectors of Indian-controlled Kashmir.
The incidents could not be independently verified. In the past, each side has accused the other of starting border skirmishes in the Himalayan region.
India's cabinet committee on security, headed by Modi, met Wednesday, its second since the attack.
Witness accounts
At least three tourists who survived told The Associated Press that the gunmen singled out Hindu men and shot them from close range. The dead also included a Nepalese citizen and a local Muslim pony ride operator.
Aishanya Dwivedi, whose husband was killed, said a gunman approached the couple and challenged him to recite the Islamic declaration of faith. Her husband replied that he was Hindu, and the attacker shot him 'point blank in the head,' she said.
'He was on my lap. I was soaked in his blood,' Dwivedi said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yomiuri Shimbun
38 minutes ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Japan Looks to Boost Trust with S. Korea's President Lee, Who Has Called for ‘Pragmatic Diplomacy'
The Associated Press South Korean President Lee Jae-myung speaks during a press conference at the presidential office in Seoul on June 4. Japan is eager to foster a trusting relationship with South Korea under its new President Lee Jae-myung, who advocates 'pragmatic diplomacy' — prioritizing practical benefits over ideology. During their first phone call on Monday, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba and Lee, who is known for being critical of Japan, agreed to keep up momentum toward better Japan-South Korea relations. Ishiba hopes to hold an in-person meeting, according to government sources. 'We had an excellent phone conversation. Although difficult issues exist between Japan and our neighbor South Korea, I intend to communicate actively and energetically [with Lee] to develop a stable bilateral relationship,' Ishiba told reporters at the Prime Minister's Office in Tokyo after the phone call. Lee, on his X account, praised Ishiba as a leader who believes in trying to build a genuine relationship of trust with South Korea. Given the increasingly challenging strategic environment, the leaders recognized the need for cooperation between Japan and South Korea, and trilaterally with the United States. Concerns in this area include military collaboration between Russia and North Korea, and confrontation between the United States and China during President Donald Trump's term. The fact that Lee spoke with Ishiba before China suggests, to some extent, South Korea's continued focus on its relationship with Japan. Japan is watching how Lee pursues his 'pragmatic diplomacy,' viewing this approach as the reason he stopped his anti-Japanese remarks. Former South Korean President Moon Jae-in, who like Lee was a left-leaning leader, emphasized on ideology and principles. During his inaugural phone call with then Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, which he held after his call with China, Moon expressed that he could not accept the agreement on former comfort women that was previously made with Japan. He subsequently nullified the agreement, causing Japan-South Korea relations to severely deteriorate. In contrast, Lee expressed his eagerness on Monday for cooperation based on the national interests of both countries. He showed that he intends to separate historical issues from economic and security matters. At a press conference shortly after his inauguration on June 4, he also hinted that he would stick to his predecessors' solution to a lawsuit filed by former wartime requisitioned workers from the Korean Peninsula. However, Japan is still deeply concerned about whether Lee can address potential friction between the two countries while maintaining the support of his base. Tokyo is looking to stabilize relations by building trust through frequent summit meetings.
Yomiuri Shimbun
6 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
President Donald Trump Pushes Ahead with His Maximalist Immigration Campaign in Face of LA Protests
The Associated Press National Guard stand guard near the metropolitan detention center Monday, June 9, 2025, in downtown Los Angeles. WASHINGTON (AP) — Donald Trump made no secret of his willingness to exert a maximalist approach to enforcing immigration laws and keeping order as he campaigned to return to the White House. The fulfillment of that pledge is now on full display in Los Angeles. The president has put hundreds of National Guard troops on the streets to quell protests over his administration's immigration raids, a deployment that state and city officials say has only inflamed tensions. Trump called up the California National Guard over the objections of Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom — the first time in 60 years a president has done so — and is deploying active-duty troops to support the guard. By overriding Newsom, Trump is already going beyond what he did to respond to Black Lives Matter protests in 2020, when he warned he could send troops to contain demonstrations that turned violent if governors in the states did not act to do so themselves. Trump said in September of that year that he 'can't call in the National Guard unless we're requested by a governor' and that 'we have to go by the laws.' But now, the past and current president is moving swiftly, with little internal restraint to test the bounds of his executive authority in order to deliver on his promise of mass deportations. What remains to be seen is whether Americans will stand by him once it's operationalized nationwide, as Trump looks to secure billions from Congress to dramatically expand the country's detention and deportation operations. For now, Trump is betting that they will. 'If we didn't do the job, that place would be burning down,' Trump told reporters Monday, speaking about California. 'I feel we had no choice. … I don't want to see what happened so many times in this country.' 'A crisis of Trump's own making' The protests began to unfold Friday as federal authorities arrested immigrants in several locations throughout the sprawling city, including in the fashion district of Los Angeles and at a Home Depot. The anger over the administration's actions quickly spread, with protests in Chicago and Boston as demonstrations in the southern California city also continued Monday. But Trump and other administration officials remained unbowed, capitalizing on the images of burning cars, graffiti and Mexican flags — which, while not dominant, started to become the defining images of the unrest — to bolster their law-and-order cause. Leaders in the country's most populous state were similarly defiant. California officials sued the Trump administration Monday, with the state's attorney general, Rob Bonta, arguing that the deployment of troops 'trampled' on the state's sovereignty and pushing for a restraining order. The initial deployment of 300 National Guard troops was expected to quickly expand to the full 4,000 that has been authorized by Trump. The state's senior Democratic senator, Alex Padilla, said in an interview that 'this is absolutely a crisis of Trump's own making.' 'There are a lot of people who are passionate about speaking up for fundamental rights and respecting due process, but the deployment of National Guard only serves to escalate tensions and the situation,' Padilla told The Associated Press. 'It's exactly what Donald Trump wanted to do.' Padilla slammed the deployment as 'counterproductive' and said the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department was not advised ahead of the federalization of the National Guard. His office has also pushed the Pentagon for a justification on the deployment, and 'as far as we're told, the Department of Defense isn't sure what the mission is here,' Padilla added. Candidate Trump previewed immigration strategy during campaign Much of this was predictable. During his 2024 presidential campaign, Trump pledged to conduct the largest domestic deportation operation in American history to expel millions of immigrants in the country without legal status. He often praised President Dwight D. Eisenhower's military-style immigration raids, and the candidate and his advisers suggested they would have broad power to deploy troops domestically to enact Trump's far-reaching immigration and public safety goals. Trump's speedy deployment in California of troops against those whom the president has alluded to as 'insurrectionists' on social media is a sharp contrast to his decision to issue no order or formal request for National Guard troops during the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, despite his repeated and false assertions that he had made such an offer. Trump is now surrounded by officials who have no interest in constraining his power. In 2020, Trump's then-Pentagon chief publicly rebuked Trump's threat to send in troops using the Insurrection Act, an 1807 law that empowers the president to use the military within the U.S. and against American citizens. Current Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth signaled support on his personal X account for deploying troops to California, writing, 'The National Guard, and Marines if need be, stand with ICE,' referring to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency. The Defense Department said Monday it is deploying about 700 active-duty Marines to Los Angeles to support National Guard troops already on the ground to respond to the protests. White House responds to an 'incompetent' governor Protesters over the weekend blocked off a major freeway and burned self-driving cars as police responded with tear gas, rubber bullets and flash-bang grenades in clashes that encompassed several downtown blocks in Los Angeles and led to several dozen arrests. Much of the city saw no violence. But the protests prompted Trump to issue the directive Saturday mobilizing the California National Guard over Newsom's objections. The president and his top immigration aides accused the governor of mismanaging the protests, with border czar Tom Homan asserting in a Fox News interview Monday that Newsom stoked anti-ICE sentiments and waited two days to declare unlawful assembly in the city. Trump told Newsom in a phone call Friday evening to get the situation in Los Angeles under control, a White House official said. It was only when the administration felt Newsom was not restoring order in the city — and after Trump watched the situation escalate for 24 hours and White House officials saw imagery of federal law enforcement officers with lacerations and other injuries — that the president moved to deploy the Guard, according to the official, who was granted anonymity to discuss private deliberations. 'He's an incompetent governor,' Trump said Monday. 'Look at the job he's doing in California. He's destroying one of our great states.' Local law enforcement officials said Los Angeles police responded as quickly as they could once the protests erupted, and Newsom repeatedly asserted that state and city authorities had the situation under control. 'Los Angeles is no stranger to demonstrations and protests and rallies and marches,' Padilla said. 'Local law enforcement knows how to handle this and has a rapport with the community and community leaders to be able to allow for that.' The aggressive moves prompted blowback from some of Trump's erstwhile allies. Ileana Garcia, a Florida state senator who in 2016 founded the group Latinas for Trump and was hired to direct Latino outreach, called the recent escalation 'unacceptable and inhumane.' 'I understand the importance of deporting criminal aliens, but what we are witnessing are arbitrary measures to hunt down people who are complying with their immigration hearings — in many cases, with credible fear of persecution claims — all driven by a Miller-like desire to satisfy a self-fabricated deportation goal,' said Garcia, referring to Stephen Miller, a White House deputy chief of staff and key architect of Trump's immigration crackdown. The tactics could be just a preview to what more could come from the Trump administration and the Republican-controlled Congress. GOP lawmakers are working to pass a massive tax-and-border package that includes billions to hire thousands of new officers for Border Patrol and for ICE. The goal, under the Trump-backed plan, is to remove 1 million immigrants without status annually and house 100,000 people in immigration detention centers.
Yomiuri Shimbun
6 hours ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Some Visitors Report Extra Scrutiny at US Airports as Trump's New Travel Ban Begins
The Associated Press Vicenta Aguilar, right, hugs her son's girlfriend as Aguilar and her husband arrive from Guatemala to see their son for the first time in 22 years and to meet their two grandchildren grandchildren, at Miami International Airport, Monday, June 9, 2025, in Miami. MIAMI (AP) — President Donald Trump's new ban on travel to the U.S. by citizens from a dozen countries took effect Monday with relative calm, as some travelers with valid visas reported extra scrutiny at American airports before being allowed entry. The ban targeting mainly African and Middle Eastern countries kicked in amid rising tension over the president's escalating campaign of immigration enforcement. But it arrived with no immediate signs of the chaos that unfolded at airports across the U.S. during Trump's first travel ban in 2017. Vincenta Aguilar said she was anxious Monday as she and her husband, both Guatemalan citizens, were subjected to three different interviews by U.S. officials after arriving at Miami International Airport and showing tourist visas the couple received last week. 'They asked us where we work, how many children we have, if we have had any problems with the law, how we are going to afford the cost of this travel, how many days we will stay here,' said Aguilar, who along with her husband was visiting their son for the first time since he left Guatemala 22 years ago. She said they were released about an hour after their flight landed, greeting their waiting family members in Florida with tears of relief. Guatemala is not among the countries included in the new ban or flagged for extra travel restrictions. Trump's new ban shouldn't revoke previously issued visas The new proclamation that Trump signed last week applies to citizens of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. It also imposes heightened restrictions on people from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela who are outside the U.S. and don't hold a valid visa. The new ban does not revoke visas previously issued to people from countries on the list, according to guidance issued Friday to all U.S. diplomatic missions. However, unless an applicant meets narrow criteria for an exemption to the ban, his or her application will be rejected starting Monday. Travelers with previously issued visas should still be able to enter the U.S. even after the ban takes effect. Narayana Lamy, a Haitian citizen who works for his home country's government, said he was told to wait after showing his passport and tourist visa Monday at the Miami airport while a U.S. official confirmed by phone that he was allowed into the country to visit family members. Luis Hernandez, a Cuban citizen and green card holder who has lived in the U.S. for three years, said he had no problems returning Monday to Miami after a weekend visiting family in Cuba. 'They did not ask me anything,' Hernandez said. 'I only showed my residency card.' Ban appears to avoid chaos that followed Trump's first-term attempt During Trump's first term, a hastily written executive order ordering the denial of entry to citizens of mainly Muslim countries created chaos at numerous airports and other ports of entry, prompting successful legal challenges and major revisions to the policy. Many immigration experts say the new ban is more carefully crafted and appears designed to beat court challenges that hampered the first by focusing on the visa application process. Trump said this time that some countries had 'deficient' screening for passports and other public documents or have historically refused to take back their own citizens. He relied extensively on an annual Homeland Security report of people who remain in the U.S. after their visas expired. Trump also tied the new ban to a terrorist attack in Boulder, Colorado, saying it underscored the dangers posed by some visitors who overstay visas. U.S. officials say the man charged in the attack overstayed a tourist visa. He is from Egypt, which isn't on Trump's restricted list. Critics say travel ban sows division The ban was quickly denounced by groups that provide aid and resettlement help to refugees. 'This policy is not about national security — it is about sowing division and vilifying communities that are seeking safety and opportunity in the United States,' said Abby Maxman, president of Oxfam America, a nonprofit international relief organization. Haiti's transitional presidential council said in a statement that the ban 'is likely to indiscriminately affect all Haitians' and that it hopes to persuade the U.S. to drop Haiti from the list of banned countries. In Venezuela, some visa holders changed U.S. travel plans last week to get ahead of Trump's restrictions. For those without visas, the new restrictions may not matter much. Since Venezuela and the U.S. severed diplomatic relations in 2019, Venezuelans have had to travel to neighboring South American countries to obtain U.S. visas. José Luis Vegas, a tech worker in the Venezuelan capital of Caracas, said his uncle gave up on renewing an expired U.S. visa because it was already difficult before the restrictions. 'Paying for hotels and tickets was very expensive, and appointments took up to a year,' Vegas said.
