"Goli will be answered with Gola:" HM Amit Shah on Op Sindoor amid chants of 'Bharata mata ki jai'
Nanded (Maharashtra) [India], May 26 (ANI): Union Home Minister Amit Shah said on Monday that Operation Sindoor has sent a message to the whole world that no one should trouble the Indian army, its people and its border, otherwise they will have to face the consequences. He said so while addressing a public gathering in Maharashtra's Nanded district, where he inaugurated the statue of former Mahrashtra Chief Minister Vasantrao Naik.
Speaking about Vasantrao Naik, he said, 'Today, the OBC leader Vasant Naik's statue is inaugurated. I fold my hands at him.' Multiple BJP leaders attended the gathering, including Maharashtra BJP president Chandrakant Bawankule.
Addressing the gathering on the larger issues of national concern, the Home Minister said, 'Operation Sindoor has sent a message to the whole world that no one should trouble the Indian army, its people and its border, otherwise they will have to face the consequences. PM Modi has cleared that if someone attacks us, then 'Goli' will be answered with 'Gola',' Shah said.
While also taking a jibe at Congress, Shah added that the Narendra Modi-led government has replied with multiple strikes on Pakistan, with the most recent being Operation Sindoor.
'Pakistan has forgotten that the Congress, which was there 10-15 years ago has been changed. For 11 years there is Bharatiya Janata Party's Narendra Modi government. They attacked on Uri, we retaliated with surgical strike. They attacked on Pulwama, we retaliated with air strike. And then they attacked in Pahalgam, we replied with Operation Sindoor and destroyed their terror hotspots,' Shah said.
Addressing the public gathering, he told the people to raise their fists and shout: 'Raise your hands with me, on the successful Operation Sindoor, make fists and shout out 'Bharata Mata ki jai', 'Jai Jai Jai Shivaji'.'
Speaking about the all-party delegation that is visiting multiple countries across the world to put forward India's position against terrorism, Shah mentioned that the diplomatic effort will 'unmask Pakistan's face of terrorism.'
'After Operation Sindoor, PM Modi decided that it is the nation's matter. So, all-party delegation of MPs will visit different countries and unmask Pakistan's face of terrorism. Then, all-party delegations were formed,' he said.
While also hitting out at Shiv Sena (UBT), he mentioned that while its leaders criticised the delegation, the founder of the party, Balasaheb Thackeray would have praised the delegation. He said, 'Then, all-party delegations were formed. Later, a top leader of Shiv Sena (UBT) commented on the delegation and said that 'Yeh kiski baraat jaa rahi hai?' Shiv Sena (UBT) used to be the party of Balasaheb Thackeray. If Balasaheb had been here, he would have appreciated PM Modi for Operation Sindoor.'
The Union Home Minister also highlighted the anti-naxal operation in Chhattisgarh, termed 'Operation Black Forest,' reiterating the resolve to end the red menace by March 31, 2026.
'Along with Operation Sindoor, one more operation was underway, Operation Black Forest. Under this operation in Chhattisgarh, our CRPF, Chhattisgarh Police and BSF, destroyed the hubs of naxals at the height of 5,000 ft and 31 naxals were killed. So far 36 more naxals have been killed. Many surrendered and were arrested. We will put an end to naxalism in this nation by 31st March, 2026,' Shah added. (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
14 minutes ago
- Time of India
Pakistan's defence minister calls Simla Agreement a ‘dead document', says LoC now a ceasefire line
Pakistan's Defence Minister Khawaja Asif has declared the 1972 Simla Agreement a "dead document," asserting a return to the 1948 position on Kashmir and questioning the relevance of other bilateral agreements. This statement follows escalating tensions after a terror attack in Pahalgam, prompting retaliatory strikes by Indian forces across the Line of Control. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Simla Agreement is 'dead', says Asif Past rhetoric on Simla Agreement and growing tensions Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Recent escalation after Pahalgam attack India's retaliatory strike In a provocative statement against India, Pakistan's Defence Minister, Khawaja Asif, has called the 1972 Simla Agreement a 'dead document' that is no longer relevant. Speaking in a televised interview on Wednesday, Asif stated that Pakistan has effectively returned to the 1948 position on Kashmir, and the Line of Control (LoC) is now a ceasefire line, not a formal his remarks, Asif said the bilateral framework between India and Pakistan has collapsed. 'The Simla Agreement is now a dead document. We are back to the 1948 position, when the United Nations declared the LoC a ceasefire line following the ceasefire and resolutions,' he said. He added, 'Going forward, these disputes will be dealt with multilaterally or internationally.'The Defence Minister also questioned the status of other India-Pakistan agreements. 'Whether the Indus Waters Treaty is suspended or not, Simla is already over,' Asif is not the first time Pakistani leaders have made remarks about the Simla Agreement. Over the past few years, Islamabad has signaled discomfort with the bilateral framework. Last month, it announced the suspension of Shimla agreement and also threatened to suspend it after India's decision to abrogate Article 370 in August 2019, which removed the special status of Jammu and Kashmir. Pakistan has repeatedly raised the issue in international forums, even as India has maintained that all matters concerning Jammu and Kashmir are strictly Simla Agreement, signed in 1972 after the Indo-Pak war of 1971, binds both countries to resolve their disputes through bilateral means. India has consistently reiterated that Kashmir is a bilateral issue, rejecting any third-party between the two countries escalated recently following a deadly terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, in which several Indian tourists were killed. India blamed Pakistan-based terror outfits for the Pahalgam response to the Pahalgam attack, the Indian armed forces conducted precision strikes across the LoC, targeting terror launchpads.
India Today
14 minutes ago
- India Today
Why China engages in diplomacy of silence on Pakistan
Beijing recently declined to comment on the performance of Chinese missiles used by Pakistan in the recent conflict with India. This may seem like a routine diplomatic brush-off, but the silence speaks to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), China is the world's fourth-largest arms exporter, and publicly acknowledging the substandard performance of Chinese weapon systems might have affected China's growing defence export ambitions, particularly in western Africa, Latin America and Southeast widely known, any public acknowledgement of arms supplies to Pakistan could have also drawn criticism from India and international watchdogs, for "indirectly" fuelling conflict in South Asia by strengthening Islamabad. Notably, Pakistan is among China's oldest and most consistent arms clients, with strategic cooperation between the two deepening after the Sino-Indian war of 1962. According to SIPRI data, over 81% of Pakistan's arms imports between 2020 and 2024 came from the recent military conflict between India and Pakistan, the latter deployed a slew of Chinese weapons, such as the HQ-9 and HQ-16 air defence systems, PL-15E long-range air-to-air missiles, J-10CE and JF-17 fighter jets, among now India is calling out this military nexus on global platforms. During India's diplomatic outreach to key international partners, which included UN Security Council members, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, part of a delegation to the Americas, took this up in Bogota, is a polite word. Much of it is not for defence but for attack," said Tharoor, referring to Chinese arms supplied to has always been an impudent, assertive neighbour — one which refuses to acknowledge responsibility or comment on arms supplies to Pakistan, even as it continues open and unrepentant defence dealings with diplomacy of silence on the issue is a bid to portray its multiple roles: that of a military supplier, a so-called neutral diplomatic voice on paper, and a dominant regional player in the Asia-Pacific being described as Islamabad's "all-weather friend", Beijing has historically avoided overtly backing Pakistan during escalations with India. In fact, it has only issued direct warnings once — in the 1965 India-Pakistan War, (on September 16, 1965), when it threatened India to dismantle all military installations on or over the China-Sikkim boundary within three days or face "serious consequences", The Indian Express reported, quoting documents accessed from the United States State Department archives and declassified Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War, China took a more cautious line, calling the "happenings in Pakistan" an internal matter that should be resolved by the Pakistani people, without foreign the 1999 Kargil War, China urged restraint from both India and Pakistan, and avoided blaming either party — a stance well-documented by many defence latest example of this diplomacy of silence came during the monthly defence ministry media briefing that was held in the last week of May 2025, when Chinese defence ministry spokesperson Senior Colonel Zhang Xiaogang played down the reports of India recovering an unexploded PL-15E, a radar-guided beyond visual range missile, stated to be the most advanced rocket of its kind produced by merely commented that the missiles in question were "export equipment" that had been "displayed at exhibitions globally". He added, "India and Pakistan are neighbours that cannot be moved away", and urged both sides to exercise "calm and restraint".Notably, he reiterated China's willingness to play a "constructive role" in preserving regional peace — a language mirroring Beijing's official stance during previous Indo-Pakistani tensions in 1971 and Beijing is neither confirming nor denying such claims about its defence systems during the latest India-Pakistan are many layers to this expert Major General Yash Mor (Retired) says, "China has long described its relationship with Pakistan as 'higher than mountains, deeper than seas, and sweeter than honey'. Meanwhile, deep-seated distrust issues also persist between India and China, particularly in the aftermath of the Doklam standoff of 2017 and the Galwan clashes of 2020-2021. And China's cartographic assertions, such as its claims over parts of Arunachal Pradesh, underscore ongoing tensions. But there were de-escalations at the LAC at the same time."advertisement"One must note that China does not actively position itself against India on matters like cross-border terrorism or India-Pakistan relations. However, Beijing was displeased with India's abrogation of Article 370 in Jammu and Kashmir. India's opposition to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) passing through POK has also caused some friction — though India's opposition was limited to formal protests only," Major General Yash Mor (Retired) tells India Today the idea behind the silence, as many experts agree, may be its commercial interests."China prefers to operate quietly, focusing on building alliances rather than making grandiose statements. The Chinese leadership maintains a measured and restrained approach, rarely issuing public remarks. Its state-controlled media offer little insight, and when statements do emerge, they typically pertain to dealings with the US or QUAD-related matters. As part of its broader strategic relationships, China supplies weapons to several countries, including Pakistan, Nepal, Myanmar, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. However, its primary objective remains trade, not arming nations to escalate conflict, as the US and Russia did during the Cold War," Major General Yash Mor (Retired) strategic silence has helped Beijing maintain diplomatic channels with India despite tensions, and has allowed it to avoid direct entanglement in South Asia's most volatile border dispute between two nuclear the same time, for the nations beyond its neighbourhood, China has repeatedly portrayed its image of a peace-loving and responsible diplomat Zhang Heqing, citing foreign minister Wang Yi, echoed the same."According to Wang Yi, on the issue of peace and security, China is the major country with the best record in the world. Since the founding of New China, it has never initiated a war or participated in a war of aggression. It has always been a firm defender of world peace," Heqing wrote on X, in long-maintained measured stance reinforces its strategy of ambiguity and distance — designed more to preserve influence than to take with India emerging as a key player in the Indo-Pacific region and a member of the Quad alliance, China is cautious not to provoke further alignment between New Delhi and the is armed by China, but not always politically shielded by it during India-Pakistan military escalations. The partnership seemingly operates in a grey area — legal, yet behind the it may not have the image of a peacemaker in New Delhi and the West, it's definitely a pacemaker for a rogue state like Pakistan, and keeps the pot hot, if not boiling, in South its diplomacy of silence, it plays the main power broker in South InTrending Reel
Indian Express
16 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Dissecting the myth of China's control over the Brahmaputra
In recent days, discussions around water sharing and regional water security have taken a new turn in South Asia, especially following India's decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty with Pakistan after the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22. Against this backdrop, Assam's Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma addressed concerns surrounding the Brahmaputra River, emphasising the importance of understanding its natural flow and reassuring the public about India's water sovereignty. His remarks, grounded in hydro-statistics and regional data, challenge false narratives that suggest China could disrupt water flow significantly, highlighting that the Brahmaputra largely depends on Indian monsoons and tributaries, not upstream sources. This article underscores that even a hypothetical reduction in Chinese water contribution would unlikely harm India; instead, it might help mitigate annual floods in Assam. As the region faces severe flooding due to monsoons, India must emphasise resilience and infrastructure over fears of upstream interference. These insights reflect a deeper understanding of the river's geographical and climatic realities, underscoring its strategic independence and the importance of fact-based policy-making in regional water management. The Brahmaputra is known as the Yarlung Tsangpo in Tibet. Pakistan, historically reliant on the Indus waters, is now attempting to stoke fears about India's water security through the Brahmaputra, asserting that China's actions could threaten Indian stability and sovereignty. There is an inherent myth in this as there is misrepresentation of a comprehensive hydro-geographical data. The Brahmaputra is primarily a rain-fed river system, with only approximately 30-35 per cent of its flow coming from China, mostly through glacial melt and rainfall that happens in the Tibetan region which is scanty. This covers the base flow of the river but the majority of the river's water — about 65-70 per cent — arises within India itself, thanks to the monsoon rains that pour over the Northeast's hilly terrains and the numerous tributaries feeding the river. The Brahmaputra's flow at key points exemplifies India's water independence. At the Indo-China border, near the Tuting region in Arunachal Pradesh, the flow rate is around 2,000-3,000 cubic metres per second. During the monsoon season, as the river enters Assam's plains, the flow swells to an impressive 15,000-20,000 cubic metres per second. These figures underscore that the river's strength and volume are predominantly sustained within India's climatic and geographical domain. India, thus, does not depend on upstream water flow from China to sustain its water needs. This information points out that even in a hypothetical scenario where China reduces its contribution — an unlikely event given that China has never officially threatened or signalled such an intent — the impact on India's water security would be minimal and potentially beneficial. Reduced flow could mitigate the devastating floods that annually ravage Assam and the northeastern region, displacing hundreds of thousands and destroying livelihoods, as floodwaters inundate low-lying areas. This counterintuitive point highlights the fact that India's water system is resilient and primarily driven by monsoon rains and local tributaries. The irony is that while fears over China's potential water withdrawal dominate discussions, the region is currently grappling with an acute flood crisis. Several parts of Assam and the greater Northeast are experiencing floods well above the danger level, driven by heavy monsoon. India's flood mitigation strategies should be aligned with this reality, focusing on improving infrastructure and resilience rather than worrying about threats that are largely hypothetical. In fact, if China were to modify its water flow, it could potentially alleviate some of these flood risks, as excess water often results from uncontrolled monsoon runoff and not upstream flow restrictions. Pakistan has exploited the Indus Waters Treaty over decades and benefited disproportionately from water access, enabling its agricultural and industrial development at India's expense. India could not build any infrastructure as it was bound by the treaty even to water states like Kashmir. With India now reclaiming its sovereignty over water resources, the narrative of dependency is being challenged robustly. Sarma asserted that the Brahmaputra is powered by our geography, our monsoon, and our civilisational resilience — elements intrinsic to India's natural environment and identity. But the discourse must move beyond mere water politics and look for a rational, fact-based approach to regional water governance and geopolitics. The writer is a Clinical Associate Professor (Research) and Research Director at Bharti Institute of Public Policy, Indian School of Business (ISB). He teaches sustainability at ISB. He contributes to IPCC reports and has recently been selected as the Lead Author of the IPCC's upcoming report on Cities and Climate Change
