Drills across India as country prepares for possible war with Pakistan
India is preparing for war. Air raid sirens are being checked, bomb shelters readied and evacuation plans for schools and hospitals drawn up.
For the first time in more than 50 years, and with relations with neighbouring Pakistan reaching a nadir, the government in Delhi has ordered drills across the country on Wednesday to check contingency plans if hostilities break out.
The Ministry of Home Affairs will be preparing to camouflage and protect key structures and control rooms, including industrial and power plants, telecom towers, military posts and government buildings, against air attack. Civilian workers will be trained on how to protect themselves and respond to power cuts across 244 of India's 796 districts.
Armed security forces personnel have been deployed across Indian-controlled Kashmir since 26 civilians were killed in a terrorist attack on April 22
SHARAFAT ALI/REUTERS
Such preparations have not been seen since before the Indo-Pakistan war
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
The new Indian railway arch bridge 35m higher than Eiffel Tower
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi inaugurated the Chenab Railway Bridge, the world's tallest railway arch bridge at 359m above the Chenab River, 35m taller than the Eiffel Tower, in the Reasi district of Jammu and Kashmir. The bridge, a key part of the Udhampur-Srinagar-Baramulla Rail Link (USBRL) project, connects the Kashmir region with the rest of India via an all-weather rail line, spanning 1,315m and designed to last 120 years. Construction involved stabilising slopes in the fractured Himalayan geology, using cement grouting, steel rod reinforcement. The USBRL project, approved in 2003, includes 36 tunnels and 943 bridges, costing Rs437.8bn (£3.7bn), with the Chenab Bridge alone costing approximately Rs14.86bn (£128m). The Chenab Bridge is expected to significantly reduce travel time between Katra and Srinagar to three hours via the Vande Bharat Express.
The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
In 1973, I reported freely on Israel at war. Now its censorship has made that impossible
Watching the TV coverage of the conflict in Gaza with increasing dismay this week, my mind went back to the banks of the Suez canal in October 1973. I was filming the surrender of the entire Egyptian third army with a team from the BBC, without significant censorship or hindrance. The Israeli commander, Gen Avraham Adan, paused in whatever he was doing to give us an update. Crossing the canal on the Israeli pontoon bridge in a bright yellow Hertz car (not a wise choice of colour) we were even helped when we had to repair a tyre that had been punctured by the shrapnel that littered the battlefield. Censorship? Yes, the report was censored by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) back at the satellite feed point in Herzliya. But the censorship was limited only to matters of operational security. This was obviously helpful to the journalists, but also to the Israelis themselves. They had independent verification, with video to back it, of their remarkable achievement in turning around their initial setbacks in Sinai. And they could show, through scenes with a biblical resonance, that the Egyptians' surrender was conducted humanely and in accordance with the Geneva conventions, the laws of war. As the great columns of the third army mounted a sand dune, they exchanged their weapons for bottles of water abundantly provided. Was it always this easy? Of course not. On another occasion, I rose early and reached a road block beyond Gaza only to be turned back, as all the press were that day, on the orders of southern command. But that was exceptional. The IDF operated a policy of relatively open access based on mutual advantage. Sometimes it would herd everyone into press buses, which was far from satisfactory. But it would regularly provide the major TV networks with an escort officer, armed and in uniform, to enable and supervise the coverage. One of my escorts in the Yom Kippur war was Topol, the actor from Fiddler on the Roof. He was something of a hero in Israel, and all roadblocks opened to him. On another occasion I was on my way to the Golan Heights, accompanied and with documents in order, when the great conductor and Israeli sympathiser Zubin Mehta asked for a lift. To my lasting regret I turned him down on the grounds that I had a press pass and he did not – I thought this may harm my chances of being allowed in. Nowhere that the IDF operated was off limits to us. We could film what we wanted and freely interview soldiers of all ranks. In the trenches of the Golan Heights, because of language difficulties, the other ranks tended to be South African immigrants. I was also free to make mistakes. In 1968, the year after the six-day war, I returned to Israel and interviewed the chief of staff, Gen Haim Bar-Lev, who was busy building the defensive line that bore his name. I travelled to Jerusalem and was stopped at a roadblock outside the biblical village of Emmaus. It stood at the centre of the Latrun salient, a Jordanian outpost in the previous war of 1948. The Israelis were busy dismantling it brick by brick. I was not allowed to film it and could only have reported it by leaving the country, not to return. Such compromises are commonplace, but I regret this one. The village disappeared, to be replaced by a Canadian peace park. I was also allowed, after 1967, to visit and stay in Gaza, and show the day-to-day reprisals by the IDF against Palestinians whom it held responsible for previous attacks. The same applied to the destruction of homes in the West Bank city of Qalqilya, and the sowing of landmines round the churches of St John the Baptist in the Jordan valley. All of this passed the IDF's censorship without difficulty. Fast forward to today, and the coverage – or rather, the non-coverage – of the conflict between the Israelis and Hamas in Gaza. The broadcasts regularly start with the mantra that the IDF does not allow foreign media access into the Gaza Strip, and proceed with the most vivid coverage, shot by brave freelances and other civilians posting on social media from inside Gaza, of scenes of death and destruction with the commentary voiced remotely in Jerusalem, Ashkelon or London. Often, both print and broadcast media preface the numbers of the dead and injured with a reminder that they were provided by the Hamas-run health ministry – sometimes the only source available. My former colleague Jeremy Bowen said on the Today programme on Wednesday: 'Israel doesn't let us in because it's doing things there … that they don't want us to see, otherwise they would allow free reporting.' I'm inclined to agree with him. My sympathies are with Bowen, Fergal Keane and others at the BBC, especially when Donald Trump flings around baseless accusations of bias. The BBC and other responsible news outlets have a difficult line to tread. I cannot speak for the American networks, but the British channels all have excellent reporters standing by in the region, not exactly there but thereabouts, sometimes on the high ground overlooking Gaza, which some reporters call the 'hill of shame'. What is missing is the first-hand experience of the war, shared by reporters on the ground who can properly interpret what is happening. This gives free rein to rumour and falsehood. What Bowen and I know from our shared experience is that it is not enough to win the war of weapons without also winning the war of words and images. And the IDF must see that it is losing. It has historically had its ups and downs with the foreign press, but nothing like the present entrenched hostility. It is doing itself great damage, which it is beginning to feel diplomatically. I would urge the following: that the foreign press, especially the TV networks, continue to stand their ground, and that the Israeli press machine does itself a favour and relaxes the rules to allow some independent access to Gaza. This will not only limit the tides of propaganda (on both sides, it must be said) but perhaps hold the frontline troops to higher standards of behaviour, just as it did beside the Suez canal in 1973. It is important to both sides to reestablish at least the limited level of trust that used to exist between them. Here is an example. In the 1973 war, we were able transmit the news by satellite on the day that it happened. Our office was a chair beneath a palm tree near the feed point. In the 1967 war, the exposed news film was bundled into onion bags – blue for the BBC, red for NBC – and taken to the censor who stamped his approval on the masking tape around the neck, before it was air-freighted to London. But he had to take our word for what the film actually showed. The public had a more accurate account back then of events on the battlefield than it does today through the fog of war in Gaza. When access is denied, everyone loses. And, Israel, that includes you. Martin Bell is a Unicef UK ambassador. He is a former broadcast war reporter, and was the independent MP for Tatton from 1997 to 2001 Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Reuters
5 hours ago
- Reuters
India, U.S. trade talks extended as deadline looms for interim deal, say sources
NEW DELHI, June 6 (Reuters) - Trade talks between Indian and U.S. officials have been extended into next week as both sides seek consensus on tariff cuts in the farming and auto sectors, aiming to finalise an interim deal before a July 9 deadline, Indian government sources said. A U.S. delegation led by senior officials from the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) held two days of discussions in New Delhi with Indian trade officials headed by chief negotiator Rajesh Agrawal, the sources said. "The two countries are actively engaged in focused discussions to facilitate greater market access, reduce tariff and non-tariff barriers, enhance supply chain resilience and integration," one Indian government official with direct knowledge of the talks, said. Negotiators, who had initially aimed to wrap up talks by Friday, will now continue discussions on Monday and Tuesday to resolve outstanding differences, a second Indian official said. U.S. President Donald Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi had agreed in February to conclude a bilateral trade pact by fall 2025 and more than double trade to $500 billion by 2030. The current talks are part of efforts to hammer out a limited trade agreement that could lead the Trump administration to revoke 26% reciprocal tariffs on Indian goods - tariffs that have been paused along with those on several other U.S. trading partners for 90 days, the second official said. "Many Indian exporters have held back shipments to the U.S. in the last two weeks, fearing cargos may not reach before the July 9 deadline,' the official added. India's exports to the U.S. jumped nearly 28% year-on-year to $37.7 billion in the January–April period, driven by front-loading of shipments ahead of tariff hikes in April, while imports rose to $14.4 billion, widening the trade surplus in India's favour, according to US government data. India approved a licence for Elon Musk's Starlink to launch commercial operations, ignoring his public spat with Trump, Reuters reported on Friday. India is opposing U.S. demands to open up its agricultural and dairy markets, another Indian official said, citing the impact on millions of poor farmers who cannot compete with heavily subsidised American products. Indian officials have also made it clear New Delhi could pursue its complaint at the World Trade Organisation against the U.S. tariff hikes on steel and aluminium, while aiming to work out a bilateral agreement, the source added.
