Jairam slams US invite to Pak Army chief, calls it diplomatic setback for India
New Delhi, June 12 (UNI) Amid reports that Pakistan Army Chief Gen Asim Munir has been invited for the US Army Day on June 14, senior Congress leader Jairam Ramesh on Thursday termed it a "major diplomatic and strategic setback" for India.
Taking to X, Ramesh questioned the United States' intent, pointing out that General Munir is the same person who made provocative remarks shortly before the Pahalgam terror attack.
He also criticised the recent remarks by the US Central Command chief, who described Pakistan as a "great partner" in counter-terrorism efforts.
"The Modi government is saying that Operation Sindoor is still underway; in such a situation, the participation of the Pakistani Army Chief as a guest at the US Army Day event is undoubtedly a matter of serious concern," Ramesh said.
The Rajya Sabha MP further said, 'The Trump administration is consistently making statements that can only be interpreted to mean that the US is viewing India and Pakistan through the same lens. The Prime Minister has only recently welcomed the delegation that had briefed the global community, including the United States, on Pakistan's involvement in supporting terrorism, yet simultaneously, reports from Washington DC are surfacing that further undermine India's diplomatic standing."
Ramesh demanded that Prime Minister Narendra Modi shed his "obstinacy and prestige", and immediately convene an all-party meeting and a special session of Parliament to present a unified national stance and chalk out a clear roadmap.
'Decades of diplomatic progress cannot be easily undermined,' he added.
UNI RBE PRS
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
37 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump signs measure blocking California's ban on new sales of gas-powered cars
President Donald Trump signed a resolution on Thursday that blocks California's first-in-the-nation rule banning the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035. The move is expected to become the state's latest legal challenge with the federal government. The resolution was approved by Congress last month and aims to quash the country's most aggressive attempt to phase out gas-powered cars. Trump also signed measures to overturn state policies curbing tailpipe emissions in certain vehicles and smog-forming nitrogen oxide pollution from trucks. Trump called California's regulations "crazy" at a White House ceremony where he signed the resolutions. "It's been a disaster for this country," he said. It comes as the Republican president is mired in a clash with California's Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, over Trump's move to deploy troops to Los Angeles in response to immigration protests. It's the latest in an ongoing battle between the Trump administration and heavily Democratic California over issues including tariffs, the rights of LGBTQ+ youth and funding for electric vehicle chargers. The three resolutions Trump signed will block California's rule phasing out gas-powered cars and end the sale of new ones by 2035. They will also kill rules that phase out the sale of medium- and heavy-duty diesel vehicles and cut tailpipe emissions from trucks. In his remarks at the White House, Trump expressed doubts about the performance and reliability of electric vehicles, though he had some notably positive comments about the company owned by Elon Musk, despite their fractured relationship. "I like Tesla," Trump said. In remarks that often meandered away from the subject at hand, Trump used the East Room ceremony to also muse on windmills, which he claimed "are killing our country," the prospect of getting electrocuted by an electric-powered boat if it sank and whether he'd risk a shark attack by jumping as the boat went down. "I'll take electrocution every single day," the president said. When it comes to cars, Trump said he likes combustion engines but for those that prefer otherwise, "If you want to buy electric, you can buy electric." "What this does is it gives us freedom," said Bill Kent, the owner of Kent Kwik convenience stores. Kent, speaking at the White House, said that the California rules would have forced him to install "infrastructure that frankly, is extremely expensive and doesn't give you any return." The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, which represents major car makers, applauded Trump's action. "Everyone agreed these EV sales mandates were never achievable and wildly unrealistic," John Bozzella, the group's president and CEO, said in a statement. Newsom, who is considered a likely 2028 Democratic presidential candidate, and California officials contend that what the federal government is doing is illegal and said the state plans to sue. "If it's a day ending in Y, it's another day of Trump's war on California," Newsom spokesperson Daniel Villasenor said in an email ahead of Trump's signing. "We're fighting back." California's attorney general is expected to speak at a news conference Thursday morning. The signings come as Trump has pledged to revive American auto manufacturing and boost oil and gas drilling. The move follows other steps the Trump administration has taken to roll back rules that aim to protect air and water and reduce emissions that cause climate change. The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed repealing rules that limit greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas. Dan Becker with the Center for Biological Diversity, said the signing of the resolutions was "Trump's latest betrayal of democracy." "Signing this bill is a flagrant abuse of the law to reward Big Oil and Big Auto corporations at the expense of everyday people's health and their wallets," Becker said in a statement. California, which has some of the nation's worst air pollution, has been able to seek waivers for decades from the EPA, allowing it to adopt stricter emissions standards than the federal government. In his first term, Trump revoked California's ability to enforce its standards, but Democratic President Joe Biden reinstated it in 2022. Trump has not yet sought to revoke it again. Republicans have long criticized those waivers and earlier this year opted to use the Congressional Review Act, a law aimed at improving congressional oversight of actions by federal agencies, to try to block the rules. That's despite a finding from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, a nonpartisan congressional watchdog, that California's standards cannot legally be blocked using the Congressional Review Act. The Senate parliamentarian agreed with that finding. California, which makes up roughly 11% of the U.S. car market, has significant power to sway trends in the auto industry. About a dozen states signed on to adopt California's rule phasing out the sale of new gas-powered cars. ___ Austin reported from Sacramento, Calif.
Time of India
37 minutes ago
- Time of India
‘Bodies all around me': Air India crash survivor tells PM Modi what happened in 33 seconds of horror
Prime Minister Narendra Modi visited Ahmedabad Civil Hospital on Friday to meet Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, the only survivor of Thursday's fatal Air India crash. Ramesh was among the 242 individuals aboard AI flight 171, which crashed shortly after takeoff from Ahmedabad, killing 260 people, including those on the ground. Ramesh is currently being treated in the hospital's C7 ward, where 25 others injured in the crash are also admitted. Modi also interacted with the attending medical team during his visit. Vishwash Kumar Ramesh survives as others perish Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, seated in 11A, survived the crash due to his proximity to an emergency exit, according to local police. The 40-year-old British national was flying back to the UK with his brother after a family visit to India. Speaking to the media from his hospital bed, he described the aftermath: 'When I got up, there were bodies all around me. I was scared. I stood up and ran. There were pieces of the plane all around me. Someone grabbed hold of me and put me in an ambulance and brought me to the hospital.' It remains unclear whether he managed to escape before or after the aircraft made impact. PM Modi visits crash site with officials Earlier in the day, the Prime Minister also visited the Air India crash site near Ahmedabad International Airport. He was accompanied by Union Civil Aviation Minister Ram Mohan Naidu Kinjarapu, Gujarat State Home Minister Harsh Sanghavi, and senior officials. The Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner crashed just 33 seconds after takeoff and collided with a medical college hostel, leading to significant casualties among both passengers and those on the ground. Visited the crash site in Ahmedabad today. The scene of devastation is saddening. Met officials and teams working tirelessly in the aftermath. Our thoughts remain with those who lost their loved ones in this unimaginable tragedy. Casualties and ongoing investigation The crash of Air India flight 171 led to the death of at least 260 people. Among the 242 onboard were 169 Indian nationals, 53 British citizens, seven Portuguese nationals, and one Canadian. The Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau (AAIB), under the Ministry of Civil Aviation, has launched a formal investigation into the incident. Union Minister Ram Mohan Naidu confirmed that the probe is underway to determine the causes of one of the deadliest air crashes in India's recent aviation history.
Time of India
41 minutes ago
- Time of India
Comparing 1971 India-Pakistan war & Operation Sindoor
Dr. Prashant Prabhakar Deshpande has post-graduated in Economics with a Gold Medal in 1976 and was awarded a Ph.D in Social Sciences from Nagpur University in 2007. Introduction In the aftermath of the Operation Sindoor Congress has been highlighting Pakistan's surrender to India in 1971 Bangladesh war during Smt Indira Gandhi's premiership. However, according to experts, the exercise is futile. According to them, while both achieved their respective objectives, they differ significantly in context, scale, and impact and should be viewed within their distinct historical and strategic frameworks. According to experts, the 1971 war was a full-scale military conflict triggered by widespread human rights violations and a massive refugee crisis in East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, where the Pakistani army persecuted the Bengali population, forcing nearly 10 million refugees to flee to India. In response, India initially provided humanitarian aid and extended support to the Bengali resistance force, the Mukti Bahini. When Pakistan launched an attack on both eastern & western fronts, India declared a full-scale war, engaging across land, air, and sea, achieving a decisive victory, leading to the liberation of East Pakistan and the creation of Bangladesh, leading to a significant territorial and political shift in South Asia. According to experts, Operation Sindoor in contrast, was a precision military strike launched to dismantle terror camps in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (POK) to avenge the massacre of 26 Indian tourists in J&K's Pahalgam on 22nd of April, 2025 destroying 9 terror hideouts using advanced technology, including drones, satellite imagery, and precision-guided weapons. The operation was aimed solely at terrorist infrastructure avoiding civilian or military targets, the objective being to curb terrorism and deliver a strong message to Pakistan without escalating into a full-scale war. After Pakistan's retaliatory strikes, however, India responded firmly that culminated into an agreement to hold fire & military action on May 10, 2025. Comparing 1971 & 2025 According to military experts, comparing the 1971 war with Operation Sindoor is not appropriate, as both had vastly different objectives and contexts. While the 1971 war resulted in the creation of Bangladesh, Operation Sindoor was a limited but targeted military action aimed at dismantling terrorist infrastructure. While the 1971 war reshaped South Asia's political landscape, Operation Sindoor sent a strong message to Pakistan and the terrorist groups it backs, without escalating into a broader conflict. Achievements of Operation Sindoor Operation Sindoor reportedly targeted terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and PoK, resulting in the destruction of two terrorist headquarters, reportedly killing several terrorists, including 2 designated by the United Nations and 8 on India's most-wanted list. Operation Sindoor highlights a shift towards a proactive defence strategy adopted by India, ensuring national security and regional stability. The destruction of terror camps and Pakistani military assets has sent a strong message to adversaries, reinforcing India's commitment to counter-terrorism. India's precision strikes under Operation Sindoor showcased a modern military doctrine targeting terror camps and Pakistani military installations without engaging in prolonged warfare. India's approach focuses on economic dominance, strategic deterrence, and controlled military engagements, underscoring India's long-term vision, ensuring national security without compromising economic growth under the Viksit Bharat Vision. India agreed to the Pakistani DGMO's request to halt firing & military action only after it achieved its objective to destroy terrorist camps, forcing Pakistan's military to plead. India's actions demonstrated its firm stance against terrorism and cross-border aggression. The country demonstrated its military prowess neutralising half a dozen US and China-made fighter jets along with hundreds of Turkish and Chinese drones deployed by Pakistan in addition to destroying 9 terror camps, eliminating 100+ terrorists, including masterminds behind the Kandahar hijack and 26/11 Mumbai attacks & causing significant losses estimated at $10 billion+. Operation Sindoor demonstrates a decisive shift in India's counter-terrorism strategy, aimed at delivering swift and targeted responses, rather than issuing warnings . Reasons behind India's agreeing to Pakistan's request to hold fire & military action According to experts in today's world, military confrontations are not solely about territorial gains but about economic stability, precision strikes, and global influence. Unlike 1971, when full-fledged warfare was the only viable option, today's geopolitical landscape demands calculated actions that align with economic and strategic priorities, according to them. A prolonged war with Pakistan would derail India's economic growth, disrupt Foreign Direct Investments (FDIs), and slow down job creation, negatively impacting the country's development trajectory. As global manufacturing shifts away from China, a prolonged conflict could prevent India from emerging as a key manufacturing hub, securing Beijing's economic dominance. Unlike traditional warfare, modern conflicts focus on precision military operations that weaken adversaries without engaging in prolonged war. Economically fragile and politically unstable Pakistan has nothing to lose from prolonged military engagements. However, China and the US Deep State have vested interests in India's prolonged involvement as: – Pakistan serves as a front for major global powers to sell weapons and destabilize India. – A long military conflict would weaken India's global position, similar to how the West pushed Russia into a multi-year war with Ukraine. Opposition's Nefarious design to play politics on Operation Sindoor Indian opposition parties, including India's grand old party, Indian National Congress, which was in power at the Centre which remained passive after the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, are now pushing for war to: Disrupt the government's economic policies by forcing it into a long military conflict, and; Create public discontent if the government refuses to escalate the war, labelling it as weakness. These parties do not realise or do not want to realise that they are playing into the hands of India's adversary, Pakistan, which has been since long harbouring terrorists, doing a disservice to the nation, discrediting & demoralising the country's Armed forces. Epilogue India's recent military operations highlight a shift towards proactive defence strategies & by destroying terror camps, sends a strong message to adversaries, reinforcing India's commitment to counter-terrorism. According to experts, while the Shimla Agreement signed after the 1971 war was aimed at diplomatic resolution, India's modern defence approach underscores the necessity of military deterrence in safeguarding national interest, considering it futile to compare 1971 war & Operation Sindoor. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer Views expressed above are the author's own.
