'India must let neutral umpire probe attacks'
Former captain Shahid Afridi says the body language of the leader becomes the body language of the team. Photo: PCB
Former Pakistan captain Shahid Afridi, known for his hard-hitting batting as well as his candid comments, has suggested that India must seriously consider Pakistan's offer to engage "neutral umpire" to probe the recent terrorist incidents in Kashmir besides using cricket diplomacy as a tool to revive Indo-Pak relations.
Afridi condemned the terrorist attacks on the Kashmiri tourists but said retaliatory actions by India will not help in reaching a solution or identifying the killers. "Pakistan have offered to get the matter probed through neutral bodies or investigators and India must consider that offer in order to reach the culprits of these recent incidents," Afridi told Telecomasia.net.
"India have hundreds of thousands of military men deployed in Kashmir and yet this happened and that needs to be seriously investigated," he said. "Terrorists have no religion, nationality or cast and should be severely punished, but without proof you cannot accuse anyone."
India has alleged Pakistan's involvement in the brazen attacks at a tourist destination Pahalgam in their administered Kashmir that killed 28 people.
New Delhi has since suspended the 1960 Indus Water Treaty with Pakistan that threatens to affect the flow of water to Pakistan. In retaliation, Pakistan shut the air space for India and warned stopping Pakistan's share of water amounts to war.
Afridi reiterated his stance that cricket should go on. "Do not mix politics and sports, this has been said for years now so cricket should go on. Even the Indian people and players want it to continue."
The dashing all-rounder added that cricket and sports diplomacy has worked wonders to bring the two arch-rivals closer in the past and there is no reason why it should not work now.
"Cricket and sports have helped in improving the relations between the neighboring countries in the past too, and it can work tremendously well again in this current situation. When India and Pakistan's kabbadi teams can visit each other's countries, why can't the cricket team?" asked Afridi.
He also claimed that former Indian players were under pressure to speak against Pakistan. "Former players do not want to speak on the grim situation in the aftermath of the attacks, but they are under pressure to speak against Pakistan.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
2 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Jaishankar's ‘terroristan' remark overlooks India's own role in regional instability, aggression
Listen to article Amid a long history of rouge acts of aggression, terrorism and preemptive assaults on Pakistan. Now India's Minister of External Affairs S Jaishankar committed another verbal attack on Pakistan as calling it 'terroristan'. Speaking at a joint press conference in New Delhi on Tuesday alongside European Union High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Kaja Kallas, Jaishankar said, 'I'd like you to understand this is not a conflict between two states per se,' Jaishankar said. 'This is actually a response to the threat and the practice of terrorism. So, I would urge you to make it. Don't think of it as India or Pakistan; think of it as India–Terroristan. You will then appreciate it,' he added. The remarks are among the strongest in recent months by a senior Indian official and come amid heightened diplomatic tensions. However, India has a long history of intervention, igniting armed conflict and even producing a shadow army during 1971 war. India's current Defence Minister Rajnath Singh has openly acknowledged the country's policy of targeting peoples beyond its borders, reinforcing long-suspected claims of cross-border operations. In a TV interview, Singh stated, 'If any terrorist tries to disturb India… and escapes to Pakistan, we will go there to kill him,' describing the strategy as approved by Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The statement comes in the wake of a recent Guardian report about India's involvement in up to 20 extrajudicial killings in Pakistan since 2020. While India's Ministry of External Affairs has dismissed the report as 'false and malicious propaganda,' Singh's remarks appear to contradict that denial, casting new light on India's covert terror doctrine. On the other hand, The Indian agency RAW, was finally drawn out of shadows last year when it assassinated pro-Khalistan activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar on Canadian soil. Delhi was in denial – but not for long. The US ambassador in Ottawa was quick to confirm there was shared intelligence among the 'Five Eyes' partners that helped Canada unravel Nijjar's murder mystery. This was followed by another explosive revelation. The FBI thwarted an Indian plot to assassinate another pro-freedom Sikh leader on American soil. It was learnt that the US informed some allies about the plot following Nijjar's murder. Both former prime minister Justin Trudeau and Ex-president Joe Biden took up the blatant violation of sovereignty by Indian agents with Delhi at the top level. Hate speech, minorities and Islamophobia In March 2024, more than 20 UN experts signed a joint statement urging India to "end attacks against minorities" in the run-up to national elections. Since Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi took office in 2014, India has seen numerous outbreaks of violence between majority Hindus and its 200-million-strong Muslim minority. Instances of hate speech against minorities in India such as Muslims increased 74% in 2024, a Washington-based research group said reported in 2025, with incidents ballooning around last year's national elections. In 2022, a study by the Islamic Council of Victoria (ICV) found that Twitter users in India are responsible for 55.12% of anti-Muslim content on the platform. The report highlights a strong link between surges in online Islamophobia and major global events involving Muslims, such as protests, terror attacks, and regional conflicts. Pakistan's irrefutable evidence During a press conference last month in Rawalpindi, Director General ISPR Lieutenant General Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry revealed that Indian army officers are sponsoring terror operations in Pakistan, supplying explosives, IEDs, and funds to militants targeting civilians and security forces. 'This irrefutable evidence is just one small part of India's state-sponsored terrorism,' Chaudhry said. Citing the arrest of a Pakistani suspect on April 25 near the Jhelum bus stand, DG ISPR informed the individual was trained and funded by Indian handlers. Authorities recovered an IED, Indian-origin drone, and large sums of cash. 'Forensic analysis of the retrieved materials confirmed irrefutable evidence, verifiable by any credible independent agency,' he added. Chaudhry named several Indian army personnel — including Major Sandeep Verma and Subedar Sukhwinder — as handlers, claiming they provided instructions for assembling and planting explosives, including a deadly attack in Jalalpur Jattan that killed four Pakistani soldiers. He also called out Indian media for spreading 'blatant propaganda' following incidents involving explosives and dismissed allegations against Pakistan over the recent Pahalgam attack in Indian-administered Kashmir. 'Seven days have passed since the Pahalgam incident, and so far, India has not presented any evidence for its baseless allegations,' he said. Kulbhushan Jadhav case On March 3, 2016, Pakistani intelligence agencies achieved a monumental success by arresting Indian spy Kulbhushan Jadhav, marking a significant milestone in the fight against terrorism and exposing India's involvement in state-sponsored terrorism. Following his arrest, Pakistani intelligence agencies uncovered Jadhav's extensive terrorist network, which was responsible for targeting innocent Pakistani lives. During interrogation, Jadhav confessed to carrying out operations in Pakistan under the direct orders of the Indian government and RAW. In conclusion, Jaishankar's recent remark, labelling Pakistan as 'terroristan,' exposes a glaring irony, given India's own extensive history of covert operations, cross-border violence, and state-sponsored terrorism. While India continues to deflect accusations and blame Pakistan, the undeniable evidence of Indian involvement in extrajudicial killings, support for militant activities, and assassination plots against its own citizens abroad paints a starkly different picture. The remarks by Indian officials only serve to highlight the hypocrisy at play, with India's foreign policy and actions contradicting its rhetoric. As the global community becomes increasingly aware of these covert operations, India's attempts to project itself as the moral high ground in the region ring hollow.
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Newer world order in Trump era — and Pakistan
Listen to article After President Donald Trump's second coming to the Oval Office, the US ways, means and ends of foreign policy are witnessing a transformation. The evolving 'Newer World Order', though dynamic and transitory, needs to be understood. Deciphering President Trump's speeches, announcements, presidential orders, tweets and utterances of last five months, it can be concluded that "trade and tariffs" are the principle means of his interstate relations philosophy. He is well focused at realising his electioneering slogan 'Make America Great Again', for which he is trying to rejuvenate the US economy, bring FDI, reinvigorate the industrial sector, create more jobs, secure US homeland against crimes and illegal immigration, save on extra expenditure made overseas, shift responsibility of defence to self-help by partners and collect more tariffs on imports to reduce taxes on American citizens. His major worry appears to be the back-breaking US debt of trillions of dollars. This approach has been well reflected in his visit to the Middle East where he was successful in securing trillions of dollars of investments and billions of dollars of sales in defence, technology and aviation sectors. Trump portrays himself as anti-war, but perhaps he is for short military showdowns, trade wars and employment of economic coercion to attain his policy ends. Manifestation of this approach was also seen during the last month's Indian aggression against Pakistan, and Pakistan's effective and successful counter offensive. He has reiterated multiple times the role played by him and the US secretary of state in brokering the ceasefire between India and Pakistan. It is inferred that, during his presidency, US interstate relations shall be increasingly woven around trade and economy, rather than security. Trump desires to go down in the history as an American President who helped stop major conflicts in the world, and took his country out of colossal debt and deficit. Trump is likely to help bring peace in the Middle East and work for 'two-state solution' to realise his dream of 'Abraham Accords'. KSA and Turkey are also playing a role in his peace efforts. Lifting of sanctions on Syria, meeting with the Syrian president and expression of hope that a deal could be reached with Iran are positive indicators. Iran is expected to be pragmatic as well. President Trump is ardently working for a ceasefire in Ukraine, and get closer to Russia — perhaps to forestall Russia and China getting into an unmanageable alliance. Though a priority, containment of China may retake shape of 'Congagemnent' during his tenure. China making great strides in high-end technology would wish to maintain pace of its comprehensive rise by avoiding conflicts and developing a good working relationship with the US. However, to protect its interests, China is expected to remain assertive in all domains. The US is likely to continue trade with China, but on more favourable terms. Important fact is that finding an alternative to high quality Chinese products on cost effective rates for US consumers in short term may not be possible. China has been a trusted ally of Pakistan. The China-Pakistan friendship bond has gained newer heights during the May 2025 Pak-India War. Pakistan's grit and tenacity and its courageous, swift, skilful, comprehensive and lethal response to the Indian aggression must have impressed the friends and foes alike. At this point in time, Pakistan and China, their people and militaries are closer than ever before. China will continue to support Pakistan unequivocally. This relationship is likely to experience stress due to the enduring US-China competition. It is important that an understanding is developed in the western capitals that for Pakistan, in the absence of any alternative, the only choice for realising ends of its comprehensive 'National Security Policy' that is predicated on geo-economics, remains the People's Republic of China. The recent China-Pakistan-Afghanistan tripartite meeting and PM Shehbaz Sharif's visit to Turkiye, Iran and Azerbaijan — aimed at conveying gratitude for their support during the Indian aggression, reaffirming the closer relation and expanding the ties to make the mutually beneficial friendship even stronger — is a step in right direction. The warm welcome and pleasant exchanges reflect mutual desires to strengthen the exiting bonds. The second tripartite meeting held between Pakistan, Turkiye and Azerbaijan at Lachin in Azerbaijan further manifests the growing understanding between Pakistan and the regional countries. The PM and his delegation also visited Tajikistan to strengthen the bilateral cooperation in multifaceted areas. Russia and Pakistan are getting closer too, which is being seen as a very positive development. Pakistan has sent delegations to various countries of the world to forge an understanding in the comity of nations to communicate Pakistan's position on perpetuating Indian arrogance and aggressiveness as against Pakistan's desire for enduring peace and stability in the region. Pakistan has been making efforts to develop good relations with all the neighbours, including India. Unfortunately, Indian intransigence remained a hurdle. The impasse seems to have been broken by the short but intense May 2025 War, imposed on Pakistan by the rash Indian leadership, and the ceasefire sought by India through the US. President Trump has expressed his willingness to help resolve the Kashmir dispute by convening a Pakistan-India meeting in some third country — something that is being considered a silver lining. The global milieu engenders quest to forge peace and enhance trade instead of war. Pakistan should continue trying to avoid conflicts and have good relations with all the countries, including India. The US president's promise of mediation must be pursued for resolution of the Kashmir dispute, reversal of Indian announcement of holding IWT in abeyance and restoration of special status of IIOJK. Very good relations with China, the US, the UK, EU, Gulf states, Turkiye, Afghanistan and Iran warrant added focus by Pakistan. Connectivity is the way forward for mutually beneficial socio-economic development and societal emancipation.
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Muted mandate: SAARC and the cycle of Indo-Pak escalation
Listen to article When founded, in 1985, the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) was envisioned as a platform for regional harmony and collective progress. However, its role in mitigating the most recent escalation between Pakistan and India, triggered by the Pahalgam incident of April 22, and the subsequent military and diplomatic fallout, has been conspicuously absent and critically limited. An objective evaluation reveals that SAARC, hampered by its inherent structural weaknesses and the deep-seated animosity between its two major players, has once again failed to act as an effective mechanism for de-escalation or mediation. One of the fundamental limitations of SAARC is its charter, which explicitly excludes discussions on bilateral and contentious political issues. This very clause, intended to foster cooperation in socio-economic areas without being held hostage by political disputes, renders the organisation toothless when the most pressing regional challenges are political in nature, as is the case with Indo-Pak relations. Consequently, SAARC summits and ministerial meetings become stages for polite exchanges on trade and culture, while the elephant in the room — the persistent and often escalating tensions between Pakistan and India — remains unaddressed within the formal structure. The recent crisis, which saw a rapid deterioration of diplomatic ties, cross-border accusations and even military posturing and engagement, demanded an immediate and robust regional response. Ideally, SAARC should have provided a forum for dialogue, a neutral space for both nations to air their grievances, and a mechanism to facilitate de-escalation through diplomatic channels. However, the bloc remained largely silent as bilateral tensions spiraled, underscoring its inability to transcend the nationalistic agendas of its member states, particularly when these agendas are in direct conflict. The history of SAARC is replete with instances where Indo-Pak tensions have undermined its potential. The 2016 summit was cancelled after the Uri attack. The 2019 Pulwama-Balakot standoff further marginalised the organisation. In each instance, SAARC's structural design and political inertia have rendered it a bystander. The current escalation is no different. With both nations locked in a familiar cycle of accusation and retaliation, SAARC's consensus-based decision-making process becomes a significant impediment. Any meaningful action or statement requiring the agreement of all member states is virtually impossible when the two most influential members are in direct confrontation. Furthermore, the lack of strong institutional mechanisms for conflict resolution within SAARC contributes to its ineffectiveness during crises. While the charter emphasises peaceful settlement of disputes, it lacks concrete procedures or a dedicated body to mediate or arbitrate in situations of heightened tension. This void leaves the region reliant on external actors or ad-hoc bilateral engagements, bypassing the very regional framework that was intended to foster collective security and stability. Despite these shortcomings, SAARC could still play a subtle, indirect role. By continuing to promote people-to-people contact, cultural exchanges and economic cooperation in areas where consensus exists, the organisation might foster a long-term environment of trust and understanding that could eventually spill over into the political domain. However, during times of acute crisis, these slow-burn initiatives are often overshadowed by immediate security concerns and nationalist sentiments. The palpable tension following the Pahalgam incident and India's subsequent actions has likely curtailed any such positive momentum. While the ideal of regional cooperation in South Asia remains vital, the current iteration of SAARC has proven to be an inadequate instrument for managing and resolving the most pressing security challenges facing the region. A fundamental re-evaluation of its charter and a genuine commitment from its member states to prioritise regional harmony over narrow nationalistic interests are essential if SAARC is to evolve from a largely symbolic entity into a meaningful force for peace and cooperation in South Asia.
