&w=3840&q=100)
Should India worry about Trump's lunch with Pakistan's Asim Munir?
US President Donald Trump and Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir had lunch at the White House on Wednesday (June 18). This is the first time that a US president has made such an invitation to the chief of the Pakistan Army. What's brewing? Should New Delhi be vigilant? read more
US President Donald Trump and Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir had lunch at the White House on Wednesday (June 18).
This is the first time that a US President has made such an invite to the head of the Pakistan Army who is not head of state.
New Delhi will be undoubtedly watching the events with interest.
While many in India had celebrated the return of Trump to the White House, others questioned whether it would be to New Delhi's benefit.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
But how worried should India be about the lunch?
Let's take a closer look:
What happened?
Munir, who is on a five-day trip to the United States , has thus far received the red-carpet treatment.
Trump at the luncheon was accompanied by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Special Representative for the Middle East Steve Witkoff.
Munir was accompanied by National Security Advisor Lt Gen Asim Malik, who is also the head of the intelligence agency Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).
Trump, speaking at the White House, said he wanted to thank Munir for not going to war with India.
'The reason I had him here, I want to thank him for not going into the war, ending the war (with India). And I want to thank, as you know, Prime Minister Modi,' he said.
Asim Munir was recently promoted to Field Marshal. AFP
Trump said that 'two very smart people decided not to keep going with that war'. 'That could have been a nuclear war. Those are two nuclear powers, big ones, big, big nuclear powers, and they decided (to end the conflict),' he added.
When asked if the talks included the Iran-Israel conflict, Trump said: 'They (Pakistan) know Iran very well, better than most, and they're not happy about anything. It's not that they're bad with Israel. They know them both, actually, but they know Iran better."
'The engagement marks a significant moment in the ongoing efforts to reinforce the longstanding partnership between Pakistan and the United States, built upon shared objectives of peace, stability, and prosperity,' the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR), the media wing of the Pakistan Army, said in a statement after the lunch.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Apart from lunch at the White House with Trump, Munir also met a number of top US security officials at the Pentagon, the state department, and Central Command headquarters in Florida.
How worried should India be?
Some argue that New Delhi should be worried.
After all, this is the first time a US President has invited a Pakistani military chief who isn't head of state to the White House.
Ayub Khan, Zia ul-Haq and Pervez Musharraf were all heads up state at the time they were hosted at the White House.
This despite Pakistan continuing to back terror groups and Indian intelligence agencies even investigating if Munir's remarks instigated the Pahalgam atta ck in April.
Trump's tone on Pakistan has also undergone a jarring shift.
Trump just a few years ago accused Pakistan of offering the United States 'nothing but lies and deceitful'.
However, this must be seen in light of what Trump can personally get from Pakistan.
Trump, since returning to office, has made cryptocurrency and rare earth minerals a top priority.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Pakistan, which recently established a Crypto Council, has tied up with a firm with links to the Trump family.
US President Donald Trump speaks with reporters while flying aboard Air Force One en route from Calgary, Canada to Joint Base Andrews. AP
Incidentally, Zachary Witkoff, the son of Steve Witkoff, represented the firm at the meetings with senior Pakistani officials including Munir.
Pakistan has also invited US companies to invest in its mineral reserves – which are estimated to be worth trillions of dollars.
Pakistan is also eager to reach a trade deal with the US – another Trump priority.
'President Trump expressed keen interest in forging a mutually beneficial trade partnership with Pakistan based on long-term strategic convergence and shared interests,' the ISPR statement added.
Analysts says this is Trump's modus operandi – dealing with a country strictly on a quid pro quo basis.
'The Trump-Munir meeting shouldn't be seen only through the lens of the Israel-Iran war,' Michael Kugelman, a Washington-based south Asia analyst, told The Guardian. 'There's been US-Pakistan engagement on crypto, minerals and counter-terrorism, and Trump takes a deep personal interest in all of these.'
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
'This is classic Trump: 'What can you do for me? What can I get out of this?''
Trump's claims about also being responsible for the ceasefire between India and Pakistan are also causing a backlash for the Modi government.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi in a phone call with Trump Tuesday denied that the United States played any role in the ceasefire.
Modi said that India has never sought third party mediation and would never do so.
Modi said that the ceasefire came at the behest of Pakistan.
Some argue that India should not be surprised given the United States' history of prioritising Pakistan – given its strategic location and its pliability to Washington many demands – since the Cold War.
They say that India has positioned itself as a far more reliable and trustworthy partner.
They add that the US is likely courting Pakistan at the moment in case it needs a base from which to launch operations against Iran.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Marvin Weinbaum, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute (MEI), and former state department official, speaking to Al Jazeera, warned Pakistan that 'nothing is permanent in this administration'.
'If Pakistan does play some role in the Iran crisis, they have could have more substantial meaning to these ties. But it needs to be prepared that there is nothing settled with this administration. It can change on a dime, at any hour,' he added.
With input from agencies
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
9 minutes ago
- Hans India
Omar Abdullah deliberately politicising water sharing with Punjab: AAP
Chandigarh: The Aam Aadmi Party in Punjab on Friday questioned Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah's remarks that 'we will not give water from the Indus River to Punjab' and accused him of deliberately politicising the issue. AAP spokesperson Neel Garg said the authority to decide on river waters lies with the Central government, and Omar Abdullah cannot take a unilateral decision on this matter. He emphasised that Punjab needs water and, therefore, Punjab should also get a share of the Indus River water, adding that during the war with Pakistan, the Indian government had decided to annul the Indus Water Treaty. 'Now, it is the Indian government's responsibility to appropriately distribute the remaining water and give Punjab its rightful share,' he said. Garg pointed out that like Jammu and Kashmir, Punjab is also a border state. 'Whenever war occurs, Punjab becomes the battleground. And when the country needs food grains, it becomes the granary of the nation. Now that there is water available, Punjab has a legitimate claim over it.' He highlighted that Punjab needs water today, as most of its regions have entered the dark zone. 'In the process of filling the nation's granaries, we have been deprived of our own water. Now that the Indus Water Treaty has been annulled, Punjab has the primary right over this water because it will not only bring relief to our barren lands but also boost our agriculture. When farmers prosper, the nation prospers,' he said. Garg added that Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann also stated, after the annulment of the Indus Treaty, that Punjab should receive a share of the water that is being prevented from flowing to Pakistan. 'Therefore, the government of India must consider this matter,' he said. The Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) also expressed surprise at Omar Abdullah's statement. In a statement, former Minister and senior SAD leader Daljit Singh Cheema said what Omar Abdullah was demanding was another attempt to do injustice to Punjab. He said that while filling the food bowl of the country, Punjab had lost its groundwater, which had fallen to alarming levels. He said the quantity of water in rivers had also gone down substantially, adding that the farmers of Punjab had taken huge debt on their shoulders to fulfil the food requirement of the country. Earlier, speaking on constructing a canal by the government of India to divert excess water from three rivers of the Indus system in Jammu and Kashmir to Haryana, Punjab and Rajasthan, Chief Minister Abdullah cited the 45-year-old Shahpur Kandi barrage dispute with Punjab and asked, 'Did they give us water?'
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
12 minutes ago
- Business Standard
What Happens if Trump Decides to Strike Iran or Assassinate Its Leader?
If President Trump decides to send American bombers to help Israel destroy an underground uranium enrichment facility in Iran, it will likely kick off a more dangerous phase in the war. And if the United States assassinates Iran's supreme leader, as Trump hinted was possible, there are no guarantees he will be replaced by a friendlier leader. Iran's autocratic clerical leadership, which has ruled for nearly half a century since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, has proved its staying power, even in the face of multiple domestic uprisings. Demolishing Fordo, the enrichment site buried deep in a mountain, may not obliterate Iran's nuclear program and could lead the country to broaden the war or accelerate that program. Here are some ways it could play out if the United States enters the war. Iran could negotiate Before Israel launched a surprise attack on Iran's nuclear program and other targets last week, Iran and the United States were discussing limits on Iran's uranium enrichment program. It was rapidly producing fuel close to the levels needed for nuclear weapons, and in exchange for new limits on the program, Iran would win relief from economic sanctions. The two sides were nowhere near a final agreement, but signs of a possible compromise had emerged by early June. When Israel attacked Iran, the negotiations collapsed. Yet Iran has signaled that it remains willing to talk, and even a strike on Fordo would not necessarily wipe out prospects of a return to the negotiating table. If the Trump administration follows an attack on Iran with an enticing offer, such as large-scale sanctions relief or peace guarantees, there is still a chance that Iran would consider making concessions, said Vali Nasr, an Iran expert and a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies. 'Is there an offer on the table that the Iranian people in this moment can actually rally around?' he said. 'If it's only a stick, then they're going to fight.' So far, Trump has not extended many carrots. He called in a social media post on Tuesday for Iran's 'UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER.' Iran may lean into nuclear activity All eyes are on Fordo. But it is possible that Iran has secret nuclear sites aimed at producing weapons that the United States and Israel do not know about, though no public evidence has emerged of such places. If they do exist, Iran could use whatever it has left to try to accelerate its nuclear program in the wake an American attack. With the damage Israeli airstrikes have done to nuclear facilities and the killings of top nuclear scientists, Iran probably lacks the capacity to build a nuclear weapon quickly, analysts said. Still, it could move in that direction and would have fresh incentive to do so. 'You would begin to see that broader escalation that they've held back on,' said Sanam Vakil, the director of the Middle East and North Africa Program at Chatham House. After all, Iran would have few other options left for deterring future attacks, she added. Iran's Parliament has publicly discussed a withdrawal from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. The treaty, of which Israel is not a signatory, currently requires Iran to submit to oversight by the International Atomic Energy Agency and other transparency obligations and to commit to not building a nuclear bomb. So far, the government has reiterated its longstanding insistence that Iran's nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes. But Iran has firmly refused to capitulate to a central American demand that it give up uranium enrichment, saying it has the right to a civilian nuclear program. The war could get bigger and messier Over the past week, Iran has avoided striking American troops or other targets that could pull the United States into the war. Its leaders may still be hoping to make a deal with the Trump administration to end the conflict and wary of taking on the US military on top of Israel's. Though Iran has responded to Israeli attacks with missiles and threats of its own, it has refrained from hitting American troops or bases in the Middle East. It has also not struck Arab countries allied with the United States, such as Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates. Nor has it sent global oil prices soaring by sealing off or harassing traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, a vital oil shipping channel to Iran's south. But at least one Iranian official has warned that Iran could do so if the United States enters the war. And Iran's allied militias in the region, including the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon and armed groups in Iraq, have not joined the fight. Many of them have been seriously weakened over the past two years. But those Iranian allies could still join the fray if the Trump administration decides to strike. If the United States tries to force Iran to capitulate, 'Iran will keep hitting until the end of the missile capabilities,' said Ellie Geranmayeh, an Iran expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Talk of regime change Trump said on social media this week that the United States is weighing whether to kill Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, but had decided 'not for now.' Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel said in a Fox News interview this week that changing Iran's regime 'could certainly be the result' of this war. Even if the United States assassinates Khamenei, however, the religious-military establishment that has tightly held power in Iran for nearly five decades may not fall. With a war raging, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the most powerful branch of Iran's military, could seize control of the country, said Nasr, the professor. They might put in place a more Western-friendly government, or, more likely, replace Khamenei with a more extreme figure who would dig in for a long fight, Nasr added. If the military does not assert itself quickly, some analysts fear that Iran could plunge into chaos or civil war as different factions struggle for control. But they see little chance for Iran's liberal opposition, which has been weakened and brutally repressed by the regime, to prevail. Iran's people could rise up again Netanyahu encouraged the Iranian people last week to capitalize on Israel's attacks on their government and 'rise up' against their 'evil and oppressive regime.' Iranians have staged mass protests against clerical rule several times in recent history, most recently with the 'Women, Life, Freedom' demonstrations of late 2022. Each time, the opposition has faced a harsh crackdown by government security forces. Some Iranians so despise the clerical leaders that they have at times looked to Israel as an ally and openly hoped for the United States to install new leadership. Some Iranian opponents of the regime cheered Israel's initial attacks on Iran, which they saw as more evidence of their government's incompetence and mismanagement. But the growing death toll, the attacks on civilian infrastructure and the panic gripping Iranian cities are hardening many in the country against Israel. Iranian social media platforms have been full of patriotic posts in recent days, expressing unity against foreign intervention, if not exactly support for the regime.
India Today
13 minutes ago
- India Today
MAGA hates you: Trump fumes at Fox News, WSJ over approval ratings and Iran coverage
Friends can become enemies in a heartbeat. This happened to Rupert Murdoch's Fox News, a long-time supporter of US President Donald Trump, after it gave lower approval ratings to the US President. As for Murdoch's Wall Street Journal (WSJ), the US President disagreed with their coverage of took to Truth Social to discuss Fox's "long-standing bias" and "faulty election polls", and criticised the WSJ for its reporting on America's plan on Crooked FoxNews Polls got the Election WRONG, I won by much more than they said I would, and have been biased against me for years. They are always wrong and negative. It's why MAGA HATES FoxNews, even though their anchors are GREAT (sic)," Trump posted on Truth Social. Trump blasted the network over what he called a "fake border poll" and also accused it of using "discredited pollsters despite repeated inaccuracies". The poll, released on Wednesday, indicated that 46% of respondents approve of Trump's performance, while 54% expressed disapproval."This has gone on for years, but they never change the incompetent polling company that does their work. Now a new FoxNews poll comes out this morning giving me a little more than 50% at the Border, and yet the Border is miraculously perfect. NOBODY WAS ABLE TO COME LAST MONTH. 60,000 people came in with Sleepy Joe in the same month last year (sic)," he a follow-up post, he came down heavily on Murdoch's flagship newspaper, WSJ, after it reported on Wednesday that the US was planning to attack Iran, but was holding off in a last-ditch hope to persuading the Iranians to voluntarily abandon their nuclear ambitions."The Wall Street Journal has no idea what my thoughts are concerning Iran! (sic)" Trump wrote on in the Fox Poll, Donald Trump's lowest numbers were actually on the topic of inflation, with 64% disapproving of his handling of this key economic issue, and just 34% approving, according to The Daily his outburst was particularly over how he was being rated on the relationship with Fox News, traditionally supportive of him, and The Wall Street Journal, which has both applauded and criticised his policies, has been long and this year, Trump hosted Murdoch himself in the Oval Office, where he referred to the media mogul as "legendary" and "one of the most talented people in the world", while also musing that he would need to "talk to" Murdoch about the Journal's coverage of his administration, according to a New York-based news website, Media Lucas, professor of international politics at University College Dublin, said Trump's decision to bring the military into Los Angeles to deal with protests also harmed his rating due to the method Fox poll is going to get headlines in part because it's Fox, where you have a lot of Trump supporters, in part because the numbers are so stark, and in part because of Trump's angry reaction on social media," Newsweek quoted Lucas as noted that Trump's poll numbers (on Fox News) have been fluctuating, with a notable decline in April due to concerns over the economy, trade, inflation, and the negative impact of his tariff added that deploying the military in Los Angeles to handle protests also hurt Trump's approval, even among those who support his immigration policy but disagreed with the approach. 'He's slipping' on migration, Lucas said, according to InMust Watch
