All sectors growing rapidly: PM Modi praises India's inclusive growth
3:41
Pakistan Army Chief Asim Munir gifted Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif a photo falsely claiming it depicted a Pakistani strike on India. The image, however, was an old 2019 photo of a Chinese military drill featuring the PHL-03 rocket launcher, originally captured by photographer Huang Hai. The deceptive gesture has sparked criticism over the attempt to portray a fabricated military success.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
41 minutes ago
- First Post
Pakistan must not be allowed to evade terror accountability despite escalation risks
India has to realise that once it takes kinetic action against Pakistan, the world wants a quick cessation of hostilities because it fears escalation. In this process Pakistan's terrorist action takes a back seat for the international community read more India has to make the world more sensitive to the dangers of Pakistani terrorism and highlight that, notwithstanding the sophistry of the arguments put forward by its generals, India will not absorb terrorist acts or succumb to Pakistan's nuclear blackmail. AFP The two senior-most defence officers of India and Pakistan — Chairman of Defence Staff Gen Anil Chauhan and Pakistan's Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee Gen Sahir Shamshad Mirza — participated in the recently held Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. On the sidelines of the event, they gave separate interviews to Reuters on May 31. The two generals were on the same page on the absence of nuclear signalling by Pakistan during the course of Operation Sindoor. Reuters quoted Gen Chauhan as saying, 'I think there's a lot of space before that nuclear threshold is crossed, a lot of signalling before that. I think nothing like that happened.' The same news agency then reported Gen Mirza saying, 'Nothing happened this time.' The agency further clarified that Gen Mirza stated that there was no move towards nuclear weapons during this conflict. As India has a no first use nuclear doctrine and Pakistan does not, any signal to get nuclear weapons into play can only come from Pakistan. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD While agreeing that no nuclear signal had been given during Operation Sindoor, Gen Chauhan and Gen Mirza differed greatly in their direct and indirect elaboration on the possibility of escalation during armed conflicts between India and Pakistan. The term escalation, in this context, refers to the possibility of conventional hostilities between nuclear countries leading to the use of nuclear weapons. The remarks of both generals on this subject would be closely studied worldwide by diplomats and scholars of security and strategic issues. On escalation, Gen Chauhan said, 'It's my personal view that the most rational people are people in uniform when conflict takes place,' he added. 'During this operation, I found both sides displaying a lot of rationality in their thoughts as well as actions. So why should we assume that in the nuclear domain there will be irrationality on someone else's part?' Gen Chauhan implied that as nuclear weapons were meant not for war fighting but to prevent existential crises, it would be irrational and illogical for their use for offensive purposes. Therefore, his conviction remains that the 'rationality' of the Pakistani army would prevent it from using nuclear weapons. Gen Mirza did not share Gen Chauhan's positive view about the rationality of 'people in uniform'. He stuck to Pakistan's position that India should not take kinetic action in response to terrorist strikes. Therefore, while noting that 'nothing happened this time', he added, 'But you can't rule out any strategic miscalculation at any time, because when the crisis is on, the responses are different.' Mirza also dwelt on escalation during his participation in a panel on 'Regional Crisis—Management Mechanisms'. What he said in his statement, as well as in response to questions, needs to be carefully evaluated by Indian policy makers and academics. In order to appreciate their significance, it is essential to place them in the context of past Indian responses to Pakistani terrorist acts. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Until the Uri terrorist attack of 2016, India avoided open kinetic action against Pakistani terrorism. It absorbed these attacks and broke off engagement with Pakistan till the anger of the Indian public subsided. Thereafter the bilateral dialogue process resumed. The major powers encouraged India to pursue such a path because they virtually accepted the Pakistani stand that kinetic action through conventional forces between nuclear powers risked escalation. What the major powers ignored was that Pakistan had begun to use nuclear weapons as a shield to carry on terrorism against India. In fact, they overlooked their own doctrine that nuclear states cannot undertake provocative acts on each other's territories because it is too dangerous to do so. Indeed, after the heinous Mumbai terrorist attack of November 26, 2008, the Western powers accepted that Lashkar-e-Taiba was behind it. However, they virtually absolved the Pakistan state agencies of having any hand in it. Prime Minister Narendra Modi changed the policy of absorbing terrorist attacks after the Uri incident. He sanctioned India's special forces to go into Pakistan-held territory of the then state of Jammu and Kashmir to undertake surgical strikes to hit Pakistani terrorist launch pads. Pakistan denied that India had undertaken any such action. This denial was obviously to protect its doctrine that a kinetic response by Indian conventional armed forces was escalatory. By denying the surgical strikes, the Pakistanis thought that the validity of their doctrine would not come into question. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The luxury of denial was not available to Pakistan after India's Balakot strike in the wake of the Pulwama terrorist attack. It therefore claimed that it had achieved the upper hand by downing an Indian fighter aircraft and capturing Wing Commander Abhinandan Varthaman on its territory. It thereafter said that the major powers intervened to diffuse the situation and that, in a sign of goodwill, it quickly released the Indian officer. India said that it had also downed Pakistani aircraft and that it was its pressure which led Pakistan to agree to releasing the officer. India did not accept that foreign mediation resolved the situation but agreed that the major powers were in touch with it as with Pakistan. The important point stressed by Pakistan was that Indian and Pakistani issues could not be resolved bilaterally but required foreign intervention and that hostilities post-Balakot were also diffused through foreign intervention. The significant point that India made through the Balakot action was that kinetic aerial action was possible as a response to Pakistan's terrorism. This meant that India had blown the lid off the Pakistani doctrine that the danger of escalation did not permit such kinetic action. As always, India also noted that it would not allow third parties to intervene in India-Pakistan issues. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD At the Shangri La Dialogue, Gen Mirza spelt out a modified Pakistani doctrine regarding the dangers of India's use of kinetic force. He argued that the post-Pahalgam situation had taken strategic stability between India and Pakistan to dangerously low levels. He said while in the past borders were targeted, on this occasion, cities were attacked. He went on to state that now not only the disputed territory (meaning the UTs of J&K and Ladakh) but the whole of India and Pakistan would be involved. This, he claimed, would be extremely detrimental to 'investments, trading and the development needs of 1.5 billion people'. He obviously implied that this negativity would impact both countries. Mirza went on to assert, 'In future, given the Indian policies and the polity's extremist mindset and absence of crisis management mechanisms, we may not give enough time to the global powers to intervene and effect a cessation of hostilities. They will probably be too late to avert damage and destruction.' As Mirza had already ruled out the possibility that escalation could be stopped bilaterally between India and Pakistan and needed the intervention of global powers, what he actually signalled was that Pakistan may use nuclear weapons if it was rapidly suffering major losses in a conventional war. Thus, Pakistan was actually, once again, asserting that India should revert to its old policy of absorbing terrorist attacks. Mirza was also perhaps responding to PM Modi's declaration that India would not be deterred by Pakistani nuclear blackmail. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD India's strategic community has to effectively respond to this refined Pakistani doctrine which, at its kernel, is emphasising that a rapid escalation to the nuclear level may occur between India and Pakistan if India again uses kinetic force. And that the quick escalation may not give the international community time to diffuse the conflict during its conventional stage. The real point that India has to forcefully articulate is that the first step on the escalatory ladder is a terrorist attack from Pakistan. Also, India as the victim cannot be equated with Pakistan, the perpetrator of terror. Hence, for strategic stability, Pakistan has to be compelled to give up terrorism. India will have to patiently and continuously make this point to move the international community to effectively pressurise Pakistan. Many countries may be inhibited from telling Pakistan to stop terror because of the nature of Sino-Pakistan ties. India has to also realise that once it takes kinetic action against Pakistan, the world wants a quick cessation of hostilities because it fears escalation. In this process Pakistan's terrorist action takes a back seat for the international community. Hence, India has to make the world more sensitive to the dangers of Pakistani terrorism and highlight that, notwithstanding the sophistry of the arguments put forward by Mirza, India will not absorb terrorist acts or succumb to Pakistan's nuclear blackmail. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The writer is a former Indian diplomat who served as India's Ambassador to Afghanistan and Myanmar, and as secretary, the Ministry of External Affairs. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
an hour ago
- First Post
After Geneva, US-China trade deal talks move to London; Trump says representatives meeting on Monday
The meeting comes after a phone call between Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping on Thursday, which the US president described as a 'very positive' conversation as the two countries attempt to break an impasse over tariffs and global supplies of rare earth minerals read more Senior U.S. administration officials will meet with a Chinese delegation on Monday in London for the next round of trade negotiations between Washington and Beijing, President Donald Trump said Friday. The meeting comes after a phone call between Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping on Thursday, which the U.S. president described as a 'very positive' conversation as the two countries attempt to break an impasse over tariffs and global supplies of rare earth minerals. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer will represent the U.S. side in the trade talks. 'The meeting should go very well,' Trump wrote on his social media platform Friday afternoon. Speaking to reporters on Air Force One Friday, Trump said Xi had agreed to restart exports of rare earth minerals and magnets to the U.S., which China had slowed, threatening a range of U.S. manufacturers that relied on the critical materials. The was no immediate confirmation from China. The Thursday conversation between Trump and Xi, who lead the world's two biggest economies, lasted about an hour and a half, according to the U.S. president. The Chinese foreign ministry has said Trump initiated the call. The ministry said Xi asked Trump to 'remove the negative measures' that the U.S. has taken against China. It also said that Trump said 'the U.S. loves to have Chinese students coming to study in America,' although his administration has vowed to revoke some of their visas.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
US suspends nuclear equipment exports to China amid trade war escalation
The US in recent days suspended licenses for nuclear equipment suppliers to sell to China's power plants, according to four people familiar with the matter, as the two countries engage in a damaging trade war . The suspensions were sent to companies by the US Department of Commerce , the people said, and affect export licenses for parts and equipment used with nuclear power plants . Nuclear equipment suppliers are among a wide range of companies whose sales have been restricted over the past two weeks as the US-China trade war shifted from negotiating tariffs to throttling each other's supply chains. It is unclear whether a Thursday call between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping would affect the suspensions. The US and China agreed on May 12 to roll back triple digit, tit-for-tat tariffs for 90 days, but the truce between the two biggest economies quickly went south, with the US claiming China reneged on terms related to rare earth elements , and China accusing the US of "abusing export control measures" by warning that using Huawei Ascend AI chips anywhere in the world violated US export controls. On Friday, Trump said US and Chinese officials would meet again on June 9. The US Department of Commerce did not respond to a request for comment on the nuclear equipment restrictions. On May 28, a spokesperson said the department was reviewing exports of strategic significance to China. "In some cases, Commerce has suspended existing export licenses or imposed additional license requirements while the review is pending," the spokesperson said in a statement. US nuclear equipment suppliers include Westinghouse and Emerson . Westinghouse, whose technology is used in over 400 nuclear reactors around the world, and Emerson, which provides measurement and other tools for the nuclear industry, did not respond to requests for comment. The suspensions affect business worth hundreds of millions of dollars, two of the sources said. A spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington said Xi emphasized on his call with Trump that both sides should make good on the agreement reached in Geneva on May 12. China has been "earnestly" executing the agreement, the spokesperson, Liu Pengyu, said in a statement on Friday. "The US side should acknowledge the progress already made, and remove the negative measures taken against China," the statement said. China's rare earth export controls are in line with common practice and not targeted at specific countries, it added. They also coincide with Chinese restrictions on critical metals threatening supply chains for manufacturers worldwide, especially America's Big Three automakers. China has granted temporary export licenses to rare-earth suppliers for the US automakers, Reuters reported on Friday. Reuters could not determine whether the new restrictions were tied to the trade war, or if and how quickly they might be reinstated. Department of Commerce export licenses typically run for four years and include authorized quantities and values. But many new restrictions on exports to China have been imposed in the last two weeks, according to sources, and include license requirements for a hydraulic fluids supplier for sales to China. Other license suspensions went to GE Aerospace for jet engines for China's COMAC aircraft, sources said. The US also now requires licenses to ship ethane to China, as Reuters reported first last week. Houston-based Enterprise Product Partners said Wednesday that its emergency requests to complete three proposed cargoes of ethane to China, totaling some 2.2 million barrels, had not been granted. Enterprise said a May 23 requirement for a license to sell butane to China, in addition to the ethane, was subsequently withdrawn. Dallas-based Energy Transfer said it was notified on Tuesday about the new ethane licensing requirement, and planned to apply and file for an emergency authorization. Other sectors that have been hit with new restrictions include companies that sell electronic design automation software such as Cadence Design Systems.
