Lt Gen Pratik Sharma takes over as Northern Army Commander amid heightened tensions with Pakistan
The DCOAS (strategy) oversees critical directorates within the Indian Army, including operations and intelligence.
Lt Gen Sharma, who was earlier the deputy chief of the Indian Army (strategy), takes over following the superannuation of Lt Gen M.V. Suchindra Kumar on 30 April.
New Delhi: Lieutenant General Pratik Sharma Thursday took over as the general officer commanding-in-chief (GOC-in-C) of the critical Northern Command amid heightened tensions with Pakistan on one side and continued stand-off with China on the other.
Commissioned into the 2nd Battalion of the Madras Regiment, the new Northern Army commander has served as the director general of military operations (DGMO), the crucial wing of the Indian Army that oversees the operational requirements and strategies.
Lt Gen Sharma has also served as the commander of the Ambala-based 2 Corps, also known as the Kharga Corps, which is one of the two Strike Corps meant for the Western borders.
He has also commanded a Division in the Poonch sector of Jammu and Kashmir. Incidentally, Lt Gen Sharma had been stationed in Kashmir since the Pahalgam attack and was part of all security briefings and planning.
The Northern Command looks after both the borders with Pakistan and China, besides having a counter-infiltration and counter-terrorism role.
In over three decades, Lt Gen Sharma has served in multiple operational environments, including Operation Pawan, the Indian Peace Keeping Force (IPKF)'s operation in Jaffa, Sri Lanka in the late 1980s; Operation Meghdoot, the 1984 Indian Army operation to take back the Siachen Glacier, which continues; Operation Rakshak, a counter-terrorism operation in Jammu and Kashmir that began in the 1990s; and Operation Parakram, the 2001-02 standoff between India and Pakistan.
He has also served in the military secretary branch and was the director general, (information warfare), a recently institutionalised information directorate at the Army headquarters in New Delhi.
Other key appointments
Air Marshal Ashutosh Dixit, who was earlier the air officer commanding-in-chief of Central Air Command in Allahabad, has taken over as the new chief of integrated defence staff (CISC) following the superannuation of Lt Gen J.P. Mathew.
A seasoned test pilot and qualified flying instructor with over 3,300 flying hours, Air Marshal Dixit brings in extensive operational and planning experience and has commanded a Mirage squadron.
He will be replaced by Air Marshal Balakrishnan Manikantan, currently AOC-in-C of the Southern Air Command.
Meanwhile, Air Marshal Narmdeshwar Tiwari has taken over as the new vice-chief of the Air Staff following the superannuation of Air Marshal S.P. Dharkar.
Tiwari was earlier commanding the South Western Air Command in Gandhinagar, and he will be replaced by the current Training Command Chief, Air Marshal Nagesh Kapoor.
(Edited by Sanya Mathur)
Also Read: Ultra & Alpine Quest—technologies that keep Pakistani terrorists, especially LeT, going in J&K
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
an hour ago
- News18
'No Equivalence With Terrorists': Shashi Tharoor Says Mediation Between India, Pakistan Not Possible
Tharoor said there was no scope for mediation between two unequals, stressing that there was no equivalence between terrorists and their victims. Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has strongly asserted that there was no scope for external mediation between India and Pakistan, saying the two neighbouring countries are not equals, amid repeated claims by US President Donald Trump that he 'helped settle" the recent conflict. While speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington on Thursday, Tharoor, who is leading an all-party delegation on Operation Sindoor, said there was no equivalence between terrorists and their victims. 'Mediation is not a term that we are particularly willing to entertain. I'll tell you why not. The fact is that this implies, even when you say things like broker or whatever, you're implying an equivalence which simply doesn't exist," he said at the event. 'There is no equivalence between a country that provides safe haven to terrorism, and a country that's a flourishing multi-party democracy that's trying to get on with its business." 'There is no equivalence between a state that is a status quo power that just wants to be left alone by its neighbours, where the neighbours don't agree with us, and a revisionist power that wants to upset the geopolitical arrangements that have existed for the last three-quarters of a century. There is no equivalence possible in these cases, and in these circumstances, to suggest that you can mediate between two unequals is not possible," Tharoor went on to say. Tharoor has repeatedly denied Trump's claims of brokering a ceasefire between India and Pakistan, after tensions flared when India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7 in response to the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22. Both countries agreed to a ceasefire on May 10. Since May 10, when Trump announced on social media that India and Pakistan had agreed to a 'full and immediate" ceasefire after a 'long night" of talks mediated by the United States, he has repeated his claim over a dozen times that he 'helped settle" the tensions between India and Pakistan. During a meeting with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Trump against raked up the issue, saying he was 'very proud" to help stop the India-Pakistan conflict. 'I spoke to some very talented people on both sides, very good people on both sides," he said, adding that he warned of cancelling trade deals with both countries if the conflict persisted. 'You know what, I got that war stopped…Now, am I going to get credit? I'm not going to get credit for anything. They don't give me credit for anything. But nobody else could have done it. I stopped it. I was very proud of that," he added. Speaking on the American role in the conflict, Tharoor said he is 'guessing to some degree" that their priority would have been to keep themselves informed, conversations on both sides, and 'certainly my government received a number of calls at high levels from the US government". At the same time, the US must have been making similar calls at the highest levels to the Pakistan side, and 'our assumption is that's where, because that's the side that needed persuading to stop this process," he said. India has been maintaining that the understanding on cessation of hostilities with Pakistan was reached following direct talks between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of the two militaries. (with PTI inputs) First Published: June 07, 2025, 09:04 IST
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
North Korea internet hit by a major outage, analyst says
North Korea is grappling with a significant internet outage, impacting key websites like its main news outlets and the Foreign Ministry. A UK-based researcher suggests the disruption, affecting all internet routes, appears to be internal rather than a cyberattack. The country's entire internet infrastructure is currently undetectable by monitoring systems, raising questions about the cause. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads North Korea's internet is experiencing a major outage on Saturday, said a UK-based researcher, adding that the cause may be may be internal rather than a cyberattack North Korea's main news web sites and its Foreign Ministry internet site were inaccessible on Saturday morning, according to checks by Reuters."A major outage is currently occurring on North Korea's internet - affecting all routes whether they come in via China or Russia," said Junade Ali, a U.K.-based researcher who monitors the North Korean Korea's entire internet infrastructure is not showing up on systems that can monitor internet activities, he said."Hard to say if this is intentional or accidental - but seems like this is internal rather than an attack," he at South Korea 's Police cyber terror response centre which monitors North Korea's cyber activities could not be reached for comment.
The Print
2 hours ago
- The Print
Op Sindoor is the first battle in India's two-front war. A vicious pawn in a King's Gambit
For once, I would avoid the temptation of the usual trope, a cricketing analogy. I'd leapfrog to chess instead. Since the Pakistanis started this with Pahalgam and fought with Chinese equipment, technology and guidance, think of them as holding the white pieces. And since the side with the white pieces makes the opening move, see this as that familiar move called PK4 in the past, and e4 now. I would, however, suggest a description, if not a sharp, hashtag-worthy name. What we've seen just now is the opening move in a two-front war. You could call it a trailer. It's just the early moves in a long-drawn war of wits, nerve, and military muscle. How do I explain this more succinctly? History gives every war a name. Officially, there's a pause, but the fighting lasted about 87 hours. Will it suffice for future generations for it to be listed merely as the 87-hour war? This means moving the pawn in front of the king two squares ahead, inviting the rival to counter the move. This move can lead to several different strategies, some as exotic sounding as The Italian Game, Scotch Game and Ruy Lopez. The description I find more suitable is The King's Gambit, since it's more aggressive and can lead to multiple tactical options. The two of them, Pakistan and China, are playing this together. And they have moved a pawn forward. Pakistan is in the front, the pawn, powered by the king and the queen, their cavalry and counsels in the back, read China. They wait for India's move now. Complacency is no plan. The clock is running. The flurry of stories (in the newspapers; you'd never catch us citing any TV channel on this) inform us that now the armed forces have also been following the practice of setting up a 'Red Team,' a group of sharp officers tasked with thinking and responding like the enemy. Think for a moment like your Red Team. What will it do next? Our basic premise is that while we have fretted over our two-front predicament, we never really thought it would come to pass at the same time. In 1962, the Pakistanis stayed out, although not unconditionally. They demanded negotiations on Kashmir which duly began under US-British pressure. And in 1965 and 1971, Kargil and onwards, the Chinese mostly kept away. This first move of the pawn two squares ahead of the king shows this has now changed. Also Read: Asim Munir just stole his 5th star & has nothing to show for it. It'll make him desperate, dangerous A two-front war is on. Except, the Chinese see no need to fight it directly. They have an able and willing proxy in Pakistan. They will keep selling it enough cutting-edge hardware to keep it on a par with India if not ahead in some specific areas, like possibly 5th-generation fighters within a year. Their satellites and other ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) resources will be at their ward's disposal, and real-time advice on tap. That's the reason I had said two weeks ago that the next provocation from Pakistan may not take the usual five-six years. It is likely to come earlier, before the field marshal begins to lose his political capital. Logically, the Red Team will conclude that China no longer has any need to fight India directly. All it needs to do is keep equipping Pakistan adequately to do it on its behalf. If you read any coverage of Operation Sindoor, an important strategic pointer jumps out at you. In the entire series of exchanges, you never heard of any American equipment being used, not even the F-16s. The Swedish SAAB Erieye AEW&C (Airborne Early Warning & Control) aircraft are bristling with Chinese electronics. See it as China versus India, but with the Pakistani military in front. For decades, we have known that the Chinese use Pakistan as a cheap instrument to triangulate us between them. This strategy has now moved two steps ahead. The first was the Chinese moving up to eastern Ladakh and tying down a significant section of our strike forces usually earmarked for Pakistan. The second is the direct military challenge from Pakistan. India's aggressive response to this PK4 or e4 move set the two partners back. They might have believed, as CDS Gen Anil Chauhan said in his Pune lecture, that their rocket/missile assault beginning the night of 9/10 May would 'bring India to its knees'. Once this gambit failed with almost all projectiles intercepted and the withering Indian response had the PAF grounded and its bases mauled, ceasefire was the wise option. The Red Team is now thinking what went wrong, and how to prepare for the next round. Also Read: There's an all-new N-word now. And India's soft power has become its hard liability The four things they will worry about: India's multi-layer air defence led by S-400, BrahMos missiles, especially when launched by Su-30MKIs from a distance way out of reach of any PAF missiles, the inadequacy of their own air defences including Chinese HQ-9s and India's ability to suppress or destroy these using its anti-radiation drones. Be sure the Chinese are working with the Pakistanis to address these. They have the S-400 too and boy, can they reverse-engineer. They will try to encash some IOUs with the Russians to find an answer to the BrahMos. A next generation fighter, the FC-31 with a longer-range missile will be on its way soon. I am only wargaming the Red Team. It's safer to presume that China now sees Pakistan as an extension of their India-focused Western Theatre Command. I would go so far as to say that the Chinese PLA would see Pakistan as their newest, the sixth theatre command. If it keeps India bogged down, their own Western Theatre Command can chill. There are several books and academic papers written on Pakistan-China relations. For our limited purpose we only need to run our eyes backwards over some important dates. The India-China border situation deteriorates after the Zhou Enlai visit in 1960. On 28 March, 1961, Pakistan sends a note to China seeking a demarcation of their boundary, which they only share by virtue of their illegal occupation over a part of Kashmir. In February 1962, as the crisis with India is heating up, Sir Muhammed Zafrullah Khan, speaking for Pakistan at the UN, admits that Islamabad is committed to withdrawing its forces from its borders with China in PoK. Two months later, on 3 May, the two issue a joint communique to start negotiations. India meanwhile keeps protesting. On 12 October, Pakistan and China have direct negotiations on border demarcation. Eight days later, Chinese PLA begins its attack. This is moving at warp speed. Just four months after the India-China fighting stops, Pakistan foreign minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto makes a dramatic visit to Beijing where a landmark agreement is signed which involves the ceding of 5,180 sq km of PoK territory (Shaksgam Valley and around) to China while getting some grazing grounds across Hunza in return. India of course rejects this. This super-short 150-word history explains the single-pylon China-Pakistan relationship. The shared hostility to India is the solitary pylon. The Pakistan-China embrace came even though one was a formal US, anti-Communism ally and the other still a 'brother' of the Soviet Union. This deal has strengthened over the intervening six decades. The difference now is that China is the world's second superpower and India is much stronger too. That's why China and Pakistan need each other more than they did in the 1960s. And if the Chinese can enable the Pakistanis to fight India as their proxies, it is value for money. We've only seen the first moves in this game yet. Also Read: What is Asim Munir thinking?
