India and Pakistan accuse each other of violating ceasefire hours after reaching deal
The ceasefire had been expected to bring a swift end to weeks of escalating clashes, including missile and drone strikes, triggered by the massacre of tourists by gunmen last month that India blames on Pakistan, which denies the charge. But multiple explosions were heard in two large cities of Indian-controlled Kashmir hours after the countries agreed to the deal.
Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said late Saturday that 'there had been repeated violations of the understanding arrived between the two countries' and accused Pakistan of breaching the agreement.
'We call upon Pakistan to take appropriate steps to address these violations and deal with the situation with seriousness and responsibility,' he said at a news conference in New Delhi. Misri said the Indian army was 'retaliating' for what he called a 'border intrusion.'
In Islamabad, Pakistan's Foreign Ministry blamed Indian forces for initiating the ceasefire violation. The ministry said Pakistan remains committed to the agreement and its forces were handling the situation with responsibility and restraint.
'We believe that any issues in the smooth implementation of the ceasefire should be addressed through communication at appropriate levels,' the ministry said.
The first word of the truce came from U.S. President Donald Trump, who posted on his Truth Social platform that India and Pakistan had agreed to a full and immediate ceasefire: 'Congratulations to both Countries on using Common Sense and Great Intelligence. Thank you for your attention to this matter!'
Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said in a speech Saturday that his country agreed to the ceasefire in the larger interest of peace in the region and hoped all the outstanding issues with India, including the long-running dispute over the Kashmir region, would be resolved through peaceful dialogue.
Misri said the head of military operations from both countries spoke Saturday afternoon and agreed 'that both sides would stop all firing and military action on land, and in the air and sea.'
However, hours after the agreement, explosions heard by residents in Srinagar and Jammu in Indian-controlled Kashmir were followed by blackouts in the two cities. There were no immediate reports of casualties.
Omar Abdullah, the region's top elected official, said in a post on social media: 'What the hell just happened to the ceasefire? Explosions heard across Srinagar!!!'
Working toward a broader agreement
Conflict between India and Pakistan is not rare, with the two countries having periodically engaged in wars, clashes and skirmishes since gaining independence from British India in 1947.
The ceasefire in the latest hostilities came after the countries fired volleys of cross-border missile strikes Saturday, when India said it targeted Pakistani air bases after Islamabad fired several high-speed missiles at military and civilian infrastructure in Punjab state. Pakistan said it responded with retaliatory strikes.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he and Vice President JD Vance had engaged with senior officials from both countries over the past 48 hours. They included Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Sharif, India's External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar and the Pakistani Chief of Army Staff Asim Munir.
Rubio said the two governments agreed to 'start talks on a broad set of issues at a neutral site.'
Though Pakistanis had initially celebrated their army's retaliation, they were later jubilant about the truce, saying it was a moment of national pride and relief after days of tension.
In Islamabad, Zubaida Bibi expressed her joy at the restoration of peace with India.
'War brings nothing but suffering,' she said. 'We are happy that calm is returning. It feels like Eid to me. We have won.'
NPR
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Ya Libnan
2 days ago
- Ya Libnan
US imposes fresh sanctions targeting Iran oil trade, Hezbollah
Al-Qard al-Hasan is considered one of the most prominent economic pillars of Hezbollah. It is managed outside the Lebanese economic banking system and is not subject to the Lebanese 'cash and credit' law. By Timothy Gardner and Brendan O'Brien Summary WASHINGTON-The U.S. imposed sanctions on Thursday against a network that smuggles Iranian oil disguised as Iraqi oil, and on a Hezbollah-controlled financial institution, the Treasury Department said. A network of companies run by Iraqi-British national Salim Ahmed Said has been buying and shipping billions of dollars worth of Iranian oil disguised as, or blended with, Iraqi oil since at least 2020, the department said. 'Treasury will continue to target Tehran's revenue sources and intensify economic pressure to disrupt the regime's access to the financial resources that fuel its destabilizing activities,' Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said. The U.S. has imposed waves of sanctions on Iran's oil exports over its nuclear program and funding of militant groups across the Middle East. Reuters reported late last year that a fuel oil smuggling network that generates at least $1 billion a year for Iran and its proxies has flourished in Iraq since 2022. Thursday's sanctions came after the U.S. carried out strikes on June 22 on three Iranian nuclear sites, including its most deeply buried enrichment plant Fordow. The Pentagon said on Wednesday the strikes had degraded Iran's nuclear program by up to two years , despite a far more cautious initial assessment that had leaked to the public. The U.S. and Iran are expected to hold talks about its nuclear program next week in Oslo, Axios reported. Said's companies and vessels blend Iranian oil with Iraqi oil, which is then sold to Western buyers via Iraq or the United Arab Emirates as purely Iraqi oil using forged documentation to avoid sanctions, Treasury said. Said controls UAE-based company VS Tankers though he avoids formal association with it, Treasury said. Formerly known as Al-Iraqia Shipping Services & Oil Trading (AISSOT), VS Tankers has smuggled oil for the benefit of the Iranian government and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is designated by Washington as a terrorist organization, it said. The sanctions block U.S. assets of those designated and prevent Americans from doing business with them. VS Tankers did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Iran's mission in New York did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The U.S. also sanctioned several vessels that are accused of engaging in the covert delivery of Iranian oil, intensifying pressure on Iran's 'shadow fleet,' it said. The Treasury Department also issued sanctions against several senior officials and one entity associated with the Hezbollah-controlled financial institution Al-Qard Al-Hassan. (Reuters)
Nahar Net
2 days ago
- Nahar Net
American bombs in Iran also reverberate in China and North Korea
by Naharnet Newsdesk 6 hours President Donald Trump campaigned on keeping the United States out of foreign wars, but it didn't take long to convince him to come to the direct aid of Israel, hitting Iranian nuclear targets with bunker-buster bombs dropped by B-2 stealth bombers and Tomahawk cruise missiles fired from a submarine. Beyond the attack's immediate impact on helping bring the 12-day war to a close, experts say Trump's decision to use force against another country also will certainly be reverberating in the Asia-Pacific, Washington's priority theater. "Trump's strikes on Iran show that he's not afraid to use military force — this would send a clear message to North Korea, and even to China and Russia, about Trump's style," said Duyeon Kim, a senior analyst at the Center for a New American Security based in Seoul, South Korea. "Before the strikes, Pyongyang and Beijing might have assumed that Trump is risk averse, particularly based on his behavior his first presidency despite some tough talk," Kim said. China, North Korea and Russia all condemn US strike Ten days into the war between Israel and Iran, Trump made the risky decision to step in, hitting three nuclear sites with American firepower on June 22 in a bid to destroy the country's nuclear program at a time while negotiations between Washington and Tehran were still ongoing. The attacks prompted a pro forma Iranian retaliatory strike the following day on a U.S. base in nearby Qatar, which caused no casualties, and both Iran and Israel then agreed to a ceasefire on June 24. North Korea, China and Russia all were quick to condemn the American attack, with Russian President Vladimir Putin calling it "unprovoked aggression," China's Foreign Ministry saying it violated international law and "exacerbated tensions in the Middle East," and North Korea's Foreign Ministry maintaining it "trampled down the territorial integrity and security interests of a sovereign state." While the strikes were a clear tactical success, the jury is still out on whether they will have a more broad strategic benefit to Washington's goals in the Middle East or convince Iran it needs to work harder than ever to develop a nuclear deterrent, possibly pulling the U.S. back into a longer-term conflict. US allies could see attack as positive sign for deterrence If the attack remains a one-off strike, U.S. allies in the Asia-Pacific region likely will see the decision to become involved as a positive sign from Trump's administration, said Euan Graham, a senior defense analyst with the Australian Strategic Policy Institute. "The U.S. strike on Iran will be regarded as net plus by Pacific allies if it is seen to reinforce red lines, restore deterrence and is of limited duration, so as not to pull the administration off-course from its stated priorities in the Indo-Pacific," he said. "China will take note that Trump is prepared to use force, at least opportunistically." In China, many who have seen Trump as having a "no-war mentality" will reassess that in the wake of the attacks, which were partially aimed at forcing Iran's hand in nuclear program negotiations, said Zhao Minghao, an international relations professor at China's Fudan University in Shanghai. "The way the U.S. used power with its air attacks against Iran is something China needs to pay attention to," he said. "How Trump used power to force negotiations has a significance for how China and the U.S. will interact in the future." But, he said, Washington should not think it can employ the same strategy with Beijing. "If a conflict breaks out between China and the U.S., it may be difficult for the U.S. to withdraw as soon as possible, let alone withdraw unscathed," he said. China and North Korea present different challenges Indeed, China and North Korea present very different challenges than Iran. First and foremost, both already have nuclear weapons, raising the stakes of possible retaliation considerably in the event of any attack. There also is no Asian equivalent of Israel, whose relentless attacks on Iranian missile defenses in the opening days of the war paved the way for the B-2 bombers to fly in and out without a shot being fired at them. Still, the possibility of the U.S. becoming involved in a conflict involving either China or North Korea is a very real one, and Beijing and Pyongyang will almost certainly try to assess what the notoriously unpredictable Trump would do. North Korea will likely be "quite alarmed" at what Israel, with a relatively small but high-quality force, has been able to achieve over Iran, said Joseph Dempsey, a defense expert with the International Institute for Strategic Studies. At the same time, it likely will be seen internally as justification for its own nuclear weapons program, "If Iran did have deployable nuclear weapons would this have occurred?" Dempsey said. "Probably not." The U.S. decision to attack while still in talks with Iran will also not go unnoticed, said Hong Min, a senior analyst at South Korea's Institute for National Unification. "North Korea may conclude that dialogue, if done carelessly, could backfire by giving the United States a pretext for possible aggression," he said. "Instead of provoking the Trump administration, North Korea is more likely to take an even more passive stance toward negotiations with Washington, instead focusing on strengthening its internal military buildup and pursuing closer ties with Russia, narrowing the prospects for future talks," he said. China and Taiwan will draw lessons China will look at the attacks through the visor of Taiwan, the self-governing democratic island off its coast that China claims as its own territory and President Xi Jinping has not ruled out taking by force. The U.S. supplies Taiwan with weapons and is one of its most important allies, though Washington's official policy on whether it would come to Taiwan's aid in the case of a conflict with China is known as "strategic ambiguity," meaning not committing to how it would respond. Militarily, the strike on Iran raises the question of whether the U.S. might show less restraint than has been expected by China in its response and hit targets on the Chinese mainland in the event of an invasion of Taiwan, said Drew Thompson, senior fellow with the Singapore-based think tank RSIS Rajaratnam School of International Studies. It will also certainly underscore for Beijing the "difficulty of predicting Trump's actions," he said. "The U.S. airstrike on Iran's nuclear facilities caught many by surprise," Thompson said. "I think it demonstrated a tolerance and acceptance of risk in the Trump administration that is perhaps surprising." It also gives rise to a concern that Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te, who in recent speeches has increased warnings about the threat from China, may be further emboldened in his rhetoric, said Lyle Goldstein, director of the Asia Program at the Washington-based foreign policy think tank Defense Priorities. Already, Lai's words have prompted China to accuse him of pursuing Taiwanese independence, which is a red line for Beijing. Goldstein said he worried Taiwan may try to take advantage of the American "use of force against Iran to increase its deterrent situation versus the mainland." "President Lai's series of recent speeches appear almost designed to set up a new cross-strait crisis, perhaps in the hopes of building more support in Washington and elsewhere around the Pacific," said Goldstein, who also is director of the China Initiative at Brown University's Watson Institute. "I think that is an exceedingly risky gambit, to put it mildly," he said.
Nahar Net
2 days ago
- Nahar Net
Russia becomes first country to formally recognize Taliban's latest rule in Afghanistan
Russia on Thursday became the first country to formally recognize the Taliban's government in Afghanistan since it seized power in 2021, after Moscow removed the group from its list of outlawed organizations. The Russian Foreign Ministry announced that it had received credentials from Afghanistan's newly appointed Ambassador Gul Hassan Hassan. The official recognition of the Afghan government will foster "productive bilateral cooperation," the ministry said in a statement. Afghanistan's Foreign Ministry called it a historic step, and quoted Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi as welcoming the decision as "a good example for other countries." The Taliban took control of Afghanistan in August 2021 following the withdrawal of U.S. and NATO forces. Since then, they have sought international recognition while also enforcing their strict interpretation of Islamic law. While no country had formally recognized the Taliban administration until now, the group had engaged in high-level talks with many nations and established some diplomatic ties with countries including China and the United Arab Emirates. Still, the Taliban government has been relatively isolated on the world stage, largely over its restrictions on women. Although the Taliban initially promised a more moderate rule than during their first stint in power from 1996 to 2001, it started to enforce restrictions on women and girls soon after the 2021 takeover. Women are barred from most jobs and public places, including parks, baths and gyms, while girls are banned from education beyond sixth grade. Russian officials have recently been emphasizing the need to engage with the Taliban to help stabilize Afghanistan, and lifted a ban on the Taliban in April. Russia's ambassador to Afghanistan, Dmitry Zhirnov, said in remarks broadcast by state Channel One television that the decision to officially recognize the Taliban government was made by President Vladimir Putin on advice from Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. Zhirnov said the decision proves Russia's "sincere striving for the development of full-fledged relations with Afghanistan."
