Ulfa-I claims 3 cadres dead in drone strikes on Myanmar camps; Army denies
2
Guwahati: The banned insurgent group, United Liberation Front of Asom-Independent (Ulfa-I), claimed that three of its cadres were killed in a targeted drone attack in at least three waves on its mobile camps in Myanmar's Sagaing region near the India-Myanmar border by the Indian Army early Sunday morning.
The Ulfa-I said between 2am and 4am, over 150 drones of Indian Army, manufactured in Israel and France, struck several mobile camps of Ulfa-I, and Revolutionary People's Front (RPF), the political wing of the People's Liberation Army (PLA) of Manipur along the India-Myanmar international border region between Longwa (Nagaland) and Pangsau Pass (Arunachal Pradesh).
The group claimed that attack resulted in the death of senior Ulfa-I leader Nayan Asom and injuries to 19 other members.
In a subsequent statement, it claimed that two more senior leaders — Ganesh Asom and Pradip Asom — were killed in a second wave of attack during Nayan Asom's funeral rites.
The Indian Army has officially denied involvement in the alleged drone stricks. Defence ministry PRO Lt Col Mahendra Rawat told TOI in Guwahati, "There are no inputs with the Indian Army on such operation."
In another statement later, Ulfa-I dismissed the Indian Army's denial, saying people in Arunachal Pradesh's border area are witness to the three waves of drone attacks.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
American Investor Warren Buffett Recommends: 5 Books For Turning Your Life Around
Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List
Undo
Assam's chief minister and state police also denied any involvement or knowledge of operations, stating that further clarity is expected as more information surfaces.
A security source confirmed that there were losses of life at the Ulfa-I camp in Myanmar, but it emphasised that, given the current crisis in Myanmar — where the military junta is embroiled in a widespread civil war with numerous ethnic armed groups and insurgents — the cause of the incident could be internal to Myanmar itself.
"The ongoing civil war in Myanmar has led to frequent clashes, shifting alliances, and a general breakdown of state control in many areas, particularly near international borders. In this environment, attacks on insurgent camps — including those used by Ulfa-I — could plausibly originate from Myanmar's own ethnic armed organisations or even from the Myanmar military, rather than from Indian forces," the source said.
Since the late 1980s and 1990s, Indian insurgent groups began establishing camps in Myanmar's border areas to escape Indian security operations. The porous border and ongoing conflict have made the region a hotspot for cross-border militant activity.
Indian security agencies have expressed concern over the use of Myanmar's territory by insurgents for launching attacks in northeast India. There have been previous instances of Indian military action or alleged cross-border strikes, but official confirmation is rare and often denied by both Indian and Myanmar authorities.
Ulfa's main camps are reportedly in the dense forests of Sagaing, with key bases at Waktham Basti, Hoyat Basti, and Hakiyot (opposite Longding district, Arunachal Pradesh). Some camps are said to be near the Pangmi Naga area and along the China-Myanmar border. Manipur-based groups, including PLA, KYKL, and PREPAK, also operate from these areas.
The NSCN-K(YA) faction has set up its headquarters and camps in Naga-inhabited regions of Sagaing, often within a 6 to 10 km radius of other Indian groups camps.
These camps have been used continuously, with their locations shifting in response to military pressure. The Sagaing region and Naga-inhabited areas of Myanmar remain the primary strongholds for these Indian insurgent groups, often with support or tolerance from local armed factions or, at times, the Myanmar military.
The ongoing civil war in Myanmar has further complicated the security landscape, with insurgent groups sometimes shifting allegiances or moving camps to avoid detection or attacks.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Today
31 minutes ago
- India Today
Video of Indian couple dumping garbage on roadside in Canada sparks outrage
A video allegedly filmed in Canada has gone viral for all the wrong reasons. It shows a couple discarding trash in a forested roadside area. The clip triggered backlash online, with several social media users speculating the couple is of Indian short video, which surfaced on X, shows the couple standing beside a car, unloading multiple bags of waste. The woman, dressed in a salwar suit, is seen dropping the contents in what appears to be a wooded stretch, with no bins or disposal facilities in the exact location and timing remain unverified, the incident drew backlash, both for the couple's actions and for the person recording the video who didn't intervene. Watch the viral video here: Journalist and author Neelesh Misra also reacted to the viral video, saying, 'Whether in India (or South Asia, wherever every are from) or in Canada, this needs to be called out and penalised. This is abhorrent behaviour.''They turned their country into a toilet. Now they're doing the same in beautiful clean Canada. Don't just film. Call it out!' one user wrote while sharing the comment read, 'They've destroyed India. We can't let them destroy Canada next.'Some users suggested the act could have been misunderstood. 'That looks like lettuce. Maybe they were feeding animals,' one comment claimed. Another added, 'If it was really garbage, they'd have tossed the whole bag. This looked like they were pulling stuff out deliberately.'Still, a section of the internet believed that recording the act and not stepping in was equally problematic. 'Let's be honest, the person filming is just as guilty. Say something, stop them, don't just record for views,' a user the reactions, no official confirmation has surfaced on the video's origin, authenticity, or the couple's identity. could not independently verify the footage. This story will be updated if more details emerge.- EndsMust Watch
India Today
31 minutes ago
- India Today
Mahadev betting app case: Companies owned by Vikas Garg under ED scanner
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED), investigating the Mahadev Betting app money laundering case, uncovered earlier this year how the mastermind of the betting network, Harishankar Tibrewal through Foreign Portfolio Investment (FPI) had invested in several listed Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) purpose of doing so was to manipulate stocks, artificially inflate the stock prices of SME companies in which FPI investments were made. Once the share prices rose, they were dumped and Tibrewal and his accomplices would double or sometimes triple their per sources, the acquisition of Nasdaq-listed Ebix Incorpotated, last year, by an Indian firm, Eraaya Lifespaces, which is promoted by one Vikas Garg, is now under the radar of the anti-money laundering agency. The suspicion by the agency is regarding the funds raised for the acquisition of Ebix Inc. by Eraaya Lifespaces. Ebix Inc. was acquired by Eraaya Lifespaces last year through funds raised from multiple channels and officials, as per sources, also flagged the meteoric rise in the share prices of Eraaya Lifespaces and asked Bombay Stock Exchange officials to investigate it. The suspicion is over the funds raised and later used for the are multiple such SME listed and unlisted companies, promoted and run by Vikas premises were also searched when multiple other companies and linked properties were searched on April 16 by ED of Garg's promoted companies which are under investigation are Vikas Lifecare Limited, Vikas Ecotech Limited, Advika Finvest, Advika Capital Limited and investigations revealed that Tibrewal had, through FPI, made investments in multiple firms owned by then, Garg has been issued multiple summons by ED officials to join investigations in the case. Earlier Garg's companies were under investigation by the Income Tax Investigation Wing, GST and few other other companies under investigation in the case have also been asked to join investigations, which include firms like Ease My Trip, IITL, JTL Industries, Gensol and others. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) also has been informed by ED officials regarding manipulation of shares and artificial inflation of proximity to Tibrewal is also being probed by agency officialhttps:// Acquisition attempts for a club in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) were also under the other companies where Tibrewal had invested through FPI, the promoters of many of those companies, are known to Garg has so far carried out around 170 raids across the country and several companies, persons and entities in the Mahadev Betting app case and assets worth over rupees 3000 crores in property, cash and movable properties have been attached, including demat accounts and share holdings.- EndsTune InMust Watch
Time of India
32 minutes ago
- Time of India
Two-thirds of the Department of Justice unit defending Trump's policies in court have quit
The U.S. Justice Department unit charged with defending against legal challenges to signature Trump administration policies - such as restricting birthright citizenship and slashing funding to Harvard University - has lost nearly two-thirds of its staff, according to a list seen by Reuters. Sixty-nine of the roughly 110 lawyers in the Federal Programs Branch have voluntarily left the unit since President Donald Trump's election in November or have announced plans to leave, according to the list compiled by former Justice Department lawyers and reviewed by Reuters. The tally has not been previously reported. Using court records and LinkedIn accounts, Reuters was able to verify the departure of all but four names on the list. Reuters spoke to four former lawyers in the unit and three other people familiar with the departures who said some staffers had grown demoralized and exhausted defending an onslaught of lawsuits against Trump's administration. "Many of these people came to work at Federal Programs to defend aspects of our constitutional system," said one lawyer who left the unit during Trump's second term. "How could they participate in the project of tearing it down?" by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Saidpur: 1 Trick to Reduce Belly Fat? Home Fitness Hack Shop Now Undo Critics have accused the Trump administration of flouting the law in its aggressive use of executive power, including by retaliating against perceived enemies and dismantling agencies created by Congress. The Trump administration has broadly defended its actions as within the legal bounds of presidential power and has won several early victories at the Supreme Court . A White House spokesperson told Reuters that Trump's actions were legal, and declined to comment on the departures. Live Events "Any sanctimonious career bureaucrat expressing faux outrage over the President's policies while sitting idly by during the rank weaponization by the previous administration has no grounds to stand on," White House spokesperson Harrison Fields said in a statement. The seven lawyers who spoke with Reuters cited a punishing workload and the need to defend policies that some felt were not legally justifiable among the key reasons for the wave of departures. Three of them said some career lawyers feared they would be pressured to misrepresent facts or legal issues in court, a violation of ethics rules that could lead to professional sanctions. All spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal dynamics and avoid retaliation. A Justice Department spokesperson said lawyers in the unit are fighting an "unprecedented number of lawsuits" against Trump's agenda. "The Department has defeated many of these lawsuits all the way up to the Supreme Court and will continue to defend the President's agenda to keep Americans safe," the spokesperson said. The Justice Department did not comment on the departures of career lawyers or morale in the section. Some turnover in the Federal Programs Branch is common between presidential administrations, but the seven sources described the number of people quitting as highly unusual. Reuters was unable to find comparative figures for previous administrations. However, two former attorneys in the unit and two others familiar with its work said the scale of departures is far greater than during Trump's first term and Joe Biden's administration. HEADING FOR THE EXIT The exits include at least 10 of the section's 23 supervisors, experienced litigators who in many cases served across presidential administrations, according to two of the lawyers. A spokesperson said the Justice Department is hiring to keep pace with staffing levels during the Biden Administration. They did not provide further details. In its broad overhaul of the Justice Department, the Trump administration has fired or sidelined dozens of lawyers who specialize in prosecuting national security and corruption cases and publicly encouraged departures from the Civil Rights Division. But the Federal Programs Branch, which defends challenges to White House and federal agency policies in federal trial courts, remains critical to its agenda. The unit is fighting to sustain actions of the cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency formerly overseen by Elon Musk; Trump's order restricting birthright citizenship and his attempt to freeze $2.5 billion in funding to Harvard University. "We've never had an administration pushing the legal envelope so quickly, so aggressively and across such a broad range of government policies and programs," said Peter Keisler, who led the Justice Department's Civil Division under Republican President George W. Bush. "The demands are intensifying at the same time that the ranks of lawyers there to defend these cases are dramatically thinning." The departures have left the Justice Department scrambling to fill vacancies. More than a dozen lawyers have been temporarily reassigned to the section from other parts of the DOJ and it has been exempted from the federal government hiring freeze, according to two former lawyers in the unit. A Justice Department spokesperson did not comment on the personnel moves. Justice Department leadership has also brought in about 15 political appointees to help defend civil cases, an unusually high number. The new attorneys, many of whom have a record defending conservative causes, have been more comfortable pressing legal boundaries, according to two former lawyers in the unit. "They have to be willing to advocate on behalf of their clients and not fear the political fallout," said Mike Davis, the head of the Article III Project, a pro-Trump legal advocacy group, referring to the role of DOJ lawyers in defending the administration's policies. People who have worked in the section expect the Federal Programs Branch to play an important role in the Trump administration's attempts to capitalize on a Supreme Court ruling limiting the ability of judges to block its policies nationwide. Its lawyers are expected to seek to narrow prior court rulings and also defend against an anticipated rise in class action lawsuits challenging government policies. Lawyers in the unit are opposing two attempts by advocacy organizations to establish a nationwide class of people to challenge Trump's order on birthright citizenship. A judge granted one request on Thursday. FACING PRESSURE Four former Justice Department lawyers told Reuters some attorneys in the Federal Programs Branch left over policy differences with Trump, but many had served in the first Trump administration and viewed their role as defending the government regardless of the party in power. The four lawyers who left said they feared Trump administration policies to dismantle certain federal agencies and claw back funding appeared to violate the U.S. Constitution or were enacted without following processes that were more defensible in court. Government lawyers often walked into court with little information from the White House and federal agencies about the actions they were defending, the four lawyers said. The White House and DOJ did not comment when asked about communications on cases. Attorney General Pam Bondi in February threatened disciplinary action against government lawyers who did not vigorously advocate for Trump's agenda. The memo to Justice Department employees warned career lawyers they could not "substitute personal political views or judgments for those that prevailed in the election." Four of the lawyers Reuters spoke with said there was a widespread concern that attorneys would be forced to make arguments that could violate attorney ethics rules, or refuse assignments and risk being fired. Those fears grew when Justice Department leadership fired a former supervisor in the Office of Immigration Litigation, a separate Civil Division unit, accusing him of failing to forcefully defend the administration's position in the case of Kilmar Abrego, the man wrongly deported to El Salvador. The supervisor, Erez Reuveni, filed a whistleblower complaint, made public last month, alleging he faced pressure from administration officials to make unsupported legal arguments and adopt strained interpretations of rulings in three immigration cases. Justice Department officials have publicly disputed the claims, casting him as disgruntled. A senior official, Emil Bove, told a Senate panel that he never advised defying courts. Career lawyers were also uncomfortable defending Trump's executive orders targeting law firms, according to two former Justice Department lawyers and a third person familiar with the matter. A longtime ally of Bondi who defended all four law firm cases argued they were a lawful exercise of presidential power. Judges ultimately struck down all four orders as violating the Constitution. The Trump administration has indicated it will appeal at least one case.
