In fresh warning, Jaishankar reminds Pakistan of ‘a man named Osama bin Laden'
External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar has delivered a powerful message to the international community, highlighting the global threat posed by terrorism linked to Pakistan. In a revealing interview with European news website Euractiv, Jaishankar stressed that the recent India-Pakistan confrontation was 'not merely an India–Pakistan issue. It's about terrorism. And that very same terrorism will eventually come back to haunt you.'
Referring to the infamous terrorist Osama bin Laden, Jaishankar asked, 'Let me remind you of something – there was a man named Osama bin Laden. Why did he, of all people, feel safe living for years in a Pakistani military town, right next to their equivalent of West Point?'
Osama bin Laden (1957–2011) was the founder and leader of the militant Islamist group al-Qaeda, responsible for orchestrating numerous terrorist attacks worldwide, including the devastating September 11, 2001 attacks in the United States.
Born into a wealthy Saudi family in Riyadh, bin Laden became involved in the Afghan mujahideen resistance against the Soviet invasion in the late 1970s.
In 1988, he founded al-Qaeda to promote global jihad against what he saw as Western oppression of Muslims.
His network carried out attacks on U.S. embassies in Africa, the USS Cole, and ultimately the 9/11 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people and triggered the US-led War on Terror.
After years in hiding, Osama bin Laden was killed by US special forces in Abbottabad, Pakistan, in 2011.
The Union Minister criticised international media for framing India's Operation Sindoor, launched after the deadly Pahalgam terror attack on April 22 that claimed 26 lives, as a simple tit-for-tat between two nuclear-armed neighbours.
Jaishankar clarified, 'I want the world to understand – this isn't merely an India–Pakistan issue. It's about terrorism.'
On the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Jaishankar explained India's neutral stance, saying, 'We don't believe that differences can be resolved through war – we don't believe a solution will come from the battlefield.' He emphasised India's balanced approach, noting, 'India has a strong relationship with Ukraine as well – it's not only about Russia.'
Jaishankar also called on Western countries to reflect on their past actions, stating, 'India has the longest-standing grievance – our borders were violated just months after independence, when Pakistan sent in invaders to Kashmir. And the countries that were most supportive of that? Western countries.'
He added, 'If those same countries – who were evasive or reticent then – now say 'let's have a great conversation about international principles', I think I'm justified in asking them to reflect on their own past.'
On economic ties, Jaishankar pitched for an EU-India free trade agreement, highlighting India's 'skilled labour and a more trustworthy economic partnership than China.' He also expressed India's reservations about the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), saying, 'Let's not pretend – we're opposed to parts of it. We have very deep reservations about CBAM and we've been quite open about it.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
36 minutes ago
- Mint
Israel strikes Iran over its nuclear program
Israel launched a wide-ranging attack on Iran's nuclear program overnight, striking dozens of targets in an operation that pushes the region into a new conflict with uncertain consequences. An Israeli military official said the attack targeted Iran's nuclear program and other military sites, as well as Iranian military commanders and nuclear scientists. Dozens of planes wrapped up the first wave of the attack before dawn Friday, Israel said. 'We struck at the heart of Iran's nuclear enrichment program. We struck at the heart of Iran's nuclear weaponization program. We targeted Iran's main enrichment facility in Natanz. We targeted Iran's leading nuclear scientists working on the Iranian bomb. We also struck at the heart of Iran's ballistic missile program,' Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said. Iranian state TV reported explosions and showed smoke rising in the capital, Tehran. The strike came hours after U.S. and Israeli officials had warned one was imminent and cut short a U.S.-led effort to resolve the standoff over Iran's nuclear program diplomatically. Iran has warned it would respond to any attack by striking Israel and potentially American bases in the region. Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz declared a state of emergency and warned his population that Iran was expected to retaliate for the attack by firing missiles and drones at Israel. President Trump said on social media that he remains committed to finding a diplomatic solution but that Iran must give up the possibility of developing a nuclear weapon. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the U.S. wasn't involved in the strikes, noting that Israel advised the Trump administration it would take action for its own self-defense. He also warned Iran not to attack U.S. interests or personnel in the Middle East. The attack comes just days before U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff was to meet his Iranian counterparts in Iran for a sixth round of nuclear talks. The U.S. has said Iran must give up the ability to enrich uranium needed to build a bomb. Iran has refused, leaving the talks at an impasse. The Israeli military official said Iran had been secretly working to build a nuclear weapon in recent months. Israel's move to try to resolve the issue militarily is a gamble. Iran has dispersed its nuclear sites across the country and has buried them deep underground. Any military strike would require a sustained effort and several rounds of fighting before either the regime agrees to give up its nuclear program or is toppled, former Israeli officials and security experts said. Western and Israeli officials have said military action could set back an Iranian nuclear program at least a year, but there is considerable uncertainty over the estimate. Meanwhile, Iran is expected to respond with attacks of its own that could send the conflict spiraling. The two exchanged direct blows last year for the first time, with Iran firing hundreds of missiles and drones at Israel. Israel responded with strikes that damaged Iran's missile program and took out much of its air defense, leaving it more vulnerable to an attack on its nuclear program. 'If a conflict is imposed on us,' Iranian Defense Minister Amir Aziz Nasirzadeh said Wednesday, 'all U.S. bases are within our reach, and we will boldly target them in host countries.' An attack also could spur Iran to build a nuclear weapon. Tehran will also likely stop cooperating with international inspectors, leaving its program more opaque to the U.S. and its allies. Advocates of a strike said Israel had a limited window of opportunity to exploit the damage it has done to Iran's air defenses and to allies such as the Lebanese militia Hezbollah, which might previously have joined a retaliatory strike on Israel. Netanyahu raised the possibility of strikes with Trump in a phone conversation Monday, according to two U.S. officials. Soon after, the U.S. began moving some diplomats and military dependents out of the Middle East. Write to Dov Lieber at and Alexander Ward at
NDTV
40 minutes ago
- NDTV
Israel Conducts Preemptive Strike On Iran, Declares State Of Emergency
Jerusalem: Israel carried out "preemptive" strikes against Iran on Friday, targeting its nuclear plant and military sites, after US President Donald Trump warned of a possible "massive conflict" in the region. Explosions were heard Friday morning in the Iranian capital, state TV reported, adding that Iran's air defence were at "100 percent operational capacity". Israel declared a state of emergency, with Defence Minister Israel Katz saying that retaliatory action from Tehran was possible following the operation. "Following the State of Israel's preemptive strike against Iran, a missile and drone attack against the State of Israel and its civilian population is expected in the immediate future," Katz said. Oil prices surged as much as 6 percent on the strikes, which came after Trump warned of a possible Iranian attack and said the US was drawing down staff in the region. "I don't want to say imminent, but it looks like it's something that could very well happen," Trump told reporters at the White House Thursday when asked if an Israeli attack loomed. Trump said he believed a "pretty good" deal on Iran's nuclear programme was "fairly close", but said that an Israeli attack on its arch foe could wreck the chances of an agreement. The US leader did not disclose the details of a conversation on Monday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but said: "I don't want them going in, because I think it would blow it." Trump quickly added: "Might help it actually, but it also could blow it." A US official said there had been no US involvement in the Israeli strikes on Iran. -- 'Extremist' -- The United States on Wednesday said it was reducing embassy staff in Iraq -- long a zone of proxy conflict with Iran. Israel, which counts on US military and diplomatic support, sees the cleric-run state in Tehran as an existential threat and hit Iranian air defences last year. Netanyahu has vowed less restraint since the unprecedented October 7, 2023 attack on Israel by Tehran-backed Hamas, which triggered the massive Israeli offensive in Gaza. The United States and other Western countries, along with Israel, have repeatedly accused Iran of seeking a nuclear weapon, which it has repeatedly denied. Israel again called for global action after the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) accused Iran on Wednesday of non-compliance with its obligations. The resolution could lay the groundwork for European countries to invoke a "snapback" mechanism, which expires in October, that would reinstate UN sanctions eased under a 2015 nuclear deal negotiated by then US president Barack Obama. Trump pulled out of the deal in his first term and slapped Iran with sweeping sanctions. Iran's nuclear chief, Mohammad Eslami, slammed the resolution as "extremist" and blamed Israeli influence. In response to the resolution, Iran said it would launch a new enrichment centre in a secure location. Iran would also replace "all of these first-generation machines with sixth-generation advanced machines" at the Fordo uranium enrichment plant, said Behrouz Kamalvandi, spokesman of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. Iran currently enriches uranium to 60 percent, far above the 3.67-percent limit set in the 2015 deal and close, though still short, of the 90 percent needed for a nuclear warhead.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Why war clouds are hovering over the Middle East yet again
A CBS report on Thursday said that 'Israel is fully ready to launch an operation into Iran,' and that in anticipation of 'heightened regional tensions', the United States had issued travel advisories to American personnel and families in Iraq, Israel, and the broader region. This comes just a day after US President Donald Trump had reportedly told Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to end the war in Gaza and 'stop talk of an attack on Iran', as well as amid ongoing negotiatioins between Tehran and Washington over a nuclear deal. While the talks are set to continue — the sixth round of negotiations are scheduled to take place in Muscat on Sunday — the latest, somewhat unexpected development has yet again left a Damocles' sword hanging over the Middle East. The trigger Israel's vehement opposition to the Iran-US nuclear talks, and its belief that Iran's vulnerabilities should be exploited with military action against its nuclear sites, is old. But more often than not, this belief has not translated into overt military action. The latest development is nonetheless alarming given it comes the day the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA's) Board of Governors declared that Iran was non-compliant with its non-proliferation obligations — a first such resolution in two decades. While the IAEA has repeatedly warned of Iran's increasing stockpile of 60% enriched uranium, the latest resolution comes on the back of an IAEA investigative report which assessed that Iran was conducting 'secret nuclear activities' at three locations. The Board can now consider another resolution to report Iran's non-compliance to the UN Security Council. Broadly, the 1968 Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Iran is a party to, obligates non-nuclear weapon states to respect IAEA safeguards agreements. Among the possible ramifications of the IAEA's report is European states (the UK, France, and Germany) triggering 'snap-back sanctions' on Iran, based on provisions of the 2015 nuclear deal (officially, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action). This deal, despite the United States' 2018 pull out, remains alive due to Iranian and European participation on paper. It is set to expire in October. The IAEA's resolution, and European reactions to it, have triggered an expectedly hostile reaction from Tehran. Iran, through its UN representative, has now threatened to withdraw from the NPT entirely. Moreover, Iran's Foreign Ministry and its Atomic Energy Organization jointly declared on Thursday that Iran will now open a new uranium enrichment facility at a 'strategically secure site' that will increase Iran's enriched uranium stockpile 'to a great extent', in response to the IAEA Board's 'politically motivated and biased' resolution. Note that Iran has long been wary of European snapback sanctions, which will worsen the pressures that Tehran already faces due to existing American sanctions. Status of n-talks Since April, the US and Iran have conducted five formal rounds of negotiations aiming for a deal which stops Iran from developing nuclear weapons in exchange for sanctions relief. The last round of talks were held in Rome on May 23. At present, the biggest sticking point is not whether Iran has a right to nuclear energy (the US agrees that it does), but whether it can enrich uranium to fuel its nuclear power plants, something that, in theory, will also allow it to produce a nuclear weapon with bomb-grade 90% enriched uranium. Thus far, the US concession to Iran is to allow Tehran to enrich uranium temporarily, before delegating that right to a consortium of regional Arab states and itself which will then provide nuclear fuel to Iran. Iran has rejected this proposal, with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei himself condemning it. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Tuesday asserted that his country does 'not need anyone's permission to enrich uranium' within its borders. The Iranian position on the matter has been clear and consistent. Earlier in May, speaking to state-run Tasnim News, Araghchi had said that Iran is prepared to implement confidence building measures and adhere to transparency in exchange for sanctions relief, as long as its rights to enrich uranium within its own sovereign territory is secured. But this has thus far been a red line for Washington, with Trump deeming Iran's position 'unacceptable'. It is yet unclear whether the US — or Iran — will be willing to budge on the matter. That said, despite hostile rhetoric, neither side has chosen to walk away from the negotiating table, and Tehran continues to court American companies to invest in Iran after a nuclear deal is reached. Although Arab states support the ongoing negotiations, Israelis have remained hostile to the process. As Netanyahu said on April 8, Tel Aviv will only accept a deal which allows signatories to 'go in, blow up the facilities, dismantle all the (Iranian) equipment, under American supervision with American execution…'. What now? Unlike European countries and the US, Israel technically has no locus standi to impose its own maximal terms on a negotiation it is not party to. Israeli covert and (occasional) overt operations against Iran have contributed to a self-fulfilling cycle of retribution and violence that has dented the already fragile ground on which Tehran and Washington engage with each other. Given how Iran is locked in its view of Tel Aviv and Washington acting in concert, Iranian officials at the highest levels, including Araghchi, have made it categorically clear that they will hold the US responsible for any Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear sites. As per the IRGC, this will invite a 'devastating and decisive response' on targets including US military infrastructure in the region. In the past, US bases in Iraq have usually been Iran's first target (through proxy or directly). This is despite the US repeatedly distancing itself from Israeli attack plans, at least in public. As recently as April, Trump opposed an Israeli plan to attack Iran's nuclear infrastructure, and refused to back such an attack. Israel's rationale to launch an attack, and effectively sabotage Iran-US negotiations, may also be borne out of domestic imperatives. It is evident that Netanyahu's domestic troubles have only increased, as European states place unprecedented sanctions on Israeli leaders, including Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich. Early on Thursday, Netanyahu by a narrow 63-51 margin survived an attempt in the Knesset to dissolve Parliament and hold early elections. With his coalition under immense pressure, the Israel Prime Minister, as he has often done in the past, has tried to up the heat on Gaza and Iran to justify not holding elections, with his coalition saying that given the war in Gaza and the 'Iranian issue', elections at this time would 'paralyse the country'. An Israeli escalation against Iran would provide further weight to this reasoning. But Israeli threats aside, the IAEA's report may already have sown seeds of conflict in the region. Should Iran withdraw from the NPT, it is a near certainty that Iran-US nuclear talks will break down. The United States' Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Act of 1978 will then prevent Washington from offering any concession which it might otherwise be open to. At present, all the pieces on the board sit with wound up springs. Whether they unwind — and unleash conflict in the region — will depend on how and when the states concerned decide to act: whether Israel proceeds with an attack, Europe implements snap-back sanctions, Iran withdraws from the NPT, or the US withdraws from negotiations. Bashir Ali Abbas is a Senior Research Associate at the Council for Strategic and Defense Research, New Delhi
