‘Misleading nation':Oppn hits out at govt over CDS's remarks
New Delhi: The Opposition on Saturday accused the Centre of 'misleading the nation' and reiterated its demand for a special Parliament session on Operation Sindoor after Chief of Defence Staff General Anil Chauhan said that India lost fighter jets on the opening day of the recent military confrontation with Pakistan due to tactical mistakes.
In an interview to Bloomberg TV in Singapore, General Chauhan said: 'What is important is not the jet being down, but why they were being downed. What mistakes were made --- those are important. Numbers are not important. The good part is that we were able to understand the tactical mistake which we made, remedy it, rectify it, and then implement it again after two days and flew our jets again, targeting at long range.'
Referring to the statements, Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge posted on X: 'The Modi Government has misled the nation. The fog of war is now clearing.'
He added: 'The Congress party demands a Comprehensive Review of our Defence Preparedness by an independent expert committee, on the lines of the Kargil Review Committee.'
Citing Donald Trump's statements, Kharge said the US president has again repeated his claim about 'brokering a ceasefire'. 'This is a direct affront to the Shimla Agreement. Instead of clarifying Mr Trump's repeated assertions, and the affidavit filed by the US Secretary of Commerce in the United States Court of International Trade, PM Modi is on an election blitz, taking personal credit for the valour of our Armed Forces, hiding behind their bravery and dodging the contours of the agreed ceasefire, which the Foreign Secretary announced on May 10, after Trump's tweet,' he added.
In a separate post on X, Congress general secretary Jairam Ramesh said, 'It is an extraordinary and telling commentary on Emergency@11 that the PM will not chair all-party meetings and will not take Parliament into confidence but the nation gets to know of the first phase of Operation Sindoor through the CDS's interview in Singapore.' 'Couldn't opposition leaders have been taken into confidence by the PM earlier?'
Telangana minister and senior Congress leader Uttar Kumar Reddy said the government should disclose how many Indian aircraft were shot down by Pakistan. 'The fact that fighter aircraft were shot down is something the government needs to stop denying. The CDS himself mentioned that. Earlier, Air Marshal Bharti had mentioned it indirectly in his briefing report, along with the DGMO… The whole country must realise today that, for some reason, the GoI was not upfront with whatever happened,' the former air force pilot said.
TMC's deputy leader in the Rajya Sabha Sagarika Ghose, too, accused the BJP-led Centre of not presenting facts before citizens and reiterated its demand for a special session of Parliament.
'Why should international media report this first? Why were these facts first not given to India's citizens, to Parliament and to people's representatives?'In another post, Ghose said, 'There are now too many citizens' concerns regarding Operation Sindoor that must be raised in the national interest. This is how a strong democracy renews itself and learns from experiences.''Citizens and opposition must be taken into confidence. The Narendra Modi government can no longer deny the opposition's demand. A special session of Parliament must be convened in June,' she posted on X.
(With PTI inputs)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
22 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Lawyers don't need to wear black coats in summer: Delhi Bar Association
In a major relief to lawyers practising in the Capital amidst the scorching heat, the Delhi Bar Association (DBA) has decided that advocates will be exempt from wearing black coats, their usual dress code, from May 16 to September 30. Rules framed under Section 49(1)(gg) of the Advocates Act, 1961, prescribe a dress code for all practising advocates. This comprises a black buttoned-up coat, chapkan, achkan (a knee-length upper garment with long sleeves, side slits and a standing collar), black sherwani and white bands with advocate's gown for men advocates. Women advocates have to wear a black and full or half-sleeve jacket or blouse, white collar, stiff or soft, and white bands with advocates' gowns or sarees and long skirts (white or black without any design). 'All the members are hereby informed that advocates are exempted from wearing a black coat during summer (from May 16 to September 30) as per amendment in rules under Section 49(1)(gg) of the Advocates Act,1961,' DBA said in a circular dated May 24. 'Therefore, the members are at liberty to appear in the Courts subordinate to the Delhi High Court without wearing a black coat… The members are, however, advised to adhere to other rules of the dress code…,' the circular issued by Vikas Goyal, Secretary, DBA, said. DBA also said the district and sessions judges of various court complexes across Delhi have been informed of this decision. 'This is a very good step. The weather is very erratic and humid. In June, the heat will be way worse. This should be done by all Bar Associations and Councils across North India,' said Advocate Dhir Singh Kasana, former Saket Bar Association secretary. 'Indian district courts lack proper infrastructure in terms of fans, air conditioners, unhygienic washrooms, and sitting rooms, coupled with rising temperatures, it has become a daily physical and mental challenge for the advocates to wear black coats during court hours, especially in summer…This move is a welcome step towards the welfare of the advocates practising at district courts,' Advocate Paras Jain, who practices in Delhi, said. On February 27 this year, the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa (BCMG) issued a circular stating that advocates need not wear black coats from March 1 to June 30 every year. Similarly, Bhopal's Bar Council gave a similar exemption to lawyers from April 15 to July 15, 2025.
Hans India
30 minutes ago
- Hans India
Op Sindoor should not be used to derive political mileage
The political class will do better if it stops desisting from trying to derive electoral mileage from the highly successful Operation Sindoor that was executed recently. The military aspects of the operation have been largely praised (even by objective western experts), but the political aftermath has proven far more complex. The ruling party has come under scrutiny for allegedly using the operation's success to enhance its nationalistic image ostensibly for electoral gains. On its part, the Opposition has done little better. Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge called for a special parliamentary session to discuss the operation in detail. He raised concerns about inconsistencies in official narratives, particularly surrounding reports regarding the number of Indian aircraft lost during the strikes. He also accused the government of 'misleading the nation.' His statement came after the Chief of Defence Staff Gen Anil Chauhan acknowledged the loss of some Indian aircraft but emphasised that the armed forces had adapted quickly to changing tactical scenarios, ultimately achieving the mission objectives. Chauhan categorically refuted Pakistan's assertions of shooting down multiple Indian jets, labelling them as propaganda meant to distort facts. His remarks highlighted the critical role of clear and truthful communication in sustaining public trust and countering misinformation. The political discourse triggered by Operation Sindoor reflects a broader tension between safeguarding national security and navigating partisan interests. While it is natural for political parties to discuss significant national developments, it is imperative that such dialogues remain constructive and rooted in the national interest. Exploiting military operations for electoral advantage not only undermines the integrity of the armed forces but also erodes public confidence in the nation's democratic institutions. As India continues to assess the long-term implications of Operation Sindoor, there is a pressing need for political maturity and a unified stance on issues of national security. Recognising and honouring the courage and competence of the armed forces should transcend political divides. National security must remain above the realm of party politics, treated with the seriousness and dignity it deserves. Also, our political leaders must come to terms with a sobering reality: Operation Sindoor, while tactically successful and symbolically significant, was not a war that we won—nor even a full-scale battle. At best, it was a well-executed skirmish, a calibrated military response to the horrifying Pahalgam terror attack that claimed 26 innocent lives. Its importance lies not in territorial gains or dramatic military victories, but in the message it has sent loud and clear-Pakistan will have to pay a heavy price for supporting and harbouring terrorist outfits. Precision strikes on terrorist camps disrupted their operations and showcased India's strategic capabilities. However, this operation must not be mistaken for closure. The war on terror is a long and evolving struggle, requiring constant vigilance, strategic foresight, and, above all, national unity. True victory will come not with a single strike, but through sustained efforts to dismantle the networks of extremism to be assured of lasting peace and security. Operation Sindoor stands as a testament to India's strategic capability and resolve in the face of terrorism. However, its legacy will be defined not just by military precision but by the manner the nation's political leadership chooses to engage with it. By fostering transparency, encouraging responsible dialogue, and prioritising unity, India can ensure that such operations serve their true purpose—protection and security of all its citizens.
Mint
33 minutes ago
- Mint
X factor: The rise and fall of Elon Musk as a political figure
Elon Musk has officially resigned from the US Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Although his role was only temporary and departure was not surprising, it follows his criticism of President Donald Trump's tax bill. The 'Big Beautiful Bill' would not improve America's finances, he said, and will undermine his efforts to cut back on unnecessary government spending. Was there a clear divide between Trump and Musk? Only seven months ago, at his victory speech on 6 November, Trump spent four minutes praising Musk. 'A star is born—Elon!" said Trump. Musk had invested nearly a quarter of a billion dollars in Trump's campaign, which could explain his influence on the Trump administration. It was possibly the most astute investment Musk ever made. He oversaw Trump's DOGE and also shaped a far-right discourse both domestically and internationally. Also Read: Electric debacle: Tesla's troubles started before Musk wore the MAGA cap Musk attempted to involve himself in several European political issues—in Germany and the UK especially. In February, Time magazine portrayed Musk as 'President Musk." Its cover illustration showed him seated at the Resolute Desk in the White House. However, it is evident that Musk has now drifted to the margins of Trump's world. 'Elon is from South Africa—I don't want to get Elon involved," Trump told his South African counterpart, Cyril Ramaphosa, during a discussion at the White House recently. On 19 May, an analysis titled 'Why has Elon Musk vanished from the spotlight?' was published by Politico, which noted that Trump was posting messages about Musk on his Truth Social platform at an average of four times a week in February and March, but stopped doing so in April. Musk was included in nearly daily fund-raising emails sent by Trump's campaign team. However, save for a single email in May, this abruptly stopped in early March. Trump's top advisors and official White House accounts also stopped posting photos and content mentioning Musk. Musk, whose business empire includes Tesla, SpaceX and X, seemed to have got the drift. Amid mounting investor worries, he announced a major reduction in political spending. This was a public indication of the billionaire turning his focus back to his businesses. Also Read: Tesla's slump: When social intelligence clashes with artificial intelligence The main source of Musk's fortune, Tesla, has lost sales globally and suffered severe brand damage as a result of his political activities. His expressions of support for the far-right anti-immigration AfD party in Germany, for example, were noted across Europe. Tesla's sales in Europe dropped 49% in April, indicating a backlash against him. Towards the end of that month, Tesla reported a 71% dip in profits. In a call with Tesla investors, Musk said that he would begin stepping back from his position at DOGE in May. In the US and abroad, Tesla dealerships have been the target of protests and vandalism. Musk's move to impose harsh employment and spending cuts within the federal government on behalf of the Trump administration was dubbed 'one of the greatest brand destructions" ever by Scott Galloway, professor of marketing at New York University's Stern School of Business. According to some surveys, most respondents disapproved of the way Musk and DOGE have handled federal government employees and slashed jobs. About 60% of respondents in a nationwide study conducted by Marquette University Law School last month had a negative opinion of Musk, while 38% had a positive opinion. The study found approval of Musk's DOGE handling at 41% and disapproval at 58%. Also Read: The US should stay away from gimmicks and tackle its real fiscal problem Musk may have recently met his political Waterloo in Wisconsin, where he contributed at least $3 million to making the Wisconsin Supreme Court campaign the most costly in US history. He even personally appeared in Green Bay sporting a cheese-head cap, a favourite among supporters of the Green Bay Packers, an American football team. But the Republican candidate he backed lost by a 10% margin. The Democrats mobilized people by calling it a 'People versus Musk' contest to highlight his intervention. Frankly, Musk's accountability has been non-existent, his loyalties seem inconsistent and his political intentions unclear. Trump might be well aware of this. Musk stood for six hours to shake hands with Democrat Barack Obama during his 2008 presidential campaign. In 2014, Musk described himself as 'somewhere in the middle, fiscally conservative and socially liberal." He even advocated that Trump 'hang up his hat and sail into sunset" in 2022, arguing that he was too old to seek re-election. But then he started to tilt Republican. Also Read: A trade arrangement that leaves out the US could trump Trump's tariffs Thus, it was perhaps inevitable that Trump would grow weary of Musk. Since the president is accustomed to generating all his popularity himself, it would be easy for him to assume he needs nobody's help on that count. Then there is also the matter of Musk's unpopularity, which Trump may not want rubbing off on his own standing. However, Musk will still hold billions of dollars once Trump's term is over, not to mention the power of his social media platform. In the political sphere, his legacy may be a handy list of what the ultra-rich should do and not do. Or maybe he has left America's business class a model that no one else would dare imitate. The author is professor of statistics at Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata.
