Shehbaz Sharif rejects nuclear threats as India tensions rise; counters officials warning of 'full Spectrum' response
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
Earlier threats of 'full spectrum of power'
Tired of too many ads?
Remove Ads
India's Retaliation: Operation Sindoor
China's role in Pakistan's defence capabilities
Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif has dismissed any suggestion that his country considered using nuclear weapons during its latest confrontation with India, insisting the nuclear arsenal is intended solely for 'peaceful purposes and national defence.' Speaking to a gathering of Pakistani students on Saturday, Sharif sought to downplay fears of escalation, even as the memory of military exchanges remains fresh.Recalling the four-day standoff that followed the deadly April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, which killed 26 civilians, Sharif acknowledged that 55 Pakistanis had died during India's retaliatory Operation Sindoor. He nonetheless stressed Pakistan's military had responded forcefully but within conventional bounds.'Pakistan's nuclear programme exists to defend the nation and to deter aggression, not to pursue it,' he told students.Sharif's remarks stood in stark contrast to statements made just weeks earlier by senior Pakistani officials, who had openly warned of nuclear retaliation if India struck. In May, Pakistan's ambassador to Russia, Muhammad Khalid Jamali, told Russian broadcaster RT that Islamabad would not hesitate to unleash 'the full spectrum of power, including nuclear,' if India attempted to attack or disrupt Pakistan's water resources.'Any move to seize or divert our water would be considered an act of war,' Jamali warned, signalling that nuclear options were actively under consideration.These comments, widely reported internationally, heightened concerns that the South Asian rivals were inching closer to a nuclear flashpoint.India's military campaign, Operation Sindoor, was launched in early May in direct response to the Pahalgam attack, which Indian intelligence blamed on Pakistan-based terror outfits including Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and Hizbul Mujahideen. Over the course of several days, Indian forces conducted what officials described as 'pre-emptive precision strikes,' hitting nine sites linked to terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.According to Indian security agencies, the strikes eliminated more than 100 militants.Prime Minister Narendra Modi underlined that India would not be cowed by threats of nuclear escalation. 'India will not tolerate nuclear blackmail while countering terrorism,' he declared on May 13.General Anil Chauhan, India's Chief of Defence Staff, echoed this position. Speaking at a think tank event in New Delhi, he said: 'Nuclear deterrence is no justification for cross-border terrorism. Operation Sindoor shows that India is willing to act decisively against it.'Meanwhile, Pakistan's growing reliance on China as its primary defence partner continues to draw scrutiny. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), Islamabad has purchased $8.2 billion worth of Chinese arms since 2015. Between 2020 and 2024 alone, Pakistan accounted for 63% of Beijing's total arms exports, the largest share going to any country.Sharif's attempt to present a more restrained nuclear posture highlights the delicate balance Islamabad must maintain—signalling strength domestically while avoiding further escalation with India.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
25 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trade body identifies 300 high potential items for US exports
Representative image MUMBAI: Trade body Federation of Indian Export Organisations (Fieo) has identified over 300 "high potential items" for exports to the US, highlighting areas, where the government may want to push for tariff cuts. Overall, Fieo has identified 408 items that are commercially important and strategically stable, accounting for over two-thirds of India's exports to the US. It has suggested trade facilitation and export promotion efforts for these items. The products range from frozen shrimps and pharmaceuticals to smartphones and diamonds, carpets, toilet linen, milled rice, and natural honey. While some of these items have a significant share of India's exports, such as medicines, India has a large share of the market for products like shrimps, accounting for over 40% of American imports. In contrast, an item like honey is a small fraction of India's overall exports, pegged at $86.5 billion last year, but it is again a quarter of all shipments into the US. The list also includes several textiles products, leather goods, footwear, chemicals, engineering goods, and electric and electronics goods, where Indian exporters have traditionally been strong. In its negotiations, the government has already demanded tariff concessions for several products, especially labour-intensive ones. Besides, in several cases, such as shrimps and carpets, based on the reciprocal tariff of 26% earlier announced for India, exports would become less competitive as rivals enjoyed a significant edge. A team of Indian negotiators led by Rajesh Agarwal, special secretary in the commerce department, will hold talks with American officials as part of efforts to get a favourable deal for India before Trump's tariffs kick in from Aug 1. Apart from the uncertainty over a trade deal, especially with India insisting on holding back concessions for several farm goods and dairy products, negotiators face additional challenges with Trump mounting further pressure by threatening additional duties on countries that align with Brics or buy oil from sanction-hit Russia. Besides, a section within the government has said that the tariff demands from the Trump administration are not clear. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Indian Express
25 minutes ago
- Indian Express
New Delhi has chance to repay Green Revolution debt: Why doing so is in India's interest
It was William S Gaud, administrator of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), who coined the term 'Green Revolution'. In a speech delivered on March 8, 1968, Gaud delved on the 'paramount importance of the world food problem' and how countries such as India were addressing it through planting of high-yielding varieties of wheat. This development, he said, had the makings of a new revolution: 'It is not a violent Red Revolution like that of the Soviets…I call it the Green Revolution'. It's the same USAID that has been shut down by the Donald Trump administration from July 1. Among the institutions impacted by the closure of the agency — that oversaw civilian foreign aid and development assistance from the US government — is the Mexico-headquartered International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center or CIMMYT. Synonymous with the renowned agricultural scientist Norman Borlaug, CIMMYT bred the semi-dwarf varieties Lerma Rojo 64A, Sonora 63, Sonora 64 and Mayo 64 that Indian farmers first sowed in 1964-65. Over the next few years, these varieties spread to more countries, heralding Gaud's 'Green Revolution.' While CIMMYT originated from a Mexican government and Rockefeller Foundation-sponsored programme in the 1940s and 50s, USAID became its main funder. It accounted for about $83 million out of CIMMYT's total $211 million grant revenues received in 2024. With the USAID's dismantling, CIMMYT is now looking at India — one of its major beneficiaries — as a potentially significant benefactor. Cold War institutions CIMMYT is to wheat what the Philippines-based International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) — established by the Ford and Rockefeller foundations in 1960 — has been to the other big cereal grain crop. Both were key to the US cultivating soft power and projecting a positive global image, more so during the Cold War. That was the time the US saw the Soviet Union as a threat, and believed that the deteriorating food situation in developing countries could foment political instability and eventual communist takeovers. Increasing cereal grain production in these countries, then, became a geopolitical imperative as part of US foreign policy. With Borlaug's varieties, Indian farmers could harvest 4-4.5 tonnes per hectare of wheat, as against 1-1.5 tonnes from the traditional tall cultivars prone to lodging (bending or falling over) when their earheads were heavy with well-filled grains. IRRI's semi-dwarf varieties, such as IR 8, IR 36 and IR 64, similarly boosted paddy (rice with husk) yields from 1-3 tonnes to 4.5-5 tonnes per hectare with minimal fertilisers, and 9-10 tonnes with higher application. Moreover, they matured in 110-130 days, compared with the 160-180 days (from seed to grain) for the traditional tall varieties. Borlaug was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1970. And it was fittingly for Peace. How India benefited The Green Revolution was seeded in India by CIMMYT and IRRI. Even the blockbuster wheat varieties Kalyan Sona and Sonalika, released for commercial cultivation by Indian scientists in 1967-68, were developed through selections from the progeny of advanced breeding material supplied by CIMMYT. Over time, Indian scientists, led by VS Mathur at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI) in New Delhi, came out with their own varieties, particularly HD 2285 in 1982 and HD 2329 in 1985. These raised wheat yields to 5-6 tonnes per hectare. It went up further to 7 tonnes-plus with HD 2967, which IARI scientists — mainly BS Malik, Rajbir Yadav and AP Sethi — unveiled in 2011. In rice, likewise, V Ramachandra Rao and MV Reddy at the Andhra Pradesh Agricultural University developed the mega varieties Swarna (MTU 7029) and Samba Mahsuri (BPT 5204), released in 1982 and 1986 respectively. IARI scientists like EA Siddiq, VP Singh and AK Singh also bred improved high-yielding basmati varieties, including Pusa Basmati 1 (released in 1989), 1121 (2003) and 1509 (2013). India exported 6.1 million tonnes of basmati rice valued at $5.94 billion (Rs 50,311.89 crore) in 2024-25. More than 90% of that was from IARI-bred varieties. Borlaug was once asked why the Green Revolution succeeded in India and not in most other developing countries, specifically Africa. He is said to have replied that it was because 'they didn't have institutions like IARI and scientists like MS Swaminathan'. The latter was instrumental in devising the overall strategy and implementation plan for the Green Revolution, with the full support of the then political leadership — from agriculture minister C Subramaniam to Prime Ministers Lal Bahadur Shastri and Indira Gandhi. Significantly, IRRI's chief breeder Gurdev Singh Khush — his IR 36 and IR 64 varieties were planted in 10-11 million hectares (mh) each worldwide during the 1980s and 1990s respectively — was an Indian. So was Sanjaya Rajaram, appointed by Borlaug as head of CIMMYT's wheat breeding programme when he was just 29. The major varieties released during the 1990s in India — PBW 343, WH 542, Raj 3765 and PBW 373 — were all under his leadership. Why India still needs them The accompanying table shows that six out of the top 10 wheat varieties, accounting for over 20 mh out of the roughly 32 mh area sown by Indian farmers in 2024-25, were directly released from CIMMYT material. The only notable indigenously bred wheat variety in recent times has been HD 2967, which covered a record area of 12-14 mh at its peak in 2017-18 and 2018-19. But the varieties released since then are predominantly based on CIMMYT germplasm. CIMMYT and IRRI, to that extent, remain relevant to India, which has a vital stake in both institutions. With the US under Trump adopting a more transactional, if not coercive, approach to foreign policy, India has both scope and reason to step up funding of the global breeding research and development programme. In 2024, India contributed a mere $0.8 million to CIMMYT and $18.3 million to IRRI. 'We should give more, but it must be for basic and strategic research in areas such as identification of new genetic resources for heat and drought tolerance, nitrogen use efficiency traits, gene editing and use of artificial intelligence tools. And it should be collaborative, not at the expense of funding for our own national agricultural research system,' said Rajendra Singh Paroda, former director-general of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research. Harish Damodaran is National Rural Affairs & Agriculture Editor of The Indian Express. A journalist with over 33 years of experience in agri-business and macroeconomic policy reporting and analysis, he has previously worked with the Press Trust of India (1991-94) and The Hindu Business Line (1994-2014). ... Read More
Indian Express
32 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Express view: Lend a hand
The Mexico-headquartered International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) — synonymous with Norman Borlaug, the 'father of the Green Revolution' — is seeking financial support from India. This comes as the Donald Trump administration has shut down the US Agency for International Development, which provided $83 million out of CIMMYT's total $211 million revenue grants to fund its global breeding research and development programme in the two cereal crops. CIMMYT basically wants countries such as India to fill the void left by the US that, under President Trump, has adopted a transactional approach to foreign policy; it no longer sees value in cultivating soft power or projecting a positive image of the US on the world stage. There are at least three reasons why India should consider stepping up its funding of CIMMYT, or even the Philippines-based International Rice Research Institute (IRRI). The first is that the money these organisations require isn't all that big. A country with $700 billion in official foreign exchange reserves can afford more than the $0.8 million and $18.3 million that it gave to CIMMYT and IRRI respectively in 2024. The second is the international goodwill this creates, consistent with the leadership role that India is increasingly taking within the Global South and given that it is also acting as a bridge with the developed North: There can be no peace and stability without food security. Third, India has stakes in both organisations that played a stellar role in turning it from ship-to-mouth to self-sufficient, if not surplus, in wheat and rice. But the challenge is to grow these crops using less water and fertiliser, besides making them tolerant to rising temperatures, salinity and other abiotic stresses. Breeding today for tomorrow's climate is a strategic imperative for a country that cannot, beyond a point, depend on others to feed 1.7 billion mouths by 2060. This extends to maize too. As Indians consume more animal products with rising incomes, the demand for it as feed — and now also as a fuel grain — will only go up. But it's not only CIMMYT and IRRI. India must simultaneously strengthen its national agricultural research system that has suffered from a lack of resources (too little money spread across too many institutes), leadership and sense of purpose. The Green Revolution owed its success as much to Borlaug as to MS Swaminathan, the Indian Agricultural Research Institute and a minister like C Subramaniam, who could make tough calls based on scientific opinion and what the situation demanded. Contrast this with the present procrastination, whether on commercialisation of genetically modified crops or allowing under-pricing of fertilisers, water and electricity. The Indian farmer today faces practical problems that only science and applied research, not subsidies, can address.
