India, Pakistan Signal Intent to Ease Tensions After Strikes
As Trump Reshapes Housing Policy, Renters Face Rollback of Rights
Is Trump's Plan to Reopen the Notorious Alcatraz Prison Realistic?
What's Behind the Rise in Serious Injuries on New York City's Streets?
NYC Warns of 17% Drop in Foreign Tourists Due to Trump Policies
Vail to Borrow Muni Debt to Ease Ski Resort Town Housing Crunch
'If India stops, we will stop,' Pakistan's Deputy Prime Minister Ishaq Dar said in an interview with Samaa TV, just hours after the army announced it had struck several Indian military sites in retaliation for New Delhi's missile attacks on Pakistani airbases.
At a briefing in New Delhi, Indian officials said any future action would depend on Pakistan's next steps. 'Indian Armed Forces reiterate commitment to non-escalation provided it is reciprocated by Pakistani military,' said Wing Commander Vyomika Singh. The briefing primarily focused on how India repelled Pakistan's military attacks earlier in the day.
The armed standoff, now in its fourth day, is at its most dangerous level in years, with both sides firing missiles and deploying drones over key military sites and densely populated cities. The US, China and Saudi Arabia are among those rushing to find a diplomatic solution. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio held a rare call with Pakistan army chief Asim Munir, and a separate one with Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar in a bid to de-escalate tensions.
Rubio 'continued to urge both parties to find ways to de-escalate and offered U.S. assistance in starting constructive talks in order to avoid future conflict,' spokesperson Tammy Bruce said in a statement.
While tensions between the two South Asian rivals remain high, there was a slight change in tone after the military strikes on Saturday. Pakistan's Defence Minister Khawaja Asif, speaking on Geo Television on Saturday, denied local media reports claiming Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif had called a meeting of the National Command Authority, the body responsible for decisions on nuclear weapons.
'We hope India will now choose dialog over escalation,' Ahsan Iqbal, Pakistan's planning minister, said in a statement posted on the ministry's X account. He added Pakistan doesn't wish to see the no-first-use nuclear doctrine unravel.
Even so, Pakistan's army wields significant control in the country and a decision to de-escalate will likely rest with the powerful army chief.
Early Saturday, the army said it began a counter-attack after Indian jets struck three of Pakistan's airbases with missiles, including Noor Airbase in Rawalpindi, which holds the army's headquarters and is located close to the capital Islamabad. The army said it retaliated by hitting Indian airbases and other military sites in Punjab state and the Indian-controlled part of Kashmir region.
At the briefing in New Delhi on Saturday, officials denied Pakistan's claims that Indian airbases were destroyed. India's army said it carried out 'precision attacks' on military targets in Pakistan, including Sialkot airbase, but didn't name the military site in Rawalpindi.
Vikram Misri, India's foreign secretary, blamed Pakistan for escalating the conflict by targeting civilian sites in cities like Srinagar, the capital of India's Jammu and Kashmir region, and Rajouri. He said Pakistan had targeted a medical center, school and airbases in Srinagar, Awantipora and Udhampur. Pakistan denied hitting any civilian sites.
Pakistan closed its airspace for all flights until noon Sunday. India also announced the closure of 32 airports in the northern and western parts of the country, and suspended 25 air route segments, until May 15.
China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs said it was 'deeply concerned about the escalation' in hostilities and called on both sides to 'refrain from any action' that could further heighten tensions. Saudi Arabian Foreign Minister Prince Faisal Bin Farhan held calls with his counterparts in India and Pakistan, also calling for a de-escalation of the conflict.
Foreign ministers from the Group of Seven said in a statement that further military escalation poses a 'serious threat' to regional stability and both countries should engage in 'direct dialog towards a peaceful outcome.'
Tensions between the countries erupted on April 22, when gunmen killed 26 civilians in India's Jammu and Kashmir region, mainly Hindu tourists. India called the attack an act of terrorism and accused Pakistan of involvement, allegations Islamabad has denied.
This week, the situation escalated dramatically when India carried out a operation against what it described as terrorist camps inside Pakistan. The strikes on nine targets, which Pakistan's army said killed 31 civilians, were the deepest breach of Pakistani territory by India since the 1971 war.
The conflict has roiled financial markets in both nations. India's NSE Nifty 50 index dropped more than 1% on Friday, the most in a month. After plunging on Thursday, Pakistan stocks rose on Friday before the International Monetary Fund approved a $1 billion loan disbursement.
Pakistan and India have clashed several times over the disputed region of Kashmir since independence from Britain in 1947. The last time the two nations came close to an all-out war was in 2019, after a suicide bomber killed 40 members of India's security forces.
India blamed Pakistan and responded about two weeks later with its first airstrikes on Pakistani soil since 1971. Pakistan retaliated by shooting down an Indian jet and arresting the pilot, who was later released. Tensions died down soon afterward.
--With assistance from Chiranjivi Chakraborty.
(Updates with comments from Saudi Arabia)
How the Lizard King Built a Reptile Empire Selling $50,000 Geckos
US Border Towns Are Being Ravaged by Canada's Furious Boycott
Maybe AI Slop Is Killing the Internet, After All
With the New York Liberty, Clara Wu Tsai Aims for the First $1 Billion Women's Sports Franchise
Pre-Tariff Car Buying Frenzy Leaves Americans With a Big Debt Problem
©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
2 hours ago
- New York Times
Trump Wields Tariffs as a Force in Diplomacy, to Questionable Effect
As President Trump pushes to end the war in Ukraine, he is using tariffs to try to persuade Russia to agree to a cease-fire that would halt its invasion. The economic tool is not often associated with war and peace. Mr. Trump said last month that Russia's trading partners could face 'very severe tariffs,' in what would be a roundabout way of trying to hurt Moscow. To show that he means business, Mr. Trump raised tariffs on Wednesday on imports from India to an extraordinary 50 percent, saying he was punishing the country for buying Russian oil. The taxes would be paid by American companies importing goods and would result in higher costs for consumers in the United States. An Aug. 8 deadline for Russia to agree to a cease-fire came and went, and Mr. Trump did not impose new tariffs on its trading partners. Instead, he announced plans to meet with President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia in Alaska on Friday. For Mr. Trump, tariffs are not just about raising revenue for the government or protecting American industries from foreign competition. They are a cudgel to try to get other countries to do as he wishes on matters that are entirely separate from trade, and to punish them when they do not. He has used or threatened them on everything from armed conflict to deportations to legal proceedings tied to his political grievances. Late last month, Mr. Trump raised tariffs on Brazilian goods to 50 percent, with a few exceptions, largely because of a coup-plot case in the country's Supreme Court against Jair Bolsonaro, the former right-wing president, whom Mr. Trump sees as an ally. Around that time, Mr. Trump threatened to impose 36 percent tariffs on Thailand and Cambodia if they did not halt their border war. American presidents have typically used financial sanctions targeting specific foreign companies to end certain channels of trade between countries, in hopes that pain changes a government's behavior. Sanctions have had mixed results at best. Tariffs used in diplomacy are somewhat different. Their aim is to make some or all of a nation's goods less competitive in the U.S. market, also with the end goal of causing pain to change a country's behavior (compelling India to stop buying Russian oil, for instance). Previous American presidents have tried to use the tariff threat in this manner, but not nearly to the degree that Mr. Trump has a half-year into his second term. He is betting that other countries care about access to the American market — he calls the United States 'a giant, beautiful store' and 'the biggest department store in history.' 'I put these in a mental framework that honestly has very little to do with trade and a lot more to do with coercive economic statecraft,' said Emma Ashford, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center who studies U.S. foreign policy. 'The tariffs that are used as leverage on some other issues are more like sanctions, in that they're leveraging U.S. economic power to some other policy end.' 'You could even see the use of tariffs this way as a continuation of the trend toward evermore draconian coercive economic measures by the U.S. in recent years' she added, citing sanctions and export controls as two of those measures. 'We keep using bigger and bigger economic guns when it becomes apparent that the smaller ones aren't achieving what we want.' Mr. Trump's threat of tariffs appears to have influenced other governments a couple times. One instance involved Colombia, which accepted U.S. military flights with deportees early this year, There was also the recent diplomacy between Cambodia and Thailand. But on larger challenges, Mr. Trump's threats have had no effect so far. Mr. Putin has continued to press his war against Ukraine despite the threats of further economic pain on Russia, which was subjected to heavy U.S.-led sanctions after its invasions of Ukraine in 2014 and 2022. And Indian officials have been defiant in the face of Mr. Trump's tariffs, saying they would continue to buy Russian oil. 'He doesn't want to do anything against Putin directly, so imposing tariffs on oil-buying countries is his preferred option right now,' said Fiona Hill, a senior director for Europe and Russia on the National Security Council during the first Trump administration. Even Mr. Trump has acknowledged the questionable value of the tactic: He told reporters on July 29 that new financial penalties on Russia 'may or may not affect them.' Sanctions are more effective at pushing a country to change its behavior than tariffs, said Edward Fishman, a former State Department official and current scholar at Columbia University who has written a new book on economic warfare. One reason is that tariffs aim to punish a country by hobbling its commercial competitiveness in the U.S. market. But the United States takes in only 13 percent of global imports, he said, so some nations targeted with tariffs might decide they can weather that pain. U.S. sanctions, on the other hand, can cut off entire channels of commerce because many companies cannot trade without access to a global financial system that the U.S. dollar underpins. (That said, many governments have weathered sanctions, even as the penalties pummel national economies and daily lives.) 'I'm personally skeptical of secondary tariffs as a weapon of economic warfare,' Mr. Fishman said. 'The United States as a destination for imports is not a choke point the way the dollar is. And it's a roundabout targeting action.' In addition, tariffs raise tensions between governments, as in the case of the United States and India, whose relationship had been improving until Mr. Trump's latest actions. And tariffs punish American companies and consumers, because U.S. companies paying the taxes generally pass on the costs to buyers, which can lead to inflation in the United States. Some American diplomats say they worry that the long-term effects of the tariffs, and how they will affect U.S. diplomacy and the global economy, have been overlooked in the State Department as a result of a recent purge that has emptied its ranks of economic, energy and other such subject-matter experts. The Trump administration is not the first to impose tariffs on nations for reasons unrelated to trade policy. During the Napoleonic Wars, the United States wielded tariffs against Britain and France for geopolitical reasons, Mr. Fishman said. And after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, he added, the Biden administration imposed tariffs on imports of Russian aluminum instead of sanctions on Russian aluminum companies, because American officials feared that prices would surge globally if those companies were forced out of the market. 'A sanction is a full cutoff,' Mr. Fishman said. 'Tariffs are a relatively weak tool of economic warfare.' But Mr. Trump has continued to try to use tariffs as leverage, perhaps because of his success with Colombia. Just days after he took office, Colombia turned back two American military aircraft carrying Colombian immigrants deported from the United States in late January. Mr. Trump responded by announcing new tariffs, sanctions and travel restrictions against the country, which has long been an important U.S. partner. Then President Gustavo Petro of Colombia announced retaliatory tariffs. 'You don't like our freedom, fine,' Mr. Petro said at the time. 'I do not shake hands with white enslavers.' By that night, they had reached an agreement. The White House claimed victory and said Mr. Petro would accept deportation flights. Later that month, Mr. Trump threatened to impose the penalty on Mexico and Canada unless they did more to stop the flow of migrants and fentanyl into the United States. He did not lay out exactly what the countries needed to do — he often keeps his demands vague so he can more easily declare a victory. When Mr. Trump postponed those tariffs, the White House claimed it had secured a series of concessions from both countries. Some of the actions though, including Canada's commitment to send more security personnel and technology to its southern border, had already been agreed to. 'President Trump has leaned on tariff threats to pressure some countries to take back more deportation flights, but oftentimes, these threats amount to no more than political theater,' said Andrea Flores, who directed border management for the National Security Council in the Biden White House. Perhaps Mr. Trump's most overtly political use of tariffs involves Brazil. Mr. Bolsonaro is accused of trying to carry out a plot to remain in power after losing the presidential election in 2022. Mr. Trump has demanded that Brazil drop the charges. That case echoes one the Justice Department brought against Mr. Trump on charges that he had conspired to overturn the 2020 U.S. election, which he lost to Joseph R. Biden Jr. The department asked a court to dismiss the case after Mr. Trump won the 2024 election, because of a Justice Department policy saying it is unconstitutional to pursue prosecutions against sitting presidents. 'Trump's secret weapon is doing what other leaders neither expect or would do themselves,' said Ricardo Zúniga, a former senior State Department official and U.S. consul general in São Paulo, Brazil. Although U.S. courts might eventually rule against Mr. Trump's use of emergency authorities to impose tariffs, Mr. Zúniga said many businesses around the world have already felt the economic toll. 'I've seen it in Brazil, where the tariffs and the tariff exemptions are disrupting trade in everything from coffee to beef to Brazilian-built transformers critical to U.S. data centers,' he said. 'And the fact is that President Trump himself will decide whether to tie the outcome of trade negotiations to Bolsonaro's trial, so companies and sectors are struggling to make their case with U.S. officials.' Lara Jakes contributed reporting from Rome.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
India attacks US and Europe's 'double standards' in their trade relationship with Russia
India has lashed out at the United States and the European Union, criticising what it described as "double standards" over their trade relations with Russia, after US President Donald Trump threatened to impose higher tariffs on Indian goods due to New Delhi's continued import of Russian oil. "The countries criticising India are themselves engaged in trade with Russia," India's Ministry of External Affairs said in a statement on Monday evening, adding that "it is unjustified to target India alone". It noted that the European Union conducted trade with Russia worth €67.5 billion ($78.02bn) in 2024, including record LNG imports of 16.5 million metric tonnes. According to the statement, the US continued to import Russian uranium hexafluoride for use in the nuclear power sector, along with palladium, fertilisers and chemicals, without clarifying the source of this information. This escalation follows direct threats made by Trump on 31 July, announcing 25% tariffs on Indian goods exported to his country, while also threatening unspecified sanctions against India's purchases of Russian oil, in what observers described as a sudden escalation in relations between Washington and New Delhi. India, one of the largest importers of Russian oil, imported about 1.75 million barrels daily between January and June 2025, up 1% from the same period last year. The EU in July imposed sanctions on India's Nayara Energy, a major refiner in which Russia's Rosneft holds a majority stake. New Delhi has maintained that it does not recognise "unilateral sanctions" imposed by the EU. New Delhi's scathing response Both Prime Minister Narendra Modi's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the main opposition Congress Party condemned the ongoing US criticism. "Trump's insulting remarks hurt the dignity of Indians," said Congress MP Manish Tiwari, adding: "It is time to put an end to this incessant bullying and intimidation." BJP vice-president Baijayant Jai Panda recalled a famous quote by Henry Kissinger on the X platform: "To be an enemy of America may be dangerous, but to be a friend of America is deadly." Trade experts believe that the upcoming US tariffs could cause significant damage to the Indian economy. Ajay Srivastava, of the Global Trade Research Initiative in New Delhi, said he expects India's exports to the US to fall 30% in the current fiscal year to $60.6bn from $86.5bn in fiscal 2025. The trade tension was directly reflected in the markets, with Indian stock indices plummeting after Trump's latest threats. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Tariff showdown shatters once robust populist alliance between Trump and Modi
The men shared bear hugs, showered praise on each other, and made appearances side by side at stadium rallies — a big optics boost for two populist leaders with many ideological similarities. Each called the other a good friend. In India, the bonhomie between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US President Donald Trump was seen as a relationship like no other. That is, until a series of events gummed up the works. From Trump's tariffs and India's purchase of oil from Russia to a US tilt towards Pakistan, friction between New Delhi and Washington has been hard to miss. And much of it has happened far from the corridors of power and, unsurprisingly, through Trump's posts on social media. It has left policy experts wondering whether the camaraderie the two leaders shared may be a thing of the past, even though Trump has stopped short of referring to Modi directly on social media. The dip in rapport, some say, puts a strategic bilateral relationship built over decades at risk. 'This is a testing time for the relationship,' said Ashok Malik, a former policy adviser in India's Foreign Ministry. The White House did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment. Simmering tensions over trade and tariffs The latest hiccup between India and the US emerged last week when Trump announced that he was slapping 25% tariffs on India as well as an unspecified penalty because of India's purchase of Russian oil. For New Delhi, such a move from its largest trading partner is expected to be felt across sectors, but it also led to a sense of unease in India — even more so when Trump, on social media, called India's economy 'dead'. Trump's recent statements reflect his frustration with the pace of trade talks with India, according to a White House official who was not authorised to speak publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity to describe internal administration thinking. The Republican president has not been pursuing any strategic realignment with Pakistan, according to the official, but is instead trying to play hardball in negotiations. Trump doubled down on the pressure Monday with a fresh post on Truth Social, in which he accused India of buying 'massive amounts' of oil from Russia and then 'selling it on the Open Market for big profits". 'They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine. Because of this, I will be substantially raising the tariff paid by India to the USA,' he said. The messaging appears to have stung Modi's administration, which has been hard-selling negotiations with Trump's team over a trade deal by balancing between India's protectionist system while also opening up the country's market to more American goods. 'Strenuous, uninterrupted and bipartisan efforts in both capitals over the past 25 years are being put at risk by not just the tariffs but by fast and loose statements and social media posts,' said Malik, who heads the India chapter of The Asia Group, a US advisory firm. Malik also said the trade deal the Indian side has offered to the US is the 'most expansive in this country's history,' referring to reports that India was willing to open up to some American agricultural products. That is a politically sensitive issue for Modi, who faced a yearlong farmers' protest a few years ago. Trump appears to be tilting toward Pakistan The unravelling may have gained momentum over tariffs, but the tensions have been palpable for a while. Much of it has to do with Trump growing closer to Pakistan, India's nuclear rival in the neighbourhood. In May, India and Pakistan traded a series of military strikes over a gun massacre in the disputed Kashmir region that New Delhi blamed on Islamabad. Pakistan denied the accusations. The four-day conflict made the possibility of a nuclear conflagration between the two sides seem real and the fighting only stopped when global powers intervened. But it was Trump's claims of mediation and an offer to work to provide a 'solution' regarding the dispute over Kashmir that made Modi's administration uneasy. Since then, Trump has repeated nearly two dozen times that he brokered peace between India and Pakistan. For Modi, that is a risky — even nervy — territory. Domestically, he has positioned himself as a leader who is tough on Pakistan. Internationally, he has made huge diplomatic efforts to isolate the country. So Trump's claims cut a deep wound, prompting a sense in India that the US may no longer be its strategic partner. India insists that Kashmir is India's internal issue and had opposed any third-party intervention. Last week Modi appeared to dismiss Trump's claims after India's opposition began demanding answers from him. Modi said that 'no country in the world stopped' the fighting between India and Pakistan, but he did not name Trump. Trump has also appeared to be warming up to Pakistan, even praising its counterterrorism efforts. Hours after levying tariffs on India, Trump announced a 'massive' oil exploration deal with Pakistan, saying that one day, India might have to buy oil from Islamabad. Earlier, he also hosted one of Pakistan's top military officials at a private lunch. Sreeram Sundar Chaulia, an expert at New Delhi's Jindal School of International Affairs, said Trump's sudden admiration for Pakistan as a great partner in counterterrorism has 'definitely soured' the mood in India. Chaulia said 'the best-case scenario is that this is just a passing Trump whim', but he also warned that 'if financial and energy deals are indeed being struck between the US and Pakistan, it will dent the US-India strategic partnership and lead to loss of confidence in the US in Indian eyes". Related India and Pakistan trade heavy fire in Kashmir as tensions escalate Three suspected militants killed in gunfight in disputed Kashmir region, India says India's oil purchases from Russia are an irritant India had faced strong pressure from the Biden administration to cut back its oil purchases from Moscow during the early months of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Instead, India bought more, making it the second-biggest buyer of Russian oil after China. That pressure sputtered over time and the US focused more on building strategic ties with India, which is seen as a bulwark against a rising China. Trump's threat to penalise India over oil, however, brought back those issues. On Sunday, the Trump administration made its frustrations over ties between India and Russia ever more public. Stephen Miller, deputy chief of staff at the White House, accused India of financing Russia's war in Ukraine by purchasing oil from Moscow, saying it was "not acceptable". Miller's remarks were followed by another Trump social media post on Monday in which he again threatened to raise tariffs on goods from India over its Russian oil purchases. 'India is not only buying massive amounts of Russian oil, they are then, for much of the oil purchased, selling it on the open market for big profits. They don't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine," Trump wrote. Some experts, though, suspect Trump's remarks are mere pressure tactics. 'Given the wild fluctuations in Trump's policies,' Chaulia said, 'it may return to high fives and hugs again.' India says it will safeguard its interests Many expected India to react strongly over Trump's tariff threats considering Modi's carefully crafted reputation of strength. Instead, the announcement prompted a rather careful response from India's commerce minister, Piyush Goyal, who said the two countries are working toward a "fair, balanced and mutually beneficial bilateral trade agreement". Initially, India's Foreign Ministry also played down suggestions of any strain. But in a statement late Monday, it called Trump's criticism 'unjustified and unreasonable' and said it will take 'all necessary measures to safeguard its national interests and economic security". It said India began importing oil from Russia because traditional supplies were diverted to Europe after the outbreak of the Ukraine conflict, calling it a 'necessity compelled by global market situation". The statement also noted US trade with Russia. 'It is revealing that the very nations criticising India are themselves indulging in trade with Russia,' the statement said. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
