Pakistan violates agreement to stop military action, India retaliates swiftly
Live Events
(You can now subscribe to our
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel
New Delhi | Srinagar: India said Pakistan violated an agreement to stop military action against each other, hours after the accord was reached and had gone into effect at 5 pm on Saturday."For the last few hours, there have been repeated violations of the understanding arrived at earlier this evening," foreign secretary Vikram Misri said at a televised briefing late on Saturday. "The armed forces are giving an adequate and appropriate response to these violations. We call upon Pakistan to take appropriate steps to address these violations and deal with the situation with seriousness and responsibility."National security advisor Ajit Doval spoke to his Chinese counterpart Wang Yo about Pakistan's violation of the agreement.Srinagar was rocked by multiple blasts at around 8:50 pm that continued intermittently for at least 40 minutes on Saturday night. Similar reports came in from other parts of Kashmir, including Anantnag in the south and Baramulla in the north. Electricity was shut across the Valley."What the hell just happened to the ceasefire? Explosions heard across Srinagar! This is no ceasefire. The air defence units in the middle of Srinagar just opened up," Jammu & Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah wrote on social media.The deal had been aimed at halting four days of conflict sparked by the April 22 terrorist attack on tourists in Pahalgam that killed 26 people. The accord was arrived at purely through bilateral means and is devoid of any preconditions. "India and Pakistan have today worked out an understanding on stoppage of firing and military action," external affairs minister S Jaishankar had earlier posted on X. "India has consistently maintained a firm and uncompromising stance against terrorism in all its forms and manifestations. It will continue to do so."Misri had said the deal was worked out between army officials on the two sides. This underlined that there was no third-party mediation involved."The Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) of Pakistan called the Director General of Military Operations of India at 1535 hours IST on Saturday," he said in a statement. "It was agreed between them that both sides would stop all firing and military action on land and in the air and sea with effect from 1700 hours Indian Standard Time on Saturday."Sources said India has decided that any future act of terror will be considered an act of war and the country will respond accordingly.Instructions had been given to both sides to give effect to the understanding. The DGMOs are to talk again on May 12 at 1200 hours.Highly placed sources told ET that contrary to claims made by US President Donald Trump and other officials of that country, the agreement to stop military action was taken purely on a bilateral basis and that the call was initiated by the Pakistan DGMO.There are no preconditions attached to Saturday's decision. The Indus Water Treaty will remain in abeyance, India will continue to deny Pakistan access to its airspace and ports, and postal services and trade will also continue to be banned. There will be no rollback on the decision to stop visas for Pakistanis. The Pakistan diplomatic mission will not be allowed to be upgraded.Trump, US vice president JD Vance and secretary of state Marco Rubio had claimed that the US played a major role in facilitating a ceasefire between India and Pakistan. Trump posted on X: "After a long night of talks mediated by the United States, I am pleased to announce that India and Pakistan have agreed to a FULL AND IMMEDIATE CEASEFIRE."Indian officials briefed the media on Saturday about the previous night's military action. Its forces had carried out precision and targeted strikes against Pakistan Air Force bases at Rafiqui, Murid, Chaklala and Rahim Yar Khan, military targets at Sukkur, Chunian besides Pasrur and Sialkot aviation bases, following military provocation by the neighbour on May 9-10. The military said it had inflicted major damage on Pakistan's military assets.The Pakistan military was observed at the time to be moving troops into forward areas, indicating offensive intent, to further escalate the situation. The Indian armed forces remain in a high state of operational readiness. The Pakistani military continued with its provocations on Friday night, carrying out aggressive actions, employing multiple threat vectors all along the western border, wing commander Vyomika Singh said in a joint briefing by the external affairs and defence ministries. Pakistan employed UAVs, drones, long-range weapons, loitering munitions and fighter aircraft to target civilian areas and military infrastructure. It also resorted to air intrusions using drones and fired heavy calibre weapons along the Line of Control, Singh said."Along the international border and the Line of Control, air intrusions and several harassment attacks were also attempted from Srinagar till Naliya at more than 26 locations," she said. "Indian armed forces successfully neutralised these threats and majority of the vectors. However, limited damage was sustained to equipment and personnel at Indian Air Force stations at Udhampur, Pathankot, Adampur and Bhuj. There were also several high-speed missile attacks noticed subsequently after 01:40 hours in the night at several air bases in Punjab."In a swift and calibrated response, the Indian armed forces carried out precision attacks on identified military targets. These included technical infrastructure, command and control centres, radar sites and weapon storage areas. Pakistan military targets at Rafiqui, Murid, Chaklala, Rahim Yar Khan, Sukkur and Chunian were engaged using air-launched precision weapons from fighter aircraft. Radar sites at Pasrur and Sialkot aviation base were also targeted using precision munitions, she said.While carrying out these responses, India ensured minimum collateral damage. Pakistan on the other hand had targeted civilian infrastructure, attacking medical centres and schools at air bases in Srinagar, Awantipora and Udhampur. India refuted claims by Pakistan regarding damage it had inflicted.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
Client services for client state: Trump's reset with Pak is marked by a transactional, short-horizon foreign policy
US anxiety seems to centre around India's destruction of Pakistan's Nur Khan airbase. According to Imtiaz Gul, it's 'under American control'. Our forefathers believed that we were different from Hindus in every possible aspect of life. Our religion is different. Our customs are different. Our traditions are different. Our thoughts are different. Our ambitions are different.… That was the foundation of the Two-Nation Theory. It was laid on the belief that we are two nations, not one.' That was Pakistan Army chief Gen — now Field Marshal — Asim Munir speaking at the Convention for Overseas Pakistanis in Islamabad on April 17. Less than a week later in Pahalgam, Pakistani terrorists killed 1 Christian and 24 Hindu tourists, as well as a local Muslim who resisted the assailants, after the killers established their victims' religious identities. A link between Munir's rant and the Pahalgam massacre is a possibility. But the rage in India in response to the attack went far beyond what Pakistan had expected. Perhaps it had assessed that India would do what it had done after the 2016 Uri attack when 18 Indian soldiers were killed. Or, in response to the 2019 Pulwama suicide bombing, which killed 41 Indian paramilitary soldiers. On both earlier occasions, India had reacted with one-off counterattacks in POK and Balakot. Rawalpindi probably expected a similar reaction post-Pahalgam. This time, the storyline changed. India's counter, launched on May 7, forced the Pakistani DGMO to speak to his Indian counterpart on May 10, and seek a ceasefire. The world is now aware of what transpired between May 7 and 10, although many would not want to talk about it. Suppliers of military equipment to Pakistan — the US, China, and Turkey — will probably be reevaluating their equipment that succumbed to Indian, Russian and French equipment. Inevitably, the Americans got into the act, mostly to save their major non-Nato ally. The resounding success of the Indian response had taken them aback. One wondered about the urgency of Trump's self-described 'intervention' to stop matters escalating on the India-Pak front when the Ukraine war and IsraelHamas conflict — or even the Houthi battles in Yemen — have been allowed to last for years. Indian denials about US intervention have been ignored by the Americans. The Pakistanis, of course, eagerly accepted this rescue. US anxiety seems to centre around India's destruction of Pakistan's Nur Khan airbase. Remember, according to Pakistani journalist and security expert Imtiaz Gul, the base is 'under American control', where even senior Pakistan Army officers are not allowed to has been extremely useful to the US. Its defence minister Khawaja Asif asserted that they had been fighting America's dirty wars for 30-odd years. From a strategic perspective, it's well-known that the US has been helping Pakistan to keep India 'occupied', while they get a geographic toehold near Iran and China. Both China and the US would like to have total control over Pakistan, to have a base looking at their interests to the east and economic rise, its decisions to choose its sourcing and look after its own interests, cause concern to the US. India tends to get under its skin, as its commerce secretary Howard Lutnick grumbled recently. Which is why the restart of the old game of hyphenating India and Pakistan, ignoring Indian sensitivities, while propping up these decisions may have been made earlier, announcements of $1 bn to Pakistan by IMF, $40 bn by World Bank, and another $800 mn during Operation Sindoor were bad optics. The latest signallings include inviting Munir to attend the 250th US Army Day celebrations in Washington on June 14 — which also happens to be Trump's 79th birthday. Undoubtedly, Munir will meet officials from the State Department and Pentagon, and get promises for military Central Command commander Michael E Kurilla, testifying before the House Armed Services Committee in Washington earlier this week, described Pakistan as a 'phenomenal partner' in anti-terrorism operations. He emphasised the need for the US to maintain relationships with both India and Pakistan, stating that he didn't 'believe it is a binary switch that we can't have one with Pakistan if we have a relationship with India'. In that case, the US shouldn't have a problem with India's relations with Russia and the a matter of conjecture if this US-Pak partnership is about Iran, Central Asia or even India. Pakistan is looking at buying 40 more Chinese J-35A stealth fighter aircraft, a rival of the US F-35, with a listed price of $9 bn, but on offer at 50% the value. This will mean that 80% of Pakistan's military purchases will be from China. Pakistan's debt to China, including CPEC, already amounts to nearly $70 April 26, World Liberty Financial (WLF) agreed to help build Pakistan's blockchain infrastructure, promote stablecoin-based remittances, and tokenise real-world assets. The agreement seeks to position Pakistan as a crypto-forward nation. Eric Trump, the president's son, is associated with WLF, whose executives met Pakistani PM Shehbaz Sharif as well as Munir. Enough such conditions, India should be prepared for Pahalgam-style attacks in the future, while expecting no assistance from China, and ambivalence from the US. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. How a nudge from Cyrus Mistry helped TCS unlock a USD1 billion opportunity Explainer: The RBI's LAF corridor and its role in rate transmission Is Zomato under siege? Quick commerce may be the next telecom Operation Sindoor, Turkey, Bangladesh played out as India hosted global airlines after 42 years Coal on one hand and green on the other; this company balances both Stock Radar: Bandhan Bank stocks break out from 1-month consolidation; what should traders do? Check target & stop loss Combination of strong brand & higher margins equals long-term investment: 5 stocks with an upside potential of up to 23% Two Trades for Today: A PSU energy major for 7.5% rise, a large-cap refinery stock for close to 6% upmove These mid-cap stocks with 'Strong Buy' & 'Buy' recos can rally over 25%, according to analysts
Economic Times
an hour ago
- Economic Times
With the US slapping tariffs around, international trade is like the Wild West now: Gene M. Grossman
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel The WTO system got blown up starting with the first Trump administration when many appellate body judges stepped down — since every major country can veto appointments, the US vetoed all replacements. That stopped the adjudication of disputes. Currently, many countries — some led by the US — see fit to do what they want and don't abide by WTO agreements . Gene M. Grossman is Jacob Viner Professor of International Economics at Princeton University. Speaking to Srijana Mitra Das, he discusses trade — in the time of Trumpian tariffs:A. I am an international trade economist. I've worked over 46 years on various aspects of trade, from the relationship between it and the environment to links between trade and growth, outsourcing, political economy and the effects of trade policy A. There was a focus on supply chain disturbances as a result of the pandemic — that event made those concerns very salient and there was a lot of thought about how to make supply chains more resilient. This was the topic du jour until the US Presidential election — that turned everything on its head. Now, we are all talking about tariffs.A. No. The US has benefitted enormously from international trade. This is an international regime we set up to serve many of our goals, some economic, some political. It led to the development of a rules-based system and a great deal of liberalisation and while US trade barriers might be a tiny bit less than those in Europe or Japan, the differences are miniscule. Claims about international trade having been unfair to the US are absurd, in my opinion.A. Earlier, we had a system that wasn't perfect but it worked reasonably well — countries made commitments at the World Trade Organization (WTO) and subscribed to policies of other countries. If someone thought another country wasn't abiding by what they promised, they would take their case to a WTO panel and then, an appellate body and a decision would be made. Countries would be asked to change their policies if these weren't in conformance with what they'd promised. It wasn't perfect — there was perhaps a bit of judicial overreach by appellate judges but, by and large, it did discipline what countries were doing and most nations obeyed those rulings, at times, with some foot-dragging. The whole thing got blown up starting with the first Trump administration when many of the appellate body judges stepped down. Since every major country can veto appointments, the US vetoed all replacements until there were only two judges left — three judges are needed to hear a case, so that stopped the adjudication of Biden also did not overturn that. Currently, many countries, some led by the US, see fit to do what they want and don't abide by any agreements. We see the thinnest veneers of excuses made, including national security, emergencies, etc., with no real effort to show those are operative in several US is now slapping trade policies and tariffs all over the place without any attention to the commitments it made in the WTO — that is the Wild West. There is no will to abide by WTO agreements — the organisation has no enforcing abilities and is reduced to sitting on the sidelines now.A. Trade has been a catalyst for the spread of knowledge around the globe — that's been very beneficial to innovation. The limitations on the movements of people through visa tightening and immigration restrictions, and curbs on the movement of goods, will be detrimental to global growth and innovation.A. It has some grain of truth — and a vast overstatement. All the research points to enormous skill-based technological progress in the US. Trade played a strong role in certain industries and locales and mostly benefitted low-income consumers who tend to buy imported goods more than proportionately. The claim that trade is the cause of adverse trends in income distribution is overstated.A. I wouldn't bet against it. It depends on how these trade policies play out — that is anybody's guess, given how they seem to change every few days. I do see the uncertainty, chaos and volatility that's been created as a hindrance to investment. There will be lowered demand as well once these tariffs do hit prices in the stores. So, I'm concerned about a recession at least in the US. If there is enough cooperation, this could be avoided in other countries — however, when a shock hits the system, nations take steps they think will protect them but collectively, they get harmed. I see Europe building barriers, for instance — that could spread. If I were a betting man, I'd say the chances are 50-50.(Views expressed are personal)
The Hindu
2 hours ago
- The Hindu
Japan and China trade blame over Chinese fighter jets flying close to Japanese planes
Japan and China blamed each other on Thursday (June 12, 2025) after Tokyo raised concern that a Chinese fighter jet came dangerously close to Japanese reconnaissance planes. The Chinese fighter jets took off from one of two Chinese aircraft carriers that were operating together for the first time in the Pacific, Japan's Defence Ministry said. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi told reporters that Japan conveyed its 'serious concern' to China that such close encounters could cause accidental collisions. According to Japan, a Chinese J-15 fighter jet took off from the Shandong aircraft carrier on Saturday (June 7, 2025) and chased a Japanese P-3C aircraft on reconnaissance duty, coming within an 'abnormally close distance' of 45m for about 40 minutes. A Chinese jet also crossed 900m in front of a Japanese P-3C for about 80 minutes on Sunday (June 8, 2025), the Ministry said. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian defended China's activities as being fully consistent with international law and practices, and blamed Japanese vessels and airplanes for conducting close reconnaissance of China's military activities. The incidents occurred in the Pacific, where Japan's Self-Defence Force spotted the two carriers, the Shandong and the Liaoning, almost simultaneously operating near southern Japanese islands for the first time. Aircraft carriers are critical to projecting power at a distance. China routinely sends coast guard vessels, warships and warplanes around disputed East China Sea islands, but now they also reach as far as Guam, a U.S. Pacific territory with military bases. Both Chinese carriers operated in waters off Iwo Jima, about 1,200km south of Tokyo. The Liaoning also sailed inside Japan's exclusive economic zone near Minamitorishima, the country's easternmost island, Japan's Defence Minister Gen Nakatani said. There was no violation of Japanese territorial waters, he said.
