India's Operation Brahma delivers aid to Myanmar; 800 patients treated
Sharing a post on X, India in Myanmar shared the update on India's humanitarian efforts in the affected region: "Our Field Hospital has been widely appreciated in Myanmar with 800 patients so far. Sr. Gen. Min Aung Hlaing visited it today."
"An IAF C17 brought its replenishment as also food aid for needy communities, and carried our NDRF team back after a successful Mission. #OperationBrahma," the post added.
On Saturday, India delivered 442 tonnes of food aid to Myanmar, as part of its ongoing humanitarian response following the devastating earthquake that struck the country last month.
The consignment, comprising rice, cooking oil, noodles and biscuits, was transported aboard the Indian Navy's landing ship tank INS Gharial and handed over at Thilawa Port by Ambassador Abhay Thakur to Yangon Chief Minister U Soe Thein and his team.
The official page for the Indian Embassy in Myanmar posted on X: "Meeting needs of affected people. A large 442 T consignment of food aid (rice, cooking oil, noodles & biscuits) carried by the Indian Navy landing ship tank INS Gharial arrived today at Thilawa Port & was handed over by Ambassador Abhay Thakur to CM Yangon U Soe Thein & team."
The aid is part of Operation Brahma -- India's comprehensive relief mission launched after the 7.7-magnitude earthquake on March 28, which left thousands dead and widespread damage across Myanmar.
The country continues to grapple with the aftermath, and India, acting swiftly as the first responder, has taken a lead role in supporting rescue, relief, and recovery efforts.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi had met Myanmar's Senior General Min Aung Hlaing on the sidelines of the BIMSTEC Summit in Bangkok, Thailand, on Friday.
During the meeting, PM Modi expressed India's continued support and readiness to provide further material assistance if needed. He also emphasised the need for early restoration of democracy through credible elections, according to Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
14 hours ago
- Observer
The US-India relationship is changing again
India's relationship with the United States has long been a careful balancing act between shared democratic values and sometimes diverging national interests. But recent diplomatic tremors have unsettled India, prompting it to question whether the partnership has reached a turning point. In what Indian officials view as an unsettling display of geopolitical grandstanding, US President Donald Trump has taken credit for halting recent hostilities between India and Pakistan by threatening to disrupt trade ties. India has bristled at Trump's claims, not only because it is fiercely protective of its sovereignty, but also because they lack merit. As Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar have noted, Trump did not even call them during the conflict. Bilateral trade was not mentioned by any US official while the fighting was under way. Trump may well have pressed Pakistan to end the violence, but India did not need persuading. As a status-quo power focused on its own economic development, the last thing India wanted was a protracted conflict. So, after terrorists slaughtered Indian civilians in Pahalgam in April, India devised a sharp, swift and measured response. It was always clear that 'Operation Sindoor' — which featured strikes on nine known terrorist basecamps and other facilities in Pakistani territory — was retribution against the terrorists who had targeted Indian tourists, not the opening salvo in a war against Pakistan. When Pakistan retaliated with indiscriminate attacks, India initiated another decisive but carefully calibrated strike — this time, on 11 air bases. It was this manoeuver — possibly coupled with US pressure on Pakistan's government — that prompted Pakistan to seek a cessation of hostilities. Trump hardly deserves credit for this outcome and yet, true to form, he has sought to claim it. But Indian officials have unequivocally rejected Trump's narrative. India is proud of its independence and it will not tolerate the implication that it succumbed to Trumpian threats or blandishments. This is not Trump's only action that is giving India pause. In June, he hosted Pakistan's army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir. Pakistan's civilian leadership was not at the table. Trump's unpredictability vis-à-vis China is similarly troubling. Whereas he took a reliably hardline approach to the country during his first presidency, Trump 2.0 blows hot and cold. One minute, he is imposing extreme tariffs against China; the next, he is seeking to negotiate a trade truce and saying that he might visit Beijing at Chinese President Xi Jinping's invitation. Where India fits into these calculations — if it factors into them at all — is a mystery. During Trump's first term — as well as during Joe Biden's presidency — the US regarded India as a vital partner in the Indo-Pacific. While India upheld its foreign-policy doctrine of strategic autonomy and avoided committing to any confrontation with China, it welcomed US engagement in the region and supported the revitalisation of the Quad, which includes Australia, Japan and the US, in 2017. After all, India has its own quarrels with China. Meanwhile, China's influence across South Asia is growing, extending from Bhutan and Nepal to Bangladesh and Sri Lanka. Indian officials and businesses see China as a threat. But it is difficult to know where the US stands, especially after Trump opted not to rebuke China publicly for offering intelligence assistance to Pakistan. When it comes to trade, moreover, Trump has often been tougher on partners than adversaries. On July 30, Trump announced a 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods, effective August 1, together with an unspecified 'penalty' — probably an additional 10 per cent — for India's ongoing purchases of energy and military equipment from Russia. If trade can be weaponised, defence ties could be, too. Trump's capriciousness has heightened India's strategic anxieties. The US has proved to be an unreliable partner before. For example, during the 1999 Kargil conflict between India and Pakistan, the US denied India access to vital GPS data, leading the country to develop its own. Now, Indian decision-makers are split: Should India decouple from China, trusting the US to have its back, or pragmatically engage with it, for fear that the US will do the same? This raises an even more fundamental question: What is the value of a partnership that is subject to the whims of an outsize ego? India will not panic, but it might pivot. Given its lack of treaty obligations, it has greater leeway to act independently than formal US allies like Japan or South Korea. It might use this manoeuvering room to adjust its foreign-policy orientation. Jaishankar's July visit to Beijing pointed to a desire to broaden channels of communication with China. While India is not downgrading its ties with the US, it is emphasising self-reliance. This may lead to a more transactional bilateral relationship, shaped less by ideals than interests. @Project Syndicate, 2025
Observer
2 days ago
- Observer
Filmmakers try to cash in on India-Pakistan battle
Mumbai - Indian filmmakers are locking up the rights to movie titles that can profit from the patriotism fanned by a four-day conflict with Pakistan, which killed more than 70 people. The nuclear-armed rivals exchanged artillery, drone, and air strikes in May, after India blamed Pakistan for an armed attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir. The fighting came to an end when US President Donald Trump announced a surprise ceasefire. Now, some Bollywood filmmakers see an opportunity to cash in on the battle. India tagged its military action against Pakistan 'Operation Sindoor', the Hindi word for vermilion, which married Hindu women wear on their foreheads. The name was seen as a symbol of Delhi's determination to avenge those widowed in the April 22 attack in Kashmir's Pahalgam, which sparked the hostilities. Film studios have registered a slew of titles evoking the operation, including: 'Mission Sindoor', 'Sindoor: The Revenge', 'The Pahalgam Terror', and 'Sindoor Operation'. "It's a story which needs to be told," said director Vivek Agnihotri. "If it were Hollywood, they would have made 10 films on this subject. People want to know what happened behind the scenes," he told AFP. Agnihotri struck box office success with his 2022 release, "The Kashmir Files", based on the mass flight of Hindus from Kashmir in the 1990s. - Coloured narratives - The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party gave that film a glowing endorsement, despite accusations that it aimed to stir up hatred against India's minority. Since Hindu nationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi took office in 2014, some critics say Bollywood is increasingly promoting his government's ideology. Raja Sen, a film critic and screenwriter, said filmmakers felt emboldened by an amenable government. "We tried to wage a war, and then we quietened down when Trump asked us to. So what is the valour here?" Sen told AFP of the Pakistan clashes. Anil Sharma, known for directing rabble-rousing movies, criticised the apparent rush to make films related to the Pahalgam attack. "This is herd mentality... these are seasonal filmmakers, they have their constraints," he said. "I don't wait for an incident to happen and then make a film based on that. A subject should evoke feelings and only then cinema happens," said Sharma. Sharma's historical action flick "Gadar: Ek Prem Katha" (2001) and its sequel "Gadar 2" (2023), both featuring Sunny Deol in lead roles, were big hits. In Bollywood, filmmakers often seek to time releases for national holidays like Independence Day, which are associated with heightened patriotic fervour. "Fighter", featuring big stars Hrithik Roshan and Deepika Padukone, was released on the eve of India's Republic Day on January 25 last year. - Anti-Muslim bias - Though not a factual retelling, it drew heavily from India's 2019 airstrike on Pakistan's Balakot. The film received mixed-to-positive reviews but raked in $28 million in India, making it the fourth highest-grossing Hindi film of that year. This year, "Chhaava", a drama based on the life of Sambhaji Maharaj, a ruler of the Maratha Empire, became the highest-grossing film so far this year. It also generated significant criticism for fuelling anti-Muslim bias. "This is at a time when cinema is aggressively painting Muslim kings and leaders in violent light," said Sen. "This is where those who are telling the stories need to be responsible about which stories they choose to tell." Sen said filmmakers were reluctant to choose topics that are "against the establishment". "If the public is flooded with dozens of films that are all trying to serve an agenda, without the other side allowed to make itself heard, then that propaganda and misinformation enters the public psyche," he said. Acclaimed director Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra said true patriotism is promoting peace and harmony through the medium of cinema. Mehra's socio-political drama "Rang De Basanti" (2006) won the National Film Award for Best Popular Film and was chosen as India's official entry for the Golden Globe Awards and the Academy Awards in the Best Foreign Language Film category. "How we can arrive at peace and build a better society? How can we learn to love our neighbours?" he asked. "For me that is patriotism."
Observer
3 days ago
- Observer
India reels from the shock of Trump's onslaught
NEW DELHI — President Donald Trump's new list of tariffs on half the world's countries sent the United States' trading partners scrambling to understand how their businesses will be affected. India got the bad news a day earlier — its goods face a tariff of 25% or more — but the extra time was hardly enough to adjust to the fresh chaos. Indian negotiators had not expected to conclude a meaningful deal in time to meet Trump's revised deadline of Aug. 1. But they did expect to be treated as well as their neighbors, and to keep haggling with U.S. officials until October or November, when Trump was invited to visit India as part of the Quad defense group, which brings together four big democracies — India, the United States, Japan and Australia — with a shared interest in standing up to China. Instead, they were fed a heap of insults and injuries. Along with the 25% rate, one of the highest in Asia and only a point lower than what was threatened on 'Liberation Day' in April, India was informed that its existing trade barriers are 'strenuous and obnoxious'; it will be charged an untold penalty for buying Russian oil; it is a 'dead economy.' It's archrival Pakistan was praised and promised an oil exploration deal. Hurt feelings aside, the results are confusing. Two of the biggest categories of exports to the United States from India are personal electronics, worth about $14 billion a year, and pharmaceuticals, worth $10 billion. Rajesh Sharma, executive director of India Cellular and Electronics Association, said smartphones were exempted from these tariffs; so did executives at pharmaceutical companies. But on Friday, after reading the executive order, the Global Trade Research Initiative in New Delhi concluded the opposite. India's stock markets dipped on the news for two days running. Indian and international banks wrote notices warning that the country's generally hard-charging economic growth is likely to slow measurably as a result of the tariffs. Then there are the unknown tariffs. On July 6, Trump wrote that countries aligned with the BRICS group, of which India is a founding member, would incur an additional 10% penalty. Then on July 14, he said that, if Russia didn't make peace with Ukraine within 50 days, he would punish its trading partners with 'secondary tariffs' of 100%. That figure is making Indians worry anew. Trump added 'plus a penalty' to the 25% rate imposed on India, for buying Russian oil and weapons. Shashi Tharoor, a prominent member of the opposition, spoke to an Indian news agency about the possible impact. 'There's even talk of a 100% penalty,' he said, 'which will destroy our trade with America.' There is evidence that Indian buyers of Russian oil were already pulling back before the executive order. 'Indian refiners have reduced Russian crude purchases this week,' said Sumit Ritolia, an analyst at Kpler, which tracks shipping and commodities. They were already 'looking to further diversify, amid rising concerns over potential U.S. sanctions,' having spent years taking advantage of discounted Russian oil to reduce their imports from the Persian Gulf. Reducing the United States' trade deficit is one of the Trump administration's goals, so persuading India to buy more American oil and gas would make sense. Last year, India exported $45.7 billion more goods to the United States than it imported. It spent about three times as much importing oil. If a third of that were redirected to American sources, their bilateral trade would be evened out. Trump's angry barrage of social media has complicated further negotiations. The breakdown of trust between Narendra Modi, India's prime minister, whom Trump called his 'true friend,' the U.S. president is likely to make it harder to complete any deal, analysts say. Indian news outlets have reported that Trump wanted to iron out some outstanding issues, after four rounds of direct talks between the two sides, in a phone call with Modi. The Indian government was anxious to avoid any of his last-minute surprises. The U.S. commerce secretary accused India of 'slow-rolling' its trade negotiations. Indian officials and analysts say the friction is caused by a fundamental difference of approach. Trump has a penchant for quick, top-down dealmaking. India's bureaucracy moves at a methodical pace, especially when it comes to opening up the agriculture market, which is politically sensitive. India's recently concluded trade deal with Britain took three years of talks, under two British prime ministers. On Friday, India's Foreign Ministry released a statement that put on a brave face. 'India and the United States share a Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership,' established in 2013 between President Barack Obama and then-Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, 'anchored in shared interests, democratic values and robust people-to-people ties.' The ministry stuck to principles, revealing no plan for breaking through Trump's hard line. 'This partnership has weathered several transitions and challenges,' the statement said. 'We remain focused on the substantive agenda that our two countries have committed to and are confident that the relationship will continue to move forward.' This article originally appeared in
