India has avenged Daniel Pearl's killing in Bahawalpur
In the days that followed, we learned terrorists had murdered Danny, brutally beheading him and cutting him into pieces. Twenty-three years have passed, but the chain of events that led to Danny's murder continues to haunt us—and it runs straight through Bahawalpur.
This week, India's Operation Sindoor launched an airstrike on Bahawalpur and other terrorist targets, killing terrorist chief Abdul Rauf Azhar. To be clear, Abdul Rauf did not kidnap or murder Danny. But in 1999, he masterminded the hijacking of Indian Airlines flight 814, which forced India to release three terrorists - including his brother, Masood Azhar, and a British Pakistani, Omar Sheikh, who would go on to lure Danny into captivity. Another brother, Ibrahim Azhar, was a hijacker on Flight 814.
Abdul Rauf opened the prison door that allowed a kidnapper to walk free. His killing is a reminder that those who enable terror must answer for their actions.
Bahawalpur, where Abdul Rauf enjoyed a safe haven, is more than just a city. Since the 1990s, it has been a hub for a state-sponsored terrorism industry that has enabled global violence—killing innocents in India, Pakistan and around the world. It's where the story of Danny's murder began.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
United News of India
2 hours ago
- United News of India
Opposition stages walkout from Rajya Sabha over Bihar's SIR issue
New Delhi, Aug 18 (UNI) The Opposition staged a walkout from the Rajya Sabha today, boycotting the proceedings over their demand for a debate on the ongoing revision of the electoral rolls in Bihar. The government criticized the Opposition, calling their move as 'irresponsible' as 69 hours of time have already been wasted in this session due to such disruptions. The House proceedings had resumed at 2 pm after being adjourned during Zero Hour amid the uproar. But Opposition members refused to give in, as they stood up from their seats and created a noisy disturbance in the House. Dr Sasmit Patra, who was in the chair, briefly introduced the objectives of the Indian Ports Bill, 2025, which was presented by Minister of Ports, Shipping, and Waterways, Sarbananda Sonowal. The Bill was introduced amid the chaos. The chair called upon AIADMK member Thiruchi Siva to present his amendment to the bill, but he began referring to the SSR instead. The Chair did not allow this. At the same time, Opposition members raised a point of order. Dr Patra allowed opposition leader Mallikarjun Kharge to speak on behalf of the opposition, but when he attempted to say something about the Election Commission, ruling party members objected strongly. The chair ruled that no comments unrelated to the subject under discussion would be recorded. Leader of the House Jagat Prakash Nadda criticized the Opposition attitude, calling it irresponsible and a waste of the House's time. Meanwhile, Congress and other opposition members walked out of the House. The Union Minister said at the start of the session, on July 21, the government had expressed willingness to discuss the topic according to the rules. The Chair has repeatedly ruled that the subject raised by the opposition cannot be discussed under the rules. He said, 'Despite this, the opposition's disruptions have wasted 69 hours of the House's time so far. The opposition's behavior is irresponsible. They have no interest in discussion; they believe in chaos. I condemn their behaviour.' Nadda further said, 'We have arranged discussions on every topic as per the rules. We had a discussion on Operation Sindoor, in which they were defeated. They have started opposing the country while opposing the party.' Before the proceedings began, Dr Patra calmed the members and informed them that the Business Advisory Committee had allocated three hours and one hour respectively for the discussion and passage of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill and the Indian Institutes of Management (IIM) Amendment Bill. Both the bills were passed by the Lok Sabha and have been referred to Rajya Sabha for consideration. UNI AJ PRS
NDTV
3 hours ago
- NDTV
Trump Once Again Claims He Stopped India, Pak War
Washington: US President Donald Trump on Monday once again repeated his claim that he stopped the war between India and Pakistan. Talking to the press in the Oval Office while meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump claimed to have ended six wars, including the war between India and Pakistan. While answering a question, Trump said he thought that the Russia-Ukraine war would be the "easiest one" to end, but it is not. Trump said that "it is the tough one", and we have been talking about it for a long time, like "we were talking about others …India-Pakistan." Trump also indirectly mentioned India and Pakistan on his Truth Social post earlier in the day. "I've settled 6 Wars in 6 months, one of them a possible Nuclear disaster," Trump posted. Since May 10, when Trump announced on social media that India and Pakistan had agreed to a "full and immediate" ceasefire after a "long night" of talks mediated by Washington, he has repeated his claim over 40 times that he "helped settle" the tensions between India and Pakistan. India has been consistently maintaining that the understanding on cessation of hostilities with Pakistan was reached following direct talks between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs) of the two militaries. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said in Parliament that no leader of any country asked India to stop Operation Sindoor. External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar has categorically said there was no third-party intervention in bringing about a ceasefire with Pakistan during Operation Sindoor. On the day of his summit meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday, Trump repeated multiple times within hours his claim that he stopped the war between India and Pakistan, as well as spoke about Delhi's purchases of Russian oil.
Economic Times
3 hours ago
- Economic Times
A chill is setting in that will take a long time to recover in the India-US relationship
Synopsis The India-US relationship has deteriorated, with disproportionate responses from the White House despite India's efforts to address trade concerns. Political imperatives in the US, rather than trade merits, seem to be driving the decisions, leading to a chill in relations and a hardening public mood in India. Over the past few weeks, as the India-US relationship has near-imploded, several opinions and assessments have emerged. Most analysts have been measured and thoughtful, and attempted to discern the long view. Others have been astonishingly uninformed, ranging from amateurs talking through their hats to (former) professionals opining through their golf caps. ADVERTISEMENT To be sure, any consequential policy episode must see a reckoning and self-appraisal within the government. This is to be expected in an accountable democracy. The external affairs ministry, commerce ministry and even the PMO would naturally undertake such an exercise. Were there diplomatic missteps? Could the trade negotiations have gone differently? Were gaps in Operation Sindoor's strategic comms deterministic? These are all good questions. Since there is always room for improvement, they must be asked and deliberated upon. However, this should not deflect from a fundamental and pivotal point: nothing India did, no act of commission or omission, merited the sort of response that has come from the White House and Trump regime. It's egregiously disproportionate. Inevitably, this warrants the conclusion that the issue is not about some minor sticking point that can be resolved with a 'high-level phone call' here, or more 'trade concessions' there. Advice that India should rethink its position on GM food, or making investment announcements even without resources to back them, is not particularly sensible those who should know better have advocated reckless and adventurist approaches that no Indian minister, civil servant or public official - past, present and future - can carry out. The legitimate restraints of the Indian system will always - and correctly - prevent also needs to be said India's diplomats recognised the importance of the trade and tariffs issue very early, and worked to a win-win plan. On their part, trade negotiators from the commerce ministry - again, often criticised - came up with the most ambitious market-access package in India's history. They were given the political space for it by the PM, and they delivered. ADVERTISEMENT Whatever else it is, the White House's rejection/non- acceptance of the trade offer - which would give the US an unprecedented market and strategic advantage in India - is not on merits. Even USTR insiders have that appreciation. So, what is driving the Trump regime's decision flow? How goalposts have shifted repeatedly in recent weeks would suggest that trade imperatives have long given way to political imperatives, perhaps even strategic and domestic calculations in the US president's inner council. If that is, indeed, the case, the basket of bilateral challenges could both deepen and expand in the near term. ADVERTISEMENT Either way, the relationship will take a long time to recover to the levels of political trust it has been used to over the past 20 years. A chill is setting in. The public mood is hardening, and the pressure on the Narendra Modi government - including on its ability to offer further trade concessions - is there for all to reckoning in New Delhi is that India is facing the most structured and coercive assault on its strategic autonomy - industrial and policy - in a long time. Inevitably, this perception will shape reactions. Consequences will not be limited to just the immediate future. ADVERTISEMENT No doubt there will be an economic cost. 50% tariffs are not going to be easy to manage, particularly for industries significantly dependent on US exports. Yet, this will also make other sectors wary of the geopolitical risks of excessive market exposure to the US. Rather than spur further engagement - as the trajectory of India-US relations has done in recent decades - it will induce caution and a desire to hedge and diversify. India's economic approaches towards China and Russia will become a self-fulfilling prophecy for Washington's tariff a slightly longer, but still not-too-distant, timeframe, India could conclude a trade deal with the EU. Once the EU recovers from its current 'He loves us, he loves us not' trans-Atlantic minuet, and assesses its position in the ballroom, it will note the opportunity of the moment. Next, India needs to find a non-China, non-RCEP (Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership) pathway to an economic and supply chains partnership with the Indo-Pacific. ADVERTISEMENT CPTPP (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership) lends itself as an idea. Admittedly, CPTPP standards are very stringent. Could there be a trade-off between political comfort - the absence of arm-twisting and/or supply chains surrender - and calibrating just how much an external trade agreement could be used to drive internal reform and regulatory change? The process will not be easy, or without pain. Even so, if it is achieved, it could give India a longer-term hedge and option vis-a-vis the US. The lessons of the Summer of 2025 will alter the baseline for a reset, whenever that happens. This is not a stare-down India wanted - or, more accurately, wants. But whatever happens, India cannot allow itself to be outstared. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of (Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2024 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.) Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online. NEXT STORY
