Displaced by Pakistani shelling, residents of border villages long for home and peace
Several wooden houses have been turned into skeletons of charcoal and belongings into mounds of ashes in Salamabad area of Baramulla district in Jammu and Kashmir. Residents, who migrated in the wake of Pakistan's mortar shelling on the night of May 7-8 and live in shelters, on Thursday (May 8, 2025) expressed one wish: 'The government should ensure our return to home soon'.
Zareena Begum, one of 33 families of Silikote, a village fenced with barbed wires close to the Line of Control in Baramulla's Uri, has taken refuge at the Government Degree College, Uri. The classrooms have doubled up as bedrooms for these families.
'Entire village shifted'
'Our entire village has been shifted. We were told the village was easy target and could be hit by mortars from Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (PoK). We have underground bunkers but officials said it was not sufficient to protect us,' Ms. Begum, who heads a family of eight members, said.
She is worried about the children of Silikote. 'Every blast frightens the kids. Their school is in the village and shut now. We appeal the government to make arrangements so that we return to our homes. How will our cattle survive?' Ms. Begum added.
Adjacent to Silikote is Salamabad village, where the house of Dr. Bashir Ahmad, a local, has gaping holes drilled by mortar shells, which started immediately after Operation Sindoor was wrapped up by India on Tuesday night (May 6, 2025) . 'Around 2 a.m., shells started raining from PoK and the intensity only grew with each passing hour. My neighbour Dr. Bashir's house was shattered by these mortars,' Nadeem Akbar Khan said. Mr. Khan recalled the normal life residents of Uri were living since the 1999 Kargil war. 'Life was going smoothly. As of now, life stands disturbed. This (shelling) will not get any solution. It's poor people on both sides who die. The government should find a solution and end this hostility once for all,' Mr. Khan added.
'Nothing left'
As the intensity of shelling waned on Wednesday night (May 7, 2025), many women on Thursday (May 8, 2025) scanned through debris and salvaged whatever little they could. 'This is my kitchen. Nothing has remained of it,' a resident of Salamabad said, while pointing at a small room with black smoke all around on the walls. Blackened utensils are littered on the floor.
'I am a widow. I would earn in the day and then only eat in the evening. I have saved penny by penny to make this house. It's all gone. It's not liveable,' the mortar shell victim said.
According to official figures, 13 civilians were killed and 59 were injured in Pakistan's shelling and firing along the LoC since Operation Sindoor. All deaths were reported from Poonch district. Around a dozen houses were damaged in Kupwara and Baramulla districts.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
9 minutes ago
- Hans India
India should be cautious about Pakistan's false claims: Op Sindoor
While India is struggling to protect the common man living on the borders against Pakistan army-supported terrorists, some international powers are keen on testing the sophistication of Pakistan's imported arsenal. However, the results proved far from decisive. India carried out precision airstrikes on nine terrorist sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK). It was very close to war, but India acted with restraint and targeted only terrorist camps and military bases, and not civilians. India can target every system at Pakistan's base, but Air Marshal AK Bharti explained that the country has maintained restraint despite its high capability. Our military operation, Operation Sindoor, targeted terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and PoK, especially militant camps in Muzaffarabad, Kotli, and Bahawalpur. Despite these setbacks, Pakistan breached the ceasefire within hours after the May 10 agreement. It was an attack from Pakistan! On May 8-9, Pakistan launched a massive drone attack using around 300-400 drones, targeting 36 locations in India, including military bases and religious sites like those in Srinagar and Naliya. India suffered serious human losses because of mindless terror. Still, the IAF's response was directed only at military installations, avoiding civilians and collateral damage. Pakistan launched a massive drone attack on Indian cities, while our fully prepared air defence forces successfully countered the drone attacks, preventing any damage to the intended targets. Pakistan launched its own military operation, targeting several key bases in India. They allowed civilian aircraft to fly out of Lahore during the drone attacks, including international passenger aircraft, which posed a significant challenge for India's response. Yes. Indian air defence shot down most of the drones, and no major damage occurred. Japan Times' report Well-known columnist, Brahma Chellaney wrote in his column, 'The Japan Times,' that the J-10Cs launched multiple PL-15E missiles at Indian targets, but there is no independent verification of successful hits. India's integrated air defences withstood the onslaught, gaining air superiority'. Every Indian, and our army, felt proud 'by the conflict's end, Indian airstrikes had crippled major Pakistani air bases — including Nur Khan and Bholari — without suffering any confirmed retaliatory damage. Nur Khan, near Pakistan's nuclear command and army headquarters, was particularly symbolic. Its precise targeting by Indian cruise missiles signaled a calibrated message: Even high-value, well-defended assets are not beyond reach.' And 'Pakistan reportedly launched 300 to 400 drones in a single night, yet satellite imagery showed little damage on Indian soil. India, by contrast, relied on precision standoff weapons — especially the supersonic BrahMos cruise missile, codeveloped with Russia, which successfully hit high-value targets in Pakistan with minimal risk to Indian military personnel.' The Japan Times wrote that India and China remain locked in a military standoff at the Himalayas and this was triggered in 2020 by Chinese encroachments on Indian border lands. Despite diplomatic moves to ease tensions, both countries continue to mass troops and weaponry along the disputed frontier. The combat data generated from the conflict with Pakistan offers India an invaluable edge in anticipating Chinese capabilities and countermeasures. Meanwhile, Pakistan claimed that they had shot down at least five Indian fighter jets on the first day. But there was no proof, no wreckage photos and satellite imagery to corroborate the claim. The Indian military dismissed the allegation, stating that all its pilots had returned safely. It was a major embarrassment for Pakistan. Its Defence Minister Khawaja Asif was under fire for promoting misinformation in the wake of Operation Sindoor. False and fake Readers should use fact-checkers like Factly. Fact: This video showing visuals of a crashed fighter jet being lifted by a helicopter is AI-generated. It was uploaded on May 3, before the start of 'Operation Sindoor'. Hence, the claim made in the post is FALSE'. 'Factly' explained, 'We found discrepancies in the viral video, prompting suspicion that it might have been generated using AI. To gather more information, we conducted a reverse image search of the key frames, which led us to the same video uploaded on a YouTube channel on May 3, three days before Operation Sindoor. In that video, it is described as an AI-generated scene showing a crashed fighter jet being lifted by a helicopter'. BrahMos: Standout performer It is called Brahmastra against our rivals 'The BrahMos missile, already exported by India, emerged as the standout performer during the conflict. Further, the newspaper commented, ''This was not a conventional border conflict, but a high-tech showdown featuring drones, cruise and ballistic missiles, and long-range air defences. While India and Pakistan were the primary belligerents, a third power — China — played a pivotal, if indirect, role…. Beijing's involvement via the supply of advanced weapon systems and real-time satellite reconnaissance data to Pakistan turned the engagement into a revealing trial run for Chinese arms in a live combat setting. It was reported by the media that IAF Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Anil Chauhan had on May 31 rejected Pakistan's claims that it had shot down six Indian warplanes during Operation Sindoor, calling the information 'absolutely incorrect'. The CDS added, 'what is important is not the jet being down, but why they were being downed'. General Chauhan clarified that the good part is that we are able to understand the tactical mistake, which was made, remedy it, rectify it, and then implement it again after two days and fly our jets again, targeting at long range'. He stated that 'the backbone of Pakistan' was badly damaged. Congress questions: Congress leaders like Mallikarjun Kharge and Jairam Ramesh wanted to know why the Prime Minister did call for an all-party meeting on the issue 'Why did people learn about the operation through an interview with General Chauhan in Singapore?' 'Were some Indian jets destroyed in the early stages? Why no clear info? Some Telangana leaders accused the Centre of giving in to pressure from the US President Donald President Trump and hastily rushing into a ceasefire. Jairam Ramesh said on X that the Centre had not taken Parliament into confidence even as the nation gets to know of the first phase of Operation Sindoor. The Chief Minister of Telangana claimed that the Centre was afraid of Trump's pressure and had surrendered to the ceasefire. Citizens should verify India is under threat not just from terrorists and enemy countries, but also from fake news and social media rumours. Criticism is welcome in a democracy, but it must be responsible and based on facts. National security should come before politics. Let's support our armed forces, verify information, and stay united. Pakistan can never be trusted. (The writer is Professor of the Constitution of India and founder-Dean, School of Law, Mahindra University, Hyderabad)
The Print
15 minutes ago
- The Print
Did we lose aircraft? Should we admit it? When? Answering questions raised by CDS' admission
This has led to a very public, very vociferous, and occasionally very acrimonious debate on the subject. The questions being debated are: Did we lose aircraft? If we did, should we admit it? If yes, how soon? Does losing more aircraft than the other side mean a tactical defeat? There were oblique references to losses in air combat on 6/7 May, during a briefing by the DG Air Ops (Air Marshal Awadhesh Kumar Bharti). However, this remark by the CDS—although he declined to give exact numbers—would count as the first official admission of our own attrition in the air. There has been much kolaveri over the remarks made by CDS General Anil Chauhan. While speaking to Bloomberg TV on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, the Chief of Defence Staff admitted to certain losses of Indian aircraft during Operation Sindoor. This has set the proverbial cat among the pigeons. Accusations and accolades are both flying thick and fast. The losses and the analysis In all likelihood, we did lose some aircraft. The exact number and the causes would be revealed by the Indian Air Force (IAF), should they choose to. All losses are studied in great detail. The IAF would be examining everything—from tactics, network synergy, weapon load, and rules of engagement to crew training. Which weapon caused the damage—whether surface-to-air or air-to-air—will form a part of that analysis. The possibility of friendly fire will also be examined. While the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) claimed it downed six Indian aircraft, they have failed to provide any evidence other than a sleazy presentation and social media posts. The PAF claims all 'kills' were air-to-air and credits the Chinese-made PL15 BVR missile. However, that may not be the case, considering a few of the PL 15s were found almost intact in our territory. A missile that fails to self-destruct at the end of its cruise phase is certainly not the 'best in the world' as claimed by our adversary. Their claims are speculative. At this stage, they are not aware which of their tactics-weapon combinations worked and which did not. Therefore, it does not make tactical and operational sense to clear this confusion for them by revealing our losses, if any. In my opinion, the citizen has a vested right to know. That includes accurate information on how well or poorly our armed forces performed in war. However, that right is tempered with caution and is measured against the needs of national security, which takes precedence over all rights. Hopefully, when the dust finally settles on this episode, we will receive all the information. Also read: India paid for ignoring warnings in 1965 war. It can't afford to repeat those mistakes today Attrition in air warfare For people not familiar with the planning and structuring of an air campaign against a peer competitor, the loss of our own aircraft might come as a surprise. However, despite advances in weaponry and sensors, air forces around the world cater for attrition in air war, especially in the early hours, when you fly into a hornet's nest. The first wave of airstrikes during Operation Sindoor was carried out under some very exacting circumstances. Our strikers were operating under very restrictive rules of engagements, against an adversary that was pre-warned and well-armed. SEAD and DEAD missions that typically form the first phase of any air campaign were not carried out, as per the larger political directive limiting strikes to terror infrastructure and avoiding military targets. Surprise, a factor that usually favours the raiders, was missing in this case. On the other hand, the PAF flung a technical surprise on us by launching data-linked BVR missiles at extreme ranges. As admitted by the CDS, the IAF was quick to draw lessons and went back up in air in the subsequent days. Some have misunderstood or even deliberately misconstrued the CDS's statement to mean that after incurring losses on the first day, the IAF was grounded for two days. Nothing could be further from the truth. While the tactics were being reviewed and electronic threat libraries were being updated, India maintained pressure on terrorist infrastructure in PoK. Limited strikes by Rafale and BrahMos-armed Su-30s were carried out on 8/9 May. Air defence combat air patrols (AD CAP) were maintained in the air around the clock, and backup missions were ready on the ground. An aggressive posture was maintained by our surface-to-air missiles (SAMs), threatening aerial activity deep inside Pakistan. The Indian military also had to contend with non-stop drone attacks on multiple locations, most of which were foiled. Dedicated SEAD/DEAD missions were undertaken on 8/9 May to degrade Pakistan's ability to defend its airspace. Based on political directions, escalation was controlled and some room was created to give Pakistan an off-ramp- DGMO (India) offered Pakistan an exit option, which was declined. In response to Pakistan's launch of Operation Bunyan al-Marsoos on 10 May, the IAF conducted retaliatory precision strikes on multiple targets across the length and breadth of Pakistan. The damage caused by the IAF's air-delivered munitions was seen by the entire world, courtesy of the satellite images that were widely shared. The IAF rose to challenge the PAF's hubris with an updated game plan. Electronics were tweaked, formations were rearranged, weapons were matched to the targets, and the IAF was not constrained by any restrictive ROE. The orders were clear: shoot to kill. The much-touted J10C and PL15 combo failed to bring down any of our jets. These aircraft were operating deep inside Pakistan's airspace and failed to launch even a single BVR, which just a day prior had been celebrated as a 300-km-long stick. Operation Bunyan al-Marsoos collapsed within eight hours on 10 May due to India's counterstrikes, which destroyed Pakistani morale besides destroying their assets. Pakistan sought a ceasefire through US mediation. Also read: Fund Kaveri Engine campaign is more than a hashtag. India needs control over its fighter jets Counting wins, not losses In a war, you count your wins by counting missions that were successful and not by counting damaged assets. Certain historical events corroborate this argument. The Israeli Air Force (IsAF) was pitted against the combined air power of Egypt and Syria in the Yom Kippur War (October 6–25, 1973). Although the Arabs had a greater number of aircraft, Israel enjoyed a significant technical edge in air power. The IsAF was also considered to be better trained, as it frequently exercised with Western air forces. Despite these advantages, the IsAF's losses in the first 12 hours were staggering: thirty A-4s, six Phantoms, and four Super Mystères were downed. The IsAF decided on an operational pause, took a hard look at its tactics, revised them, and went up again. The IsAF adjusted its tactics to minimise exposure to SAMs and anti-aircraft artillery. Dedicated SEAD/DEAD missions were flown, occasionally in coordination with ground-based artillery fire. In the following days, the IsAF gained and maintained control of the air. The outcome of the war is a well-known historical fact, and the crucial role played by the IsAF is also widely acknowledged. This example, along with the employment of Indian air power during Operation Sindoor, proves a point: despite the great care taken during planning, attrition in air war is unavoidable. These examples also tell us that an eventual victory is decided not merely by tallying losses incurred on both sides but by comparing mission success rates. In sum, wars are dirty business. Despite all the advances achieved by mankind, wars remain a primordial contest. Modern weapons have changed the face of war but not the nature of war. In wars, equipment will be damaged, and lives will be lost. Victory, however, will be measured against the degree to which the objectives—or 'conditions of termination'—set forth before the campaign were achieved. In that regard, Operation Sindoor was a resounding victory for Indian air power. Group Captain Ajay Ahlawat is a retired IAF fighter pilot. He tweets @Ahlawat2012. Views are personal. (Edited by Prashant)
Time of India
17 minutes ago
- Time of India
Following Lashkar rally boasting 'revenge for 1971', Pakistan speaker's open support for Pahalgam mastermind sparks outrage
The gap between the Pakistani government and terrorist groups seems to be getting smaller after India's Operation Sindoor. A shocking example of this was seen recently when Malik Ahmed Khan, Speaker of the Punjab Assembly in Pakistan, was spotted attending a rally with Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) deputy chief Saifullah Kasuri and Talha Saeed , son of LeT founder Hafiz Saeed. As per a TOI report, Kasuri, a US-designated terrorist and one of the key planners behind the recent Pahalgam terror attack in Jammu and Kashmir, was treated like a hero. When reporters asked Malik Ahmed Khan about his presence at the rally, he defended Kasuri by saying no one should be considered guilty without proper investigation. He also claimed a personal connection to Kasur, the town where the May 28 rally took place. Lashkar leaders boast of 'revenge for 1971' The presence of Talha Saeed and Kasuri at the rally came just days after videos started circulating of Lashkar terrorists celebrating what they called 'revenge' for Pakistan's defeat in the 1971 war against India. In the videos, Kasuri is seen arriving at the rally with bodyguards carrying American M4 rifles, while flower petals are showered on him. He was even called the 'conqueror' of India by his supporters. At one rally in Gujranwala on May 28, Muzammil Hashmi and others made hateful comments targeting Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. 'Modi, your missiles didn't scare our children. Why would your bullets scare us?' said Hashmi during the rally, which was hosted by the political wing of LeT, Pakistan Markazi Muslim League. Live Events 'We took revenge for Bangladesh' In another speech, Kasuri made emotional statements about the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. 'I was just four when Pakistan was broken apart in 1971. Indira Gandhi had said she drowned the two-nation theory. But on May 10, we took revenge,' he declared at a rally in Rahim Yar Khan. Kasuri also talked about the Indian air strike on Muridke, which killed fellow terrorist Mudassar. He expressed pain at not being allowed to attend the funeral. 'I cried a lot that day,' he said. Growing concerns over terror-politics nexus These events have caused alarm internationally. As per a TOI report, experts believe this is yet another sign that certain Pakistani leaders are openly supporting extremist groups. With Lashkar terrorists making bold claims of violence and revenge, and top state officials sharing the stage with them, the line between state and terror is becoming dangerously unclear. Inputs from TOI
