Indian Army contingent departs for India-Mongolia joint military exercise 'Nomadic Elephant'
New Delhi [India], May 29 (ANI): The Indian Army contingent departed on Thursday for 17th edition of India-Mongolia joint military exercise 'Nomadic Elephant', Ministry of Defence said in an official statement on Thursday.
The exercise is scheduled to be conducted in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia from May 31 to June 13. The exercise is an annual event conducted alternatively in India and Mongolia. Last edition of the same exercise was conducted at Umroi, Meghalaya in July 2024.
The Indian contingent comprising 45 personnel will be represented mainly by troops from a battalion of the Arunachal Scouts. The Mongolian armed forces contingent, also comprising similar strength, will be represented by 150 Special Forces unit, as per the ministry.
Aim of the exercise is to enhance interoperability between the two forces while employing joint task force in semi conventional operations in semi urban/mountainous terrain under the United Nations mandate, it added.
The scope of this exercise involves Platoon level field training exercise. During the exercise, Indian and Mongolian troops will engage in various training activities to include endurance training, reflex shooting, room intervention, small team tactics and rock craft training, among others. In addition, to enhance complexity of exercise, aspects pertaining to Cyber Warfare are also being incorporated in this edition of the exercise. Soldiers from both sides will also learn from each other's operational experience, the statement said.
The exercise underscores the shared commitment of India and Mongolia towards regional security, peace and stability. Exercise 'Nomadic Elephant' reinforces the India-Mongolia relationship as a cornerstone of regional cooperation, fostering strong military ties and promotion of cultural understanding.
A testament to the enduring bond of friendship, trust and cultural linkages between India and Mongolia, the exercise sets the stage for meaningful professional engagement, highlighting the unwavering commitment of both nations to broader defence cooperation. (ANI)
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
26 minutes ago
- Business Standard
SC rejects plea on deportation drive in Assam, asks petitioner to move HC
A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma told the petitioner to approach the Gauhati High Court in the matter The Supreme Court on Monday refused to entertain a plea which alleged that the Assam government has reportedly launched a "sweeping" drive to detain and deport persons suspected to be foreigners without nationality verification or exhaustion of legal remedies. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Satish Chandra Sharma told the petitioner to approach the Gauhati High Court in the matter. "Why are you not going to the Gauhati High Court?" the bench asked senior advocate Sanjay Hegde, who appeared for petitioner All BTC Minority Students Union. Hegde said the plea was based on an order passed by the apex court earlier. "Please go to the Gauhati High Court," the bench observed. Hegde said the petitioner would withdraw the plea to take appropriate recourse before the high court. The bench allowed him to withdraw the plea. The plea, filed through advocate Adeel Ahmed, referred to a February 4 order of the top court which, while dealing with a separate petition, had directed Assam to initiate the process of deportation of 63 declared foreign nationals, whose nationality was known, within two weeks. "Pursuant to the said order (of February 4)... the state of Assam has reportedly launched a sweeping and indiscriminate drive to detain and deport individuals suspected to be foreigners, even in the absence of foreigners tribunal declarations, nationality verification, or exhaustion of legal remedies," the plea claimed. It referred to news reports, including one about a retired school teacher who was allegedly "pushed back" into Bangladesh. "These instances reflect a growing pattern of deportations conducted by the Assam Police and administrative machinery through informal 'push back' mechanisms, without any judicial oversight or adherence to the safeguards envisaged by the Constitution of India or this court," it claimed. "The 'push back' policy, as implemented, violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution by deporting individuals without due process, thereby denying them the opportunity to contest their deportation and infringing upon their right to life and personal liberty," the plea claimed. It alleged that the indiscriminate application of deportation directives, coupled with absence of proper identification, verification and notice mechanisms, has resulted in a situation where Indian citizens were being wrongfully incarcerated and threatened with removal to foreign territories without lawful basis. The plea sought a direction that no person shall be deported pursuant to the February 4 order without a prior reasoned declaration by the foreigners tribunal, without adequate opportunity of appeal or review and verification of nationality by the Ministry of External Affairs. It also sought a declaration that the "push back" policy adopted by Assam was violative of Articles 14 (equality before law) and 21 (protection of life and personal liberty) of the Constitution and contrary to binding judicial precedents. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
Goa ahead of other states in welfare of divyangs: CM Sawant
Goa Chief Minister Pramod Sawant (ANI) GOA: Goa Chief Minister Pramod Sawant on Monday termed the creation of the Divyang Department in his administration a "major change" in spearheading the welfare of the differently abled in the state. "The Goa government has started a Divyang Department. This is a major change after the International Purple Festival," Sawant told at the concluding ceremony of ADIP Assessment Camp. "Divyang Minister Subhash Faldessai has done excellent work. I thank the department and the minister. We are ahead of other governments when it comes to welfare for the divyangs," the chief minister added. The Goa government organised Assessment Camps across all talukas of the state from May 20 to June 02. These camps aimed to identify eligible Divyangs (PwDs) for free distribution of aid and appliances under the ADIP Scheme as part of Swayampurna Goa 2.0 and Inclusive Goa initiatives. Over 11,800 PwDs across Goa were personally contacted via phone calls informing them about the camp's scheduled date, time and venue. Divyangjans who have 40 per cent disability (UDID Certificate), monthly income below 22,500(with valid income proof), Aadhaar and address proof, no aid received in the last three years (one year for children under 18 for specific items) are eligible for these camps. Locomotor, visual impairment, hearing impairment and intellectual and developmental disabilities were covered in this camp.
Indian Express
32 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Framing the narrative war against Pakistan
Nobody ever really wins the war of narratives. Each side tells its own story — shaped by perceived triumphs, real or imagined — and believes in the glory of its version. No one cares what the other side claims, unless one side was materially and visibly vanquished in a physical fight. That rarely happens. Sample this: As India began striking terror infrastructure across Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir on May 7, Pakistan claimed it had shot down six Indian aircraft. India denied it. In fact, New Delhi refused to confirm any losses until last week, when the Chief of Defence Staff tacitly acknowledged that a jet (maybe more, unspecified) had been downed, but that 'the tactical mistake was remedied, and the plan reimplemented' — an implicit way of saying: 'It matters not what we lost, as long as we ultimately won.' The standoff ended in a ceasefire, with each side walking away convinced it had the better of the exchange. India believes it called out Pakistan's nuclear bluff; Pakistan insists it gave as good as it got — claims that remain unverifiable in the fog of war. Meanwhile, Pakistan says little about the pounding its airbases received in the Indian response. So steeped in denial is the country's military establishment that its Army Chief has assumed the rank of Field Marshal — an honorific that reveals more about narrative vanity than battlefield reality. For its part, Delhi is convinced it humbled Pakistan. Islamabad, however, couldn't disagree more. 'We have shattered India's illusion of superiority,' says Pakistan's PM. 'New Delhi has been taught a lesson in respecting the sovereignty of its neighbours.' Even Washington had its version of events. President Trump triumphantly claimed that he convinced both countries to back off. 'I talked trade with them,' he said. India denies it. Pakistan agrees. Who's telling the truth? Hard to say. Perhaps none of them care. Each sticks to its own version. Last week, seven multi-party Indian delegations visited global capitals to explain Delhi's position. Many in the West are sympathetic to India's position — its long-standing concerns about cross-border terrorism and Pakistan's duplicity in dealing with extremist groups. They recognise the provocations India faces and the public pressure on Delhi to respond. Even so, some take India's account with a pinch of salt. Yes, Pakistan was complicit in the Pahalgam terror attack — but why didn't India go after the real perpetrators? Why not share intelligence? Why the secrecy, the social media bans, the coyness in accepting losses, and the reluctance to engage with the international media? Back home, a few seem interested. Most people are content with the version of events presented to them. Perhaps that's the point of a good narrative — to remove the burden of inquiry, so the prevailing storyline is accepted, repeated, and quietly folded into national pride. And therein lies the rub. Narratives are, by their very nature, misleading. They mix fact, half-truth, and convenient fiction to produce a favourable picture. In the end, they mostly convince only the teller. You can believe deterrence has been restored — but it means little if your adversary doesn't agree. The deeper challenge lies in coming to terms with Pakistan's strategic culture. As Christine Fair, Professor at Georgetown University and a keen Pakistan watcher, has long argued, the Pakistan Army operates with an insurgent mindset. It wins simply by not losing. It thrives on confrontation and political relevance. That makes it almost immune to traditional deterrence logic. This is what India must keep in mind. The next time there's a provocation from Pakistan — and there might well be another — New Delhi would do well to resist the urge for political signalling. It's this compulsive need to cater to public opinion and control the narrative that often gets us into trouble. Showing resolve is tricky because it casts restraint as weakness and risks turning action into theatre. The smarter course is to hold fire, stay alert, and choose response over optics. For that, it's important to retain the element of surprise. In the days following the start of the operation, Pakistan's military claimed it had anticipated an Indian strike and was lying in wait. While the details remain unclear, Islamabad suggested it had adopted a restrained posture until Indian aircraft reportedly struck what it described as civilian targets, after which Pakistani forces retaliated by targeting Indian jets. Whether this sequence played out exactly as claimed is open to question. It's also unclear if not targeting the Pakistan military in the opening salvo was a strategic misstep. Yet the broader point stands: Military action, meant more as political messaging, is a risky undertaking. Combat aimed mainly at signalling, not effect, is almost always a mistake. It's worth bearing in mind that in conflicts like the four-day engagement in May, narrative dominance is an illusion. The real contest is not about who speaks loudest, but who adapts, who endures, and who denies the adversary what it wants most: Relevance. The writer is a retired naval officer and strategic affairs commentator based in New Delhi
