India foils massive Pakistani drone attack on Srinagar airport, Awantipora airfield amid LoC shelling
SRINAGAR: India foiled a major Pakistani drone attack targeting the Srinagar airport and Awantipora airfield in south Kashmir on Friday evening.
In addition to these locations, drones have been sighted at 26 locations ranging the Baramulla in the North to Bhuj in the South, along both the International Border and the Line of Control with Pakistan. These include suspected armed drones posing potential threats to civilian and military targets, according to an army statement.
The locations include Baramulla, Srinagar, Avantipora, Nagrota, Jammu, Ferozpur, Pathankot, Fazilka, Lalgarh Jatta, Jaisalmer, Barmer, Bhuj, Kuarbet and Lakhi Nala.
An armed drone targeted a civilian area in Ferozpur, resulting in severe injuries to members of a local family. The injured have been provided medical assistance, and the area has been sanitised by security forces.
This comes after Pakistan resumed shelling along the Line of Control.
There were also reports of drones being engaged in Samba, Pathankot and Jammu amidst a blackout in Jammu and Baramulla.
According to the army statement, the armed forces are maintaining a high state of alert and all aerial threats are being tracked and engaged using counter-drone systems. The situation is under close watch and necessary action is being taken wherever necessary, the statement added.
Citizens in border areas have also been urged to stay indoors, avoid unnecessary movement, and follow safety instructions, with authorities stressing vigilance and no need for panic.
Heavy shelling was also reported in Uri. A woman identified as Nargis Begum had been killed when a Pakistani shell hit a vehicle near Mohura in Uri on Thursday.
CM Omar Abdullah, who is in Jammu, tweeted that, "intermittent sounds of blasts, probably heavy artillery, can now be heard from where I am."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
19 minutes ago
- First Post
Pakistan: Former PM Imran Khan likely to get bail in Al-Qadir Trust case on June 11, says top PTI leader
Incarcerated former prime minister Imran Khan is likely to get bail on June 11 in the Al-Qadir Trust case, a top party leader has said here. read more Former Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan is expected to secure bail on June 11 in the Al-Qadir Trust case, according to a senior Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader, even as the party gears up for a fresh political battle under his leadership from behind bars. The Islamabad High Court is scheduled to hear pleas seeking suspension of convictions handed to Khan and his wife, Bushra Bibi, in the high-profile case involving the alleged misappropriation of £190 million recovered by UK authorities from a Pakistani property tycoon. The case has become a central point in the ongoing legal troubles facing the PTI founder, who has been incarcerated at Adiala Jail since August 2023. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Speaking to ARY News, PTI chairman Barrister Gohar Ali Khan expressed confidence that Khan and his wife would receive relief when the court convenes next week. The hearing had previously been deferred at the request of the National Accountability Bureau (NAB), which sought more time to finalise its arguments. The Al-Qadir Trust case centres on allegations that the Khan government unlawfully facilitated the transfer of £190 million, originally frozen by Britain's National Crime Agency (NCA)—to a real estate developer's liabilities in Pakistan. In return, a charitable trust set up by Khan and Bushra Bibi allegedly received a land donation from Bahria Town, the tycoon's firm. Both Khan and his wife are named as the sole trustees. Gohar told ARY News on Saturday that the PTI will collaborate with opposition parties to launch a movement, which will be led by the party's patron-in-chief from jail. He urged the opposition parties to join PTI for the sake of the country's survival and security and revealed that a strategy for the upcoming budget has been finalised. 'The party will address a press conference on June 9 regarding it,' he said. Earlier last month, Khan had said he would lead his party's upcoming protest movement against the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) led coalition government at the Centre, from the prison. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister and a prominent leader of Khan's Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf: party, Ali Amin Gandapur, earlier this week threatened to launch a full-scale movement for the cricketer-turned-politician's release after Eid Al-Adha. Khan, who faces multiple cases and has been convicted in a few of them, has repeatedly claimed the February 8 general elections of last year to have witnessed the 'Mother of All Rigging.' He has called his rivals the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) as 'mandate thieves.' Rana Sanaullah, Special Assistant to the Prime Minister on Political Affairs, while speaking with the media at his hometown of Faisalabad in Punjab on Saturday, urged the PTI to accept Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif's offer of a meeting for negotiations and sit with the government to make amendments to the election laws. Gohar claimed Khan's wife Bushra Bibi, was being held in jail without any charges to pressure the PTI founder and claimed no deals will be made for the founder's release. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD He also dismissed rumors of internal rifts within PTI. Some years ago, the National Crime Agency (NCA) of the United Kingdom agreed to a settlement worth 190 million pounds with the family of property tycoon Malik Riaz. According to an earlier report in Dawn, the NCA, in August 2019, declared that it was granted freezing orders on eight bank accounts containing 100 million pounds, 'suspected to have derived from bribery and corruption in an overseas nation.' The NCA said it had informed the then-government, run by Khan's PTI. It is alleged that Khan asked Shehzad Akbar, his aide on accountability, to resolve the matter, who in turn, 'settled' the case with the frozen funds belonging to the national treasury being adjusted against Bahria Town's liability, the Dawn said. Bahria Town Ltd, Malik's real estate firm, was found to have illegally acquired thousands of acres of land on Karachi's outskirts in the district of Malir. It had donated hundreds of acres of land to the Al-Qadir Trust, a non-profit that has only two trustees – Khan and Bushra Bibi. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD With inputs from agencies
Hindustan Times
27 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
India's strategic culture and how it uses force
Does a tradition of risk aversion continue to define India's strategic culture and its use of force? Does this aversion embolden adversaries to consider the use of force more easily, threaten its use more effectively, and use it more readily? Has our self-professed 'peace-loving' identity become a self-fulfilling prophecy, constraining our military doctrines and warfighting impulses? A quick review of the historical record will demonstrate that, despite being a conventionally weaker power, Pakistan has consistently engaged in war initiation vis-à-vis India. Pakistan initiated the 1947-48 war, seizing a large part of Jammu and Kashmir. It also initiated the 1965 war. In 1971, Pakistan attacked Indian airfields, technically initiating the war. And in 1999, India was merely responding to Pakistan's infiltration into the Kargil sector in large numbers. In each case, Pakistan initiated the conflict, and India responded. Let me expand the definition of initiation of hostilities to make a larger point. Pakistan's sponsorship of terrorism against India also falls within the broad definition of conflict initiation. This includes the 2001 Parliament attack (killing nine people), the 2008 Mumbai massacre (over 160 fatalities), the 2016 Uri attack (19 soldiers killed), the Pulwama attack (40 CRPF personnel dead), and the recent Pahalgam killings (26 civilians). In each of these cases, the Pakistani side initiated the hostilities, if you view the use of sub-conventional force as initiation of hostilities. India's response to these sub-conventional attacks from Pakistan has evolved over the past 25 years. Initially, threats were made but not carried out (2001 and 2008), followed by demonstration strikes with minimal effect (2016), and finally, a more selective and measured application of force was adopted in 2019 and 2025. In each instance, Pakistan initiated hostilities, with India either reluctant to respond by using force or being constrained in its use. Let me come to a third aspect regarding the use of force. Despite credibly overcoming its long-held reluctance to use force, India's application of it remains suboptimal, perhaps indicative of a risk-averse strategic culture. Consider, for instance, the recent India-Pakistan standoff. India's use of force, even when it decides to use it, is puzzling in at least three ways, each stemming from a hesitant strategic culture that, while waning from 2001 to 2025, continues to have a profound influence on our conceptions of 'appropriate and acceptable' use of force. First, India's decisions regarding the use of force are still largely driven by a reputational imperative — a deep-seated desire to demonstrate to the international community that it is a responsible actor. But in a military conflict, what ultimately matters are the material outcomes, not reputational considerations. Are our reputational urges constraining our military objectives? Second, India is a hesitant user of force. There appears to be a politico-cultural intent to define the limits of force even before it begins — to ensure that it doesn't spread — and we seek to stick to that.. This creates an inherent paradox: India demonstrates an inexplicable preference for using force in ways that minimise impact, rather than maximise its effectiveness. The logic of military force must be to maximise impact with minimal force, as opposed to minimal impact with either maximum or minimal force. Third, by publicly limiting the scope of military outcomes, we seem to prioritise sending a political message over achieving decisive military outcomes. Here's the problem with that approach. While India seeks to drive home a political point, Pakistan seeks to drive home a military point. While India seeks to limit the scope, impact, targets, and scale of the operation, Pakistan seeks to expand those very variables in its response before the contest is called off. While India approaches the use of force through a political lens, Pakistan prioritises purely military considerations. While India's approach to war reflects Clausewitz's dictum that it is politics by other means, Pakistan appears to use force for military outcomes alone. India's political signaling appears to have little impact on Pakistani military thinking. Thus, the two sides operate with fundamentally different frameworks and India's desire to drive home a political point is lost on Rawalpindi. India's political approach to war isn't fundamentally flawed, but it appears ineffective in the context of India-Pakistan relations. India's risk-averse approach to using force is suboptimal in the India-Pakistan context for two key reasons. First, in Indo-Pak conflicts, history tells us that early gains are not just important, they also are often decisive. An Indian strategy prioritising political messaging, minimum military gains, and delayed third-party intervention is unlikely to produce early gains unlike Pakistan's strategy that prioritises early military gains, little political messaging and quick third-party intervention. India's doctrinal evolution on the use of force over the past 25 years has been remarkable, but serious introspection after each military conflict is a must to improve future preparedness, as such conflicts are unlikely to disappear. Happymon Jacob teaches India's foreign policy at Jawaharlal Nehru University and is editor, INDIA'S WORLD magazine. The views expressed are personal
Time of India
33 minutes ago
- Time of India
Unpaid jets, unfinished planes: China's 50% discounted fighter plane sale to Pakistan; citizens ask who is benefiting?
Beijing's fast track delivery plan of 30 J-35A stealth fighter jets to Pakistan at half the price triggered a storm of backlash across Chinese social media platforms. The move, which would mark China's first export of a fifth-generation combat aircraft, is being widely criticised as financially and strategically reckless. The deal is expected to begin deliveries in August 2025. However, the decision has left many Chinese citizens baffled and angry, especially as the J-35A, also known as the FC-31, is still undergoing testing and has not even yet been inducted into China's own air force. One user, posting under the handle @Zhejiang from the Yingyang Medical School, asked, 'Pakistan has also made a lot of fake news. How can it afford to buy it? It hasn't even paid for the J-10.' The comment refers to Pakistan's pending payments for earlier J-10C fighter jets purchased from China. Another user, @CQL0530, criticised Beijing's production priorities, 'China's own production of the J-35 has not yet been built up. How can it be given to them?' Some users dispensed with any diplomacy. 'Bullshit!' wrote another user, quoted by ET. The phrase '2 more powerful printers are coming,' shared by user Cracked Rose, was interpreted by some as a reference to the government printing more money, or jets, to fund the project. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 오스템 임플란트 받아가세요 임플란터 더 알아보기 Undo 'A charity sale', or 'strategic leverage' Beyond the jet's readiness, the announcement's timing has also drawn scrutiny. It comes just days after a terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu & Kashmir, prompting Indian analysts to see the deal as China arming Pakistan amid renewed cross-border tensions. Back home, users are questioning whether the government is, in effect, subsidising a military client state with limited ability to pay. 'It is more in your interest to spend money on building and purchasing industrial equipment and infra,' one commenter wrote. The root of concern is whether China is selling a 'concept jet,' a fighter still in development, as a finished product. While the J-35 is designed to rival platforms like the US-made F-35, it lacks any combat history or proven capabilities. A shaky pitch China previously tried to market the J-10CE, another fighter jet supplied to Pakistan, as 'combat-tested', citing claims from Islamabad that it shot down Indian Rafales during Operation Sindoor. But these claims remained unverified outside Pakistani media and have been met with scepticism. Efforts to sell the J-10CE to countries like Egypt, Brazil, and Uzbekistan have so far failed. Experts point to its reliance on Russian engines, such as the RD-93 and AL-31, which are seen as outdated and increasingly risky given geopolitical tensions and supply chain concerns. Reports suggest that Pakistani pilots are already undergoing training in China to fly the J-35. However, the Chinese government has not issued any official statement on the backlash or confirmed the details of the sale. While India is expected to keep a close eye on how this unfolds, many in China are simply asking, who benefits? If the deal goes ahead, Beijing might frame it as a strategic move to cement influence in the region. But for many ordinary citizens, it's beginning to look like a high-risk bet, funded by the Chinese taxpayer, on an unfinished aircraft sold to a customer with an unreliable credit record.
