Op Sindoor delegations: Ravi Shankar Prasad's team visits London; Baijayant Panda says 'there are 52 Osama bin Ladens'
BJP MP Ravi Shankar Prasad-led all-party delegation reached London on Saturday as part of India's efforts to reach out to partner countries to highlight its firm stance against cross-border terrorism and its policy of zero-tolerance to terrorism. Meanwhile, BJP MP Baijayant Panda slammed Pakistan in Algeria.
1. An all-party delegation led by BJP MP Ravi Shankar Prasad arrived in London on Saturday to reiterate India's zero-tolerance stance on terrorism.
Upon his arrival, Ravi Shankar Prasad said, "We are here in London. We will keep our stance on terrorism effectively, here. We believe that we will get that support here as well, the way we have received the support in those three countries."
The multi-party delegation, comprising MPs Daggubati Purandeswari, Priyanka Chaturvedi, Ghulam Ali Khatana, Amar Singh, Samik Bhattacharya, M Thambidurai and former Union minister of state MJ Akbar and Ambassador Pankaj Saran, is scheduled to meet with community groups, think tanks, parliamentarians and diaspora leaders.
The delegation landed in the UK after completing visits to France, Italy, and Denmark, where they engaged with government officials, diaspora, and other stakeholders to raise awareness about India's zero-tolerance policy towards terrorism.
From the UK, the delegation will head for discussions and meetings with a cross-section of parliamentarians, political leaders and diaspora groups in the European Union (EU) and Germany.
2. Earlier during the Denmark leg of the visit, Ravi Shankar Prasad strongly responded to a group of Pakistani nationals who raised anti-India slogans outside a venue hosting the Indian delegation in Copenhagen. He dismissed the protest as an act of "desperation" and advised people to "ignore them with impunity"
"I was very surprised to see Pakistanis here raising slogans...our programme is going very well...we are getting wide coverage...their handlers in Pakistan must have told them to do something. They have come here in desperation. Pakistan is a desperate country that lives in desperation. Ignore them with impunity," Prasad said.
3. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) MP Baijayant Panda, who is leading an all-party delegation to Algeria, hit out at Pakistan on Saturday (local time), highlighting that the neighbouring country is using its nuclear power to shield its terrorist activities.
Referring to Pakistan's support in hiding Osama Bin Laden in the country, Panda was quoted by ANI as saying, "Remember Osama bin Laden, for years, they used to lie until the Americans intervened and took him out. They are doing the same thing, except there are 52 Osama bin Ladens."
"The United Nations Security Council, of which Algeria is a member today, has sanctioned and banned a number of terrorist organisations and individuals, among them 52 terror organisations and terrorists are openly operating in Pakistan today," he added.
The Group 1 delegation, led by Baijayant Panda, Member of Parliament and former Minister, includes senior parliamentarians and officials such as Dr. Nishikant Dubey, S. Phangnon Konyak, Rekha Sharma, Asaduddin Owaisi, Satnam Singh Sandhu, Ghulam Nabi Azad, and former Foreign Secretary Harsh Vardhan Shringla.
4. Group 6 of the all-party delegation, led by DMK MP Kanimozhi Karunanidhi, arrived in Madrid. AAP MP Dr Ashok Kumar Mittal said, "This is our last destination in this tour. We will meet the Indian diaspora first and tell them about Operation Sindoor. Then, we will meet the people from the government, intellectuals, and academia. We will convey our message that India is determined to eliminate Pakistan-sponsored terrorism from India and the entire world."
5. AIMIM chief and MP Asaduddin Owaisi said in Algeria, "It's not only a question of South Asia. We are the 4th largest economy. What will happen? Do you want all this carnage to spread to different parts of South Asia? No. It is in the interest of world peace to control Pakistan, which is the main sponsor of terrorism. It has to be brought back in the FATF Grey list..."
6. An all-party Indian parliamentary delegation, led by Nationalist Congress Party-Sharadchandra Pawar (NCP-SCP) MP Supriya Sule, paid floral tributes to Mahatma Gandhi at the Indian Embassy in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, as part of their diplomatic outreach visit.
7. In Colombia, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor, leading the all-party delegation to the South American country, confirmed Bogota's withdrawal of the controversial statement after meeting Vice Foreign Minister Rosa Yolanda Villavicencio and her senior colleagues.
India has sent several all-party delegations to showcase India's resolve against terrorism and garner international support for a united stand against this global threat.
The Indian government's diplomatic outreach efforts aim to strengthen partnerships with countries in East and Southeast Asia, emphasising the need for a collective response to the threat of terrorism.
India launched Operation Sindoor on May 7 in a decisive military response to the April 22 Pahalgam terror attack in which 26 people were killed.
Tensions between India and Pakistan escalated after the Pahalgam terror attack, with India carrying out precision strikes on terror infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir in the early hours of May 7.
Pakistan attempted to attack Indian military bases on May 8, 9, and 10. The Indian side responded strongly to the Pakistani actions.
The on-ground hostilities ended with an understanding of stopping the military actions following talks between the directors general of military operations of both sides on May 10.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
25 minutes ago
- Indian Express
History of US role in India-Pakistan issues: Four wars, the hyphen, and Trump
US President Donald Trump has yet again claimed that he 'got India and Pakistan to stop fighting' by using trade talks as a bargaining chip. 'We talk trade, and we say we can't trade with people who are shooting at each other and potentially using nuclear weapons… They understood and they agreed, and that all stopped,' Trump said on May 31. New Delhi has repeatedly emphasised that the recent ceasefire in Operation Sindoor came after bilateral talks with Pakistan, and that trade with US did not figure in the calculations. While Trump is known for making extraordinary statements, his claims of 'stopping a potential nuclear war' between India and Pakistan touch a raw nerve for New Delhi. Trump's rhetoric — deliberately or unwittingly — is 'hyphenating' India and Pakistan again, something India has long fought against. Secondly, it goes against India's established position that its problems with Pakistan have to be resolved bilaterally, without the need for third party intervention. And as far as third parties go, the US on many occasions has acted more in Pakistan's interests than India's. What is India's hyphenation with Pakistan, and why does New Delhi oppose it? Why is New Delhi against third party intervention? And what has the USA's role been in India-Pakistan hostilities in the past? We explain. The history of the hyphenation and of India's distrust of third parties are intertwined. Barely two months after independence in August 1947, infiltrators from Pakistan attacked Jammu and Kashmir. Viceroy Lord Louis Mountbatten advised India to go to the UN, which it did on January 1, 1948. India had expected that its rights over a territory which legitimately acceded to it would be respected at the UN. However, the British did not support India, which many Indians perceived as a betrayal. Historian Ramachandra Guha writes (in the book India after Gandhi) of the January-February 1948 UN sessions, 'India suffered a significant symbolic defeat when the Security Council altered the agenda item from the 'Jammu and Kashmir question' to the 'India-Pakistan question'.' This is how the formal hyphenation on international fora began. India's objection to this treatment broadly are — such a framing puts India and Pakistan on the same level when the two parties are not comparable actors, India is the victim of Pakistan's territorial aggression; and that India's identity, as a democratic country and significant economy, can't be tied to Pakistan's. New Delhi believes that the world should engage with India in its own right and not as one half of a conflict zone. This is a goal it has been able to achieve to a large degree. The UN episode also put India off bringing in bigger powers, while Pakistan preferred internationalising the Kashmir issue. During the Cold War years, the West, led by the US, saw Pakistan as a critical ally in the tussle with the Soviet Union, while the non-aligned India was considered less dependable. Later, the war in Afghanistan and the US 'war on terror' ensured Pakistan's importance for the US and the West, often to India's disadvantage. Also, India with its potential to emerge as a leader of the Global South, does not believe it depends on bigger powers to help solve its problems. The role of the US To understand this in brief, the USA's actions during four wars fought by India can be considered. Alongside this, India and US have had a storied bilateral relationship quite independent of the Pakistan issue. The 1947 India-Pakistan war: Quite contrary to what Trump is doing now, in 1947, the US wanted India and Pakistan to resolve their issues bilaterally. A position paper sent by the US Secretary of State to the embassy in India says, 'We would much prefer that the Kashmir question be settled by direct negotiation between India and Pakistan. However, in the event that a resolution requesting the intervention of the United Nations, and in particular requesting the United Nations to supervise a referendum in Kashmir, is introduced by India or Pakistan and supported by the United Kingdom, the United States Delegation should also support the resolution.' The 1962 India-China war: In this war, the US helped India, airlifting military supplies. However, it used the goodwill thus generated to get together with the UK and pressure India to talk to Pakistan. Six rounds of talks were held, with no progress. Then US Undersecretary of State Chester Bowles wrote about that period, 'We had also—rather ineptly—seized upon India's acute need for US assistance as a lever to force India to make concessions to the Pakistanis in regard to Kashmir, which no democratic Indian Government could make and survive.' While the fighting was on, then US President John F Kennedy is believed to have stopped Pakistan from opening another front against India. Bruce Riedel, Senior Fellow of the American think tank Brookings, wrote in 2015, 'Then Pakistan President Ayub Khan told Kennedy that he wanted 'compensation' from India in Kashmir for Pakistan's neutrality during the war. Kennedy made clear to Ayub that no such compensation would be tolerated, and that Pakistani intervention in the war in the Himalayas would be seen by Washington as a hostile act.' The 1971 India-Pakistan war: This was the time the US backed Pakistan most forcefully and publicly, even dispatching warships towards the Bay of Bengal. The US Department of State has a website called Office of the Historian. Its article on the 1971 war says that as Pakistan had recently helped the US and China start diplomatic ties, Washington decided to back Pakistan against India, but the 'action against the mass protests in East Pakistan was well-publicized and widely condemned, which limited the extent to which the US Government was willing to help the Pakistani Government…' Eventually, America's actions during this war damaged its prestige 'in both nations, in Pakistan for failing to help prevent the loss of East Pakistan and in India for supporting the brutality of the Pakistani regime's actions…' The Kargil war of 1999: If the previous war had seen the US veer very close to Pakistan, the Kargil war redefined its relationship with India. Riedel wrote in 2019, 'When the US determined that Pakistan had deliberately violated the Line of Control near Kargil, [then President Bill] Clinton did not hesitate to blame Pakistan for risking a broader war. For the first time, an American administration was siding publicly with India against Pakistani aggression.' Clinton played a major role in getting Pakistan to retreat behind the LOC. After this, Clinton visited the subcontinent in 2000. He was the first US President to come to India in over 20 years. He spent five days in India, in contrast with just a few hours in Pakistan. Apart from these wars, the US has also worked to defuse tensions after the Parliament attack in 2001 and the Mumbai terror attacks of 2008. However, preventing tensions from escalating is different from meditating on Kashmir or other bilateral issues, which Trump has been making claims and offers about. Yashee is an Assistant Editor with the where she is a member of the Explained team. She is a journalist with over 10 years of experience, starting her career with the Mumbai edition of Hindustan Times. She has also worked with India Today, where she wrote opinion and analysis pieces for DailyO. Her articles break down complex issues for readers with context and insight. Yashee has a Bachelor's Degree in English Literature from Presidency College, Kolkata, and a postgraduate diploma in journalism from Asian College of Journalism, Chennai, one of the premier media institutes in the countr ... Read More
Hans India
29 minutes ago
- Hans India
Centre responsible for infiltration, not Mamata: Congress slams Amit Shah's remark on Bangladesh border issue
The Congress on Monday hit back at Union Home Minister Amit Shah over his recent comments accusing West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee of facilitating infiltration from Bangladesh with senior party leader Rashid Alvi underlining that securing national borders is the responsibility of the Central government, not the state. During his two-day visit to West Bengal, Amit Shah, while addressing the Vijay Sankalp Karyakarta Sammelan, alleged that Mamata Banerjee had allowed unchecked infiltration for political gain. "Mamata Banerjee has opened the nation's borders for Bangladeshis. She is allowing infiltration. Only a Lotus government can stop this," he claimed. He further accused Banerjee of refusing to provide land for fencing at the border, suggesting she was doing so to maintain her vote bank and pave the way for her nephew to succeed her as Chief Minister. Responding to Amit Shah's statements, Rashid Alvi told IANS: "Is Mamata Banerjee responsible for guarding India's borders, or is that the duty of the Indian government? Who is in charge of border security? If people are entering India illegally, the blame lies with the Central government, not Mamata. She doesn't control border patrols - (PM) Modi's government does.' Addressing the government's recent claims after Operation Sindoor, which reportedly led to the deportation of 2,000 Bangladeshis, Alvi said the figure was insignificant in comparison to the overall scale of the issue. "If lakhs of people have entered from Myanmar and Bangladesh as claimed, sending back just 2,000 is meaningless. The Supreme Court has clearly stated that India is not a dharamshala where anyone can enter and settle. All those who have entered illegally must be sent back. Even the US deports illegal immigrants, though often in handcuffs - we should do it respectfully." On being asked about Congress MPs like Shashi Tharoor and Salman Khurshid, who praised the Modi government during recent international delegations, he said: "Those who are part of official delegations represent India, not any party. But if any Congress leader praises the BJP at the cost of the Congress, action must be taken. These actions weaken the party. As the saying goes, the house is set on fire by its own lamp. Some of our leaders are destroying Congress from within. And BJP doesn't respect those who switch parties - most of them are sidelined after joining." Commenting specifically on Khurshid's praise of the PM Modi government's handling of Article 370, Alvi said: "I strongly disagree with him. He may have joined the delegation to clarify India's stand to the world, but his statements suggest he is endorsing the BJP's policies. Since the removal of Article 370, terrorism has risen in Kashmir. Pulwama happened. Pahalgam has turned into a hotspot. We even had to conduct strikes inside Pakistan. What development has taken place since the abrogation? How many five-star hotels or factories have been built? Development hasn't improved, nor has the situation on the ground. If Article 370 had to be removed, it should have been done with the confidence and participation of the Kashmiri people - not by jailing them." Asked whether the Congress should take disciplinary action against such leaders, Alvi said: "That's for the Congress high command to decide. I don't agree with their statements, but I'm not personally demanding action. If their remarks go against the party's policies, appropriate decisions should be made." On Congress President Mallikarjun Kharge's criticism of Prime Minister Modi's speeches after Operation Sindoor, Alvi said: "Sindoor runs in PM Modi's veins? That's an unfortunate choice of words. At a time when the entire country stood united behind him, he chose to extract political mileage from it. PM Modi should avoid such rhetoric. Whether it's PM Modi or Amit Shah, both are trying to gain politically from military actions. They're misleading the country." On Rahul Gandhi's query about aircraft losses during the operation, Alvi said the government must come clean. 'Every citizen has the right to know. If aircraft were lost or soldiers died, the public deserves transparency. Even the Army chief has given details to agencies. Why is the government hiding it? We missed the opportunity to hold Pakistan accountable. PM Modi had claimed we'd kill terrorists in their homes - then why is Masood Azhar still alive? A few airstrikes don't change anything; we must eliminate the root of terrorism." On the arrest of influencer and law student Sharmishta Panoli, who was sent to 14 days' judicial custody over a controversial video allegedly hurting religious sentiments, Alvi said: "Over the last 11 years, the BJP and RSS have created an atmosphere targeting Islam. India has always respected all religions. Remember the international backlash over a BJP spokesperson's remark. In this context, action against those inciting communal disharmony is justified."
India.com
33 minutes ago
- India.com
Amid Bihar CM Face Buzz, Chirag Paswan Drops BIG Hint At Future Role In Modi Government
Bihar Election 2025: Amid posters surfacing in Bihar portraying Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) chief Chirag Paswan as the future Chief Minister of the state, the political atmosphere is getting charged up ahead of the assembly polls. Paswan, a Lok Sabha MP and Union Minister in the Narendra Modi government, has been looking to make it BIG in this year's election, having tried his luck in the 2020 polls. Speaking to reporters, Paswan said that his reason for entering politics was Bihar and not a Central government role. "I don't see myself in central politics for too long. My reason for entering politics was Bihar and the people of Bihar. I want to take forward my vision of 'Bihar First, Bihari First'," said Paswan. Paswan said he has realized that being in Delhi makes it difficult to work directly for Bihar. "I have placed my thoughts before the party, and it will evaluate whether my contesting the Assembly elections would benefit the organisation,' he added. Since Chirag Paswan is the leader of the party, the LJP(RV) is likely to go with his wish and field him in the assembly constituency. Paswan emphasised that his decision to consider the state elections is driven by a desire to bring development and stronger representation to Bihar. 'Sometimes, when national leaders contest state elections, it does help the party grow. If my participation helps the alliance and strengthens the NDA's position in Bihar, I will contest,' he stated. However, Chirag Paswan made it clear that he is not eyeing the Chief Minister's post. 'There is no vacancy for the Chief Minister's post in Bihar. Nitish Kumar will remain the Chief Minister,' he affirmed, reiterating NDA unity in the state. Paswan has never contested an Assembly election before, but his growing involvement in state matters has sparked speculation about a shift from national to state politics. The Lok Janshakti Party (Ram Vilas) is part of the NDA in Bihar, which also includes parties led by Union Minister Jitan Ram Manjhi and former Union Minister Upendra Kushwaha.
