Aggressive rhetoric
In a vain attempt to cover up the setback Indian military, particularly air force, suffered during last month's misadventure against Pakistan, he asserted, 'we are not going to live with it... And we don't care where they are. If they are deep in Pakistan, we will go deep into Pakistan.'
Jaishankar's belligerent remarks have earned him a sharp rebuke from the Foreign Office in Islamabad. 'The discourse of top diplomats should aim to promote peace and harmony rather than producing bellicose punch lines,' said the FO. It also advised New Delhi to desist from concocting misleading narratives to justify its recent aggressive actions, emphasising the need for peaceful coexistence, dialogue and diplomacy.
Aggressive actions have not worked so far to Modi government's advantage, however. Its military preparedness' weakness was first exposed in the 2019 air strike in Balakot, when in a retaliatory response the next day Pakistan downed at least one Indian jet and captured the pilot. Yet it employed the same ruse – unsubstantiated allegation of terrorism in Pahalgam – and tactics last month, launching missile and drone strikes inside this country. In the ensuing conflict it lost six of its top of the line jets.
New Delhi since has been too embarrassed to name the number of warplanes shot down in action. When asked by Politico Jaishankar also wouldn't come to the point; all he could say was that the appropriate authorities would communicate on the matter when ready.
But France, where he was speaking, knows the truth not only because of the three Rafale jets the PAF downed, but also for the reason that the EU and other major powers – the US, China, and Russia – all have eyes in the sky (satellite constellations).
They could see exactly what happened and where to IAF aircraft. As a result, Pakistan's esteem has risen in diplomatic and military circles. While India likes to position itself as the dominant power in South Asia and also projected as a 'Net Security Provider' in the indo-Pacific region, the reversal it suffered during the four-day confrontation has undermined that narrative.
Pakistan 's ability to withstand, repel, and convincingly outmanoeuvre Indian military moves make it confident to be more rational and restrained in reacting to minister Jaishankar's offensive remarks. The FO's call for improving the standard of discourse is a genuine plea for elevating the quality of discourse in one of the world's most volatile regions. If only the two nations interact with civility, that can pave the way to peaceful co-existence, if not cooperation.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Express Tribune
US and India — strategic autonomy or alliance partnership
The writer is a retired major general and has an interest in International Relations and Political Sociology. He can be reached at tayyarinam@ and tweets @20_Inam This piece attempts to deconstruct the imperatives of Sino-India bilateralism in the backdrop of US-China competition. In my piece, "War of Humiliation" in the South Asia magazine (November 2020), discussing the Sino-Indian escalation in Ladakh, I had concluded that expecting India to stand up to China as a bulwark, that the US continues to prop it, is too far-fetched. That China and India would never — willingly or unwillingly — walk into a full-blown war, that is in nobody's interest. If anyone expects India to stand upto to China — doing the US bidding — in a resurrected Great Game 2.0; then it is not knowing India of Chanakya Kautilya (375-283 BC). The wizard, also called Vishnugupta or the Indian Machiavelli, said: "Do not reveal what you have thought of doing... keep it secret being determined to carry it into execution." Fast forward to 2025, there is a lot of debate nudging India to be in a 'partnership alliance' with the US to counter China; as most analysts in the US/European camp, think India cannot do it alone. Some emphasise that 'strengthening Quad' (Quadrilateral Security Dialogue comprising Australia, India, Japan and America) would be a good starting point for New Delhi. Realising that India is a 'hedging' middle power, eager to play both if not all sides, the US think-tanks deduce that transfer of more sophisticated and advanced technology to India would depend upon India's overt anti-Beijing credentials. The basic premise of such thinking is that a shooting Sino-Indian war is inevitable, and that militarily embroiling China through India is cost effective and makes strategic sense. This is a faulty presumption, just like encouraging Ukraine, a militarily weaker side, to go on the offensive against a militarily stronger Russia that was on the defensive, in the much-touted Ukrainian counter offensive in 2023, that failed. The recent chasm in the US-India relations emanate from India profiting from the Russian oil imports, debunking sanctions; Indian protectionism in trade against US agricultural products; Modi's refusal to acknowledge President Trump's role in the May 2025 Pakistan-India ceasefire; and the less than expected tenacity by India in the cited conflict. However, these are transient factors originating from the 'Trump Factor', who is in his last presidential term. There are compelling reasons for Washington to keep India in its orbit and repair the damaged relations, even if New Delhi is not very forthcoming. First, in the US strategic construct China, Iran, North Korea and Russia make a substantial 'authoritative scale (mass of alliance power)' presenting a unified challenge, needing a unified response. Moreover, China under President Xi has moved away from its confrontational 'wolf warrior' diplomacy, with emerging profile in the Global South, Africa in particular. Its BRI networks 126 countries through highways, railways, pipelines, power plants, grids, IT, social welfare and poverty-alleviation projects. BRI's staggering investment of over $1.3 trillion will ultimately cover 60% of the world population and 40% of its GDP, providing a viable economic alternative, catapulting the present US-led predatory economic system. Second, America's inability to compete with both China and Russia, requires 'strategic diplomacy', some US analysts emphasise. Its core purpose being 'cultivating favourable balances of power in critical regions' to project power far beyond material means. Strategic diplomacy aims to limit rival's options, without seeking to remove the sources of conflict. The US is moving past the age of 'globalized utopia', of being the single-most powerful hegemon, enjoying comprehensive security enabled by techno-military capabilities. It gravitates towards alliance partnerships and strategic diplomacy. And under its 'pivot to Asia' strategy, building the largest anti-China coalition, India stands out to bridge the gap between Washington's rhetoric and capabilities. US analysts feel Biden Administration was unable to properly cultivate New Delhi against Beijing. They feel Trump should nudge India closer 'as an ally on the level of Japan or NATO partners'. Will India do the US bidding willingly, under coercion or under inducements? The straight answer is no, under any conditions. Way back in a meeting with the US officials, when asked to analyse the US-India potential relationship, my answer was to 'go ahead and find out'. However, much that India will drag its feet on becoming involved in bloc politics, alliance partnership with the US, and ignore its 'strategic autonomy', Washington will persistently deploy the pressure-inducement combo to rope in New Delhi against China. Even if that means making India, as some suggest, a regional policeman and hegemon in South Asia, deferring to its advice and actions concerning other countries like Pakistan. The other touted US 'deputy sheriffs' to include Australia in Pacific Islands, Vietnam in continental Southeast Asia and Nigeria in Africa. Expecting India to go against one of its largest trading partners (despite an otherwise obscure border conflict), is not understanding geo-economics and history. First, Sino-India annual trade is over $100 for the third consecutive year. It was $124 billion for FY2024. Second, India has historically conceded against formidable adversaries, from Afghans to Moghuls to Portuguese to the British. That historic constant has not changed, Modi or no Modi. Third, militarily, Indian discussions concede China's conventional and nuclear advantage. India responds to this "conventional asymmetry" through infrastructural build-up, force modernisation and new raisings, compared to Beijing's better military infrastructure, capabilities, and logistics. The Indian security establishment remains concerned about greater survivability of Indian forces on the battlefield, in an environment of uncontrolled escalation, instead of investing in new weapon platforms especially the nuclear ones. However, paradoxically, the cited asymmetry also serves as a strong catalyst for peaceful co-existence. It is, therefore, no surprise that India gravitates towards better relations with Beijing under its 'Look East Policy', burnished by the recent chasm with Washington. When China's Foreign Minister, Wang Yi on August 18, 2025, during his two-day visit to New Delhi emphasised both nations to view each other as 'partners' and not 'adversaries or threats'; his Indian counterpart Jaishankar acknowledged the Chinese overtures, saying both countries were seeking to 'move ahead from a difficult period in our relations'. Wang met Premier Modi on Tuesday, reaffirming 'positive trend' in the bilateral ties. In sum, India it too smart to fall for the US trap.
Business Recorder
9 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Staff shortages at India's aviation regulator and air traffic control threaten safety, lawmakers say
NEW DELHI: An Indian parliamentary committee on aviation has warned that staffing shortages at the country's air safety regulator and lack of air traffic controllers pose a threat to safety in one of the world's fastest growing aviation markets. The Directorate General of Civil Aviation is grappling 'with a profound and persistent shortage of technical and regulatory personnel,' with almost half of its posts unfilled, the committee said in a report on Wednesday. Lawmakers were reviewing aviation safety in India in the aftermath of the deadly Air India Boeing Dreamliner crash that killed 260 people in June, the world's worst aviation disaster in a decade. A few days before the crash, Prime Minister Narendra Modi had addressed an annual global meeting of airlines in New Delhi, underscoring how India is banking on a boom in aviation to support wider development goals. Staffing shortages at the DGCA were 'an existential threat to the integrity of India's aviation safety system,' said the transport, tourism and culture committee report that also followed several helicopter accidents in northern India. India aviation watchdog finds 263 lapses at Indian airlines in annual audit It said the root of the crisis lay in an outdated recruitment model under which a recruitment agency hires personnel on behalf of the DGCA. The civil aviation ministry, which houses the regulator, has described the process as 'slow and inflexible,' according to the report and the DGCA faces a challenge in attracting and retaining highly skilled professionals. The ministry and the DGCA did not respond to emailed requests for comment. Civil aviation minister Ram Mohan Naidu told lawmakers last month that the government would fill up 190 of the more than 500 unfilled positions in the DGCA by October. The parliamentary committee recommended launching a focused recruitment campaign and suggested a new regulatory authority could be created to replace the DGCA. The committee also said India's air traffic controllers were under immense pressure due to staffing shortages caused by failures in workforce planning. Some air traffic controllers were not adequately trained, the committee added. The report criticised the Airports Authority of India and the DGCA for a 'deeply troubling practice' of not following duty time limitations for the controllers, saying that raised the risk of fatigue and increased the chances of a controller error.
Business Recorder
9 hours ago
- Business Recorder
Uncertainty persists despite EU-US trade deal: Lagarde
BERLIN: The US-EU trade deal has eased but 'certainly not eliminated' global uncertainty, European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde said Wednesday. Speaking at a panel at the World Economic Forum in Geneva, Lagarde said the deal had left the effective US tariff rate for EU goods at between 12 and 16 percent. The tariff rate was 'somewhat higher' than the ECB had forecast, she said, adding that President Donald Trump's plans for sector-specific levies on pharmaceutical goods and semiconductors remain unclear. The ECB expects eurozone activity to slow in the third quarter of 2025 after a strong start to the year. Lagarde said that 'global growth has remained broadly steady so far' but cautioned that 'this resilience has been mainly driven by tariff-induced distortions of economic activity'. EU push to protect digital rules holds up trade statement with US, FT reports She noted that, in the first quarter of the year, 'importers boosted their inventories in anticipation of higher tariffs'. Trump has imposed painful import tariffs on countries around the world in an attempt to boost US manufacturing and reduce his country's colossal trade deficit. He had initially threatened steep 30 percent tariffs on EU imports but late last month Brussels and Washington reached a deal which lowered that to 15 percent, with the bloc trying to secure exemptions for certain sectors. However, in recent weeks Trump has raised the possibility of additional tariffs hitting certain sectors such as pharmaceuticals, which account for 20 percent of the the EU's exports to the United States. The EU-US deal was struck a few days after a meeting of the ECB's governing council at which it decided to hold interest rates steady after consecutive cuts. That was seen as a sign of caution as policymakers waited to see what effects the US tariffs would have. In its last macroeconomic projections in June, the ECB lowered its inflation forecast to two percent for 2025 due to lower energy prices and a strengthening euro. At the same time it lowered its forecast for GDP growth in 2026 slightly to 1.1 percent. Lagarde said that new forecasts set to published in mid-September will take into account 'the implications of the EU-US trade deal for the euro area economy'.
