HT Archives: India thwarts Pak attack as tensions simmer at border
The attacks, launched this morning, were preceded by intensified Pakistani shelling of Indian positions last night. The fiercest battle of the day, according to official reports, was fought at an unnamed place in the Rann of Kutch marked on the map as Point 84-about 30 miles east of Kanjarkot.
Pakistanis attacked the post in brigade strength of about 3,500 troops and tanks. Reports reaching New Delhi this evening said three Pakistani tanks were destroyed by jawans defending the post. The post at Point 84 is about six miles inside Indian territory.
According to reports received late tonight, fighting was still going on at the point 30 miles east of Kanjarkot. The Indian Army was moving reinforcements to the area.
It's undeclared war
The Pakistani attack, described by an official spokesman as nearly an undeclared war, came unexpectedly during negotiations between India and Pakistan for ceasefire arrangements and talks over the tension in the Kanjarkot area following its forcible occupation by Pakistan in January.
The latest in the chain of diplomatic talks was a meeting today between Pakistan High Commissioner Arshad Hussain and Foreign Secretary C. S. Jha. The Pakistani envoy was told that India considered a retrograde step the Pakistan Government's move to go back on the proposal for 'immediate' ceasefire Rawalpindi had itself made about a week ago.
Rejecting the fresh set of proposals which included one for withdrawal of Indian forces from its own territory. Mr Jha told the Pakistani envoy that steps should be taken to implement Pakistan's earlier proposal which India had accepted.
As reports of the massive Pakistani attacks came in, the External Affairs Ministry instructed its missions in London, Washington and the capitals of other friendly powers to apprise these governments of the premeditated and well-planned warlike operations launched by Pakistan.
The Minister-Counsellor of the U.S. Embassy, Mr Joseph N. Greene, had a discussion on the day's developments with Mr Jha this afternoon.
Reporting the Pakistani attacks, the official spokesman told newsmen that 'there is reason to apprehend that Pakistan might indulge in similar adventures elsewhere on the long Indo-Pakistan border. But we are taking all necessary precautionary measures.'
Tidal waves
The spokesman said the attacks launched from this morning were unparalleled even in the long history of Pakistan's provocative actions on different sectors of the border. The size and intensity of these attacks clearly showed the long preparations behind them.
Indian army personnel took over guard duty of the Kanjarkot area on April 10 after Pakistani army regulars attacked the police posts at Sardar and Vigokot on April 9. At that time the Pakistanis attacked the posts in two-battalion strength. But tanks and armoured units were thrown into the battle for the first time today for the onslaught on the post at Point 84.
The terrain in the area gives Pakistan some advantages. Pakistani territory north of the Kutch-Sind border is on high ground and is not affected by tidal waters. The Pakistani side of the border is well served by road and rail.
The Kutch area, for a stretch of more than 40 miles, both in length and in width is covered by water for nearly six months in the year beginning from the midd1e of May. The nearest railhead from the border is about 70 miles away. Sand and swamp have also prevented permanent habitations.
The border between Kutch and Sind was never a subject of dispute between India and Pakistan until Pakistan created one by establishing two standing posts in what was hitherto well-understood to be Indian territory. The boundary runs along the pre-partition border between the princely state of Kutch and the former British province of Sind. All pre-partition maps have marked the border correctly.
The question of demarcation on the border on the ground was taken up during the Indo-Pakistan ministerial level talks in 1960. The work was subsequently to be carried on by the Surveyors General of the two countries, but could not proceed for lack of earnestness on Pakistan's part.
After Pakistan occupied the Kanjarkot area and advanced claims on the territory. India made repeated efforts to settle the question by opening talks. But the latest Pakistani claim, which a Government spokesman said was reminiscent of the Chinese tactics of 1959, characterizes as 'disputed territory' a big slice of Kutch up to what Rawalpindi described as the 24th Parallel.
The hitherto undisclosed claim was put forward for the first time yesterday when the Pakistan High Commissioner met the Foreign Secretary to explain his Government's fresh set of conditions for cease-fire and talks. The elucidations given by the envoy also made it clear that the Kanjarkot area now under Pakistan's occupation was not a disputed territory, according to his Government.
The proposal for withdrawal of forces by 'both sides' from the so-called disputed territory thus amounted to a peremptory demand on India to withdraw its forces from Indian territory south of Kaniarkot and north of what Rawalpindi calls the 24th Parallel.
Two killed
Two constables of the State police of Gujarat were killed and four others sustained minor injuries when Pakistan troops mounted their artillery attack on Chad island, 25 miles from the Kutch border.
Today's Pakistani shells were described as the heaviest so far.
The sources said 85 shells, each weighing 25 lb. and having a firing range of 7 miles were fired yesterday.
Pakistani troops have used shells of American manufacture. This is for the second time that American arms and ammunition has been noticed since the Pakistani army attack of April 9.
The Indian side fired back, it is understood. The bodies of the two servicemen killed were removed to Bhuj last evening and were cremated with full honours.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
9 minutes ago
- First Post
Pakistan's war on women: Honour killings expose a nation built on misogyny
For countless women, Pakistan is no longer a country to live in, but a graveyard that buries their voices, their dignity, and their very existence Every year, between 300 and 1,000 women are executed by their own families in Pakistan under the pretext of honour. Image: X/@iMaryammm The recent brutal murders of Arak and Sheetal are not isolated tragedies; they are the latest entries in Pakistan's long catalogue of bloodletting carried out in the name of honour. While governments in Islamabad posture about morality and sovereignty, the reality is this: Pakistan has become a slaughterhouse for women, where patriarchal violence is not only tolerated but embedded in the fabric of society and shielded by state institutions. Every year, between 300 and 1,000 women are executed by their own families in Pakistan under the pretext of honour. These are not crimes of passion; they are premeditated executions. And they happen with such frequency, such brazenness, that they expose Pakistan for what it is: a state incapable of protecting half its population and unwilling to confront the barbarity it shelters. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The killings of Arak and Sheetal are horrifying, but they are also predictable. They happened in a country where misogyny is weaponized, where women who dare to love, marry, or simply make choices of their own are punished with death. Pakistan has normalized this slaughter to such an extent that it barely registers as shocking anymore inside its borders. Instead, honour killings are treated as 'family matters,' excused by police, and whitewashed by local media using euphemisms like 'tragedy' or 'dispute.' Murder is softened into culture. Violence is disguised as tradition. Pakistan likes to paint itself as a victim on the world stage, forever crying about conspiracies from India, America, or foreign lobbies. But the real enemy of Pakistan is Pakistan itself. No outside force orders fathers, brothers, or husbands to strangle, burn, or shoot their daughters and sisters. No foreign conspiracy instructs police to look the other way, or courts to allow murderers to walk free under so-called forgiveness laws. These are Pakistani crimes, born of Pakistani traditions, sanctioned by Pakistani cowardice. The much-celebrated 2016 legal reforms supposedly 'closed loopholes' that allowed killers to escape punishment. Yet years later, nothing has changed. Families still shield perpetrators. Jirgas and tribal councils still bless honour killings as acceptable justice. Politicians still play to the misogynistic gallery, afraid to challenge the same patriarchal structures that keep them in power. Laws in Pakistan are theatre; the stage props look modern, but the blood on the floor is real. Murder Disguised as Tradition The deaths of Arak and Sheetal make clear what Pakistan's rulers refuse to admit: women in this country live in a permanent state of siege. Their bodies are not their own. Their choices are treated as threats. Their existence is conditional upon obedience to a code that sees them as property. To step outside that line is to sign one's own death warrant. And when that death comes, the killers are rarely punished. Pakistan's honour killing crisis is not a side issue or a cultural quirk. It is central to how the state operates—through fear, violence, and the crushing of dissent, whether political or personal. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Just as Baloch voices are silenced by enforced disappearances, just as journalists are intimidated into submission, women are murdered to enforce obedience. Honour killings are not random crimes but instruments of control. Yet Pakistan has the audacity to call itself a democracy, a land of values, a country of pride. Where is the pride in the corpses of women dumped in shallow graves? Where is the honour in strangling daughters because they chose whom to love? Where is the morality in a state that passes laws it never enforces, that pretends progress while presiding over medieval brutality? A Graveyard for Women The truth is harsh but undeniable: Pakistan is not merely failing its women—it is destroying them. A nation where hundreds of women are killed every year with impunity cannot be called a civilised state. It is a patriarchal fortress built on blood and silence. And yet, Pakistan's rulers still try to deceive the world. They hold up reforms, quote statistics selectively, and tell the international community that things are improving. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Meanwhile, women like Arak and Sheetal are being executed behind closed doors. For every case that surfaces in the media, dozens more are buried, literally and figuratively, in the darkness of rural villages or urban slums. The global community must stop indulging Pakistan's excuses. Enough of the handshakes, the aid packages, the polite acceptance of empty promises. Every dollar given to Islamabad, every speech that praises its progress, is complicity in this violence. Arak and Sheetal will soon be replaced by other names—different women, same story. The killings will go on. The police will shrug. The politicians will preen. The mullahs will remain silent. And Pakistan will continue to bleed its daughters, one by one, while claiming to defend honour. But there is no honour in murder. There is only shame, and it belongs entirely to Pakistan. Pakistan has reached its lowest depths. A state that cannot protect its women inside their own homes offers them no place of safety anywhere. In this land, every wall becomes a prison, and every street a threat. For countless women, Pakistan is no longer a country to live in, but a graveyard that buries their voices, their dignity, and their very existence. As the late scholar Nawal El Saadawi once said, 'The home, the family, and the state are often the most dangerous places for women.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Nowhere does that ring truer than in Pakistan. Tehmeena Rizvi is a Policy Analyst and PhD scholar at Bennett University. Her areas of work include Women, Peace, and Security (South Asia), focusing on the intersection of gender, conflict, and religion, with a research emphasis on the Kashmir region, Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Views expressed in the above piece are personal and solely those of the author. They do not necessarily reflect Firstpost's views.
Time of India
9 minutes ago
- Time of India
Trump says no imminent plans to penalise China for buying Russian oil
US President Donald Trump said on Friday he did not immediately need to consider retaliatory tariffs on countries such as China for buying Russian oil but might have to "in two or three weeks." Trump has threatened sanctions on Moscow and secondary sanctions on countries that buy its oil if no moves are made to end the war in Ukraine. China and India are the top two buyers of Russian oil. The president last week imposed an additional 25 per cent tariff on Indian goods, citing its continued imports of Russian oil. However, Trump has not taken similar action against China. He was asked by Fox News' Sean Hannity if he was now considering such action against Beijing after he and Russian President Vladimir Putin failed to produce an agreement to resolve or pause Moscow's war in Ukraine. "Well, because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that," Trump said after his summit with Putin in Alaska. "Now, I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don't have to think about that right now. I think, you know, the meeting went very well." Chinese President Xi Jinping's slowing economy will suffer if Trump follows through on a promise to ramp up Russia-related sanctions and tariffs. Xi and Trump are working on a trade deal that could lower tensions - and import taxes - between the world's two biggest economies. But China could be the biggest remaining target, outside of Russia, if Trump ramps up punitive measures.
Hans India
9 minutes ago
- Hans India
Political Storm Erupts Over Chidambaram's Comments On Pahalgam Terror Attack Origins
Senior Congress politician P Chidambaram found himself at the center of a heated political controversy on Monday after defending his recent statements about the Pahalgam terror incident, which he claimed were being deliberately distorted through a coordinated misinformation effort. The veteran leader pushed back against accusations from the Bharatiya Janata Party, who alleged he was providing unwarranted support to Pakistan's position on terrorism. In a social media post on X, Chidambaram expressed frustration over what he described as selective editing and misrepresentation of his comments from a recent television interview. He criticized those spreading misinformation as the "worst kind" of trolls who deliberately suppress complete recorded interviews, extract isolated sentences, silence specific words, and present speakers in a negative light to serve their political agenda. The political firestorm began following Chidambaram's interview with The Quint, where he raised questions about the government's assertions linking Pakistan to the devastating April 22 attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam region. The assault resulted in 26 fatalities, with the majority being innocent civilians caught in the violence. During the interview, Chidambaram challenged the official narrative by questioning whether authorities had successfully identified the perpetrators or determined their origins. He suggested that the attackers could potentially be domestic terrorists rather than foreign infiltrators, emphasizing the absence of concrete evidence supporting claims of Pakistani involvement in the deadly incident. The BJP responded with fierce criticism, accusing the opposition Congress party of compromising national security interests and aligning with Pakistan's official stance on terrorism. Party officials characterized Chidambaram's remarks as providing undeserved legitimacy to Pakistan's denials of involvement in cross-border terrorism. Amit Malviya, who leads the BJP's information technology cell, used social media to condemn what he viewed as Congress's pattern of defending Pakistan following terrorist attacks. He questioned why Congress leaders consistently appeared to advocate for Pakistan's position rather than supporting India's security forces in their fight against state-sponsored terrorism. The criticism intensified when BJP Member of Parliament Nishikant Dubey escalated the rhetoric by labeling the entire Congress organization as traitorous. Speaking to the ANI news agency, Dubey referenced various allegations against Congress leadership, including claims about Rahul Gandhi's interactions with China's Communist Party and unsubstantiated corruption charges, while praising Prime Minister Modi's leadership as an obstacle to what he characterized as Congress's anti-national agenda. Another BJP parliamentarian, Deepak Prakash, echoed similar accusations, claiming that Congress was aligning itself with those who oppose India's interests and warning that the Indian population would never forgive political leaders who undermined national security. Several prominent Congress representatives rallied to defend Chidambaram against the mounting criticism, arguing that the BJP was attempting to deflect attention from its own shortcomings in addressing terrorism effectively. They characterized the attacks on Chidambaram as a deliberate diversionary strategy designed to avoid accountability for security failures. Congress MP Manickam Tagore specifically pointed to what he described as the BJP's failure to properly execute Operation Sindoor, suggesting that the governing party was using the controversy to distract from more substantive issues surrounding the Pahalgam attack and the government's counter-terrorism efforts. He emphasized Congress's unwavering support for India's armed forces in their ongoing battle against terrorist threats. Veteran Congress leader Pramod Tiwari raised pointed questions about the investigation's progress, highlighting that three months after the attack, the perpetrators remained unidentified. He questioned the government's effectiveness in tracking down those responsible for killing what he described as the husbands of 26 women, criticizing the administration's handling of the security situation in Kashmir as potentially harmful to national interests. The controversy also drew commentary from outside the Congress-BJP divide, with Shiv Sena (UBT) Member of Parliament Priyanka Chaturvedi offering criticism of Chidambaram's position. Drawing on his extensive experience as a former Home Minister and cabinet member in multiple portfolios, she argued that his comments were inappropriate given the well-established pattern of Pakistani involvement in similar attacks over several decades. Chaturvedi referenced the initial claim of responsibility by The Resistance Front (TRF), which was subsequently withdrawn, and noted Pakistan's advocacy for such groups in international forums like the United Nations as clear evidence of the source of terrorist threats facing India. She maintained that the origins of such attacks should be obvious given historical patterns and Pakistan's documented support for militant organizations operating in the region. The debate reflects broader tensions over how political parties approach discussions of national security and terrorism, with opposition parties seeking to hold the government accountable for security failures while governing parties demand unity in facing external threats. The controversy also highlights the challenges of maintaining productive political discourse on sensitive security matters without compromising either democratic debate or national solidarity in confronting terrorism. As the political storm continues, both sides appear entrenched in their positions, with Congress defending its right to question government claims and demand accountability, while the BJP maintains that such questioning undermines national security and provides comfort to hostile foreign actors. The resolution of this controversy may depend on whether new evidence emerges regarding the Pahalgam attack or whether political attention shifts to other pressing national issues.
