Latest news with #DanielPearl
Indian Express
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Sachin Pilot writes: The world must see Pahalgam
There is no dearth of evidence regarding Pakistan's homegrown terrorism. It organised the IC-814 hijacking, sheltered the terrorists responsible for the 26/11 Mumbai attacks, provided a safe haven for the world's most wanted terrorist, Osama bin Laden, less than a mile from its military academy, and housed the killers of Daniel Pearl. The Pakistani Defence Minister recently acknowledged the country's history of training and funding terrorist organisations, while a PAF Air Vice Marshal allegedly admitted to orchestrating the 2019 Pulwama attacks, claiming it was a display of Pakistan's 'tactical brilliance.' Operation Sindoor was a precise, retaliatory, and proportionate response to Pakistan's history of terrorism and, more specifically, to the brutal killings of tourists in Pahalgam. The Indian Armed Forces not only destroyed terrorist bases but, following Pakistan's escalation, struck military targets, successfully dismantling its air defence and radar stations. However, the decision for a ceasefire came about in the most surprising manner. The US President first announced it through his official social media handle, followed by similar disclosures made by the Secretary of State. Later, they made unnecessary and unwarranted references to Kashmir, offering mediation at a neutral site. Moreover, they avoided calling out Pakistan for its state-sponsored terrorism. On multiple occasions, the US President went on record stating that he had leveraged trade to negotiate the ceasefire — a claim that was not immediately and explicitly denied by our highest political and diplomatic offices. This was contrary to India's long-standing foreign policy understanding that comprised three essentials. First, Kashmir was and will remain a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan, and any internationalisation of this issue is absolutely unacceptable to India. Second, one must not intermingle Pakistan's terrorism and the issue of Kashmir; those are two totally distinct issues, and the global community is morally obliged to call out Pakistan's terror-related practices. Third, there will be no talks on other issues unless cross-border terrorism stops and Pakistan vacates its illegal occupation of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir. Mediation on neutral grounds or dangling trade as a carrot (or stick) is completely unacceptable. Another surprising development has been the global community's missed opportunity to single out and denounce Pakistan's role in nurturing, funding, and supporting terrorism. Till recently, Pakistan was on the Financial Action Task Force's (FATF) grey list: Jurisdiction under increased monitoring. However, during the ongoing conflict, the IMF provided another $1-billion bailout to Pakistan. Immediately after that, Pakistan offered comprehensive support and compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased terrorists, further strengthening the terrorist infrastructure. This alone justifies reinstating Pakistan in the grey or black list of the FATF as a country with 'significant strategic deficiencies' in combating terror financing. The global community cannot remain apathetic to Pakistan's proclivity to use funds to finance terror operations. For its own security, it needs to keep a check on the grant of resources to Pakistan. A mere rehashing of calls for peace, dialogue, and de-escalation directed at both countries insinuates a false equivalence between them. India is the world's fifth-largest economy (its GDP is 10 times that of Pakistan) and will soon become the third-largest. Pakistan's crumbling economy and dependence on charitable donations render any comparison meaningless. India is a mature republic with deep democratic roots. It is an open secret that Pakistan is run by its military and intelligence establishment. This was further established during the recent conflict when the US Secretary of State called up the Pakistani Army Chief, knowing full well that a call with Pakistan's civilian government would yield little. India wants regional peace to pursue its development goals. Pakistan wants regional disturbance as it helps its military-intelligence apparatus remain in power by falsely over-indexing the country's threat perception of India. India would like to pursue the path of peace and prosperity. We aim to have rapid and equitable growth for all of our 1.4 billion citizens. Hence, the global community's hyphenation and reiteration of an 'Indo-Pak' lens to the conflict should cease immediately. The only focus of the global community should be on Pakistan's genuine efforts to halt its support for terrorism. The Pakistan-China nexus is a problem that complicates India's geopolitical position on two fronts. It is worsened by recent developments in Bangladesh, Nepal, and Sri Lanka. Bangladesh reportedly permitted China to revive an airbase that jeopardises India's security in the Northeast region along the Chicken's Neck corridor. India's foreign policy and national security decision-makers must carefully monitor these developments and take steps to ensure that these pressures can be kept in check. We must redouble our efforts to engage with our global partners and allies to mitigate the risks developing around India's multiple fronts. As of today, Operation Sindoor continues with its stated objective of dismantling terrorist infrastructure through military intervention and non-kinetic efforts. India needs to ensure that key stakeholders — multilateral bodies such as the UN and IMF, and significant economic and military powers, especially the P5 — are sufficiently sensitised to Pakistan's role in plotting, planning, funding, and harbouring terrorists to infiltrate Indian territory. If the menace is not controlled today, it will undoubtedly become a global problem with catastrophic consequences. The writer is the MLA for Tonk, Rajasthan
Asia Times
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Asia Times
Operation Sindoor showed India's strategic restraint
In the wake of Operation Sindoor – launched by India in response to a deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam – Pakistan has disseminated narratives of strategic triumph, portraying India's calculated and limited response as indicative of strategic weakness. Such a characterization, however, fundamentally disregards the measured and deliberate nature of India's operation, which was grounded in a doctrine of proportional response and strategic restraint. It further overlooks India's overwhelming military superiority and the structural vulnerabilities endemic to Pakistan's internal political, economic, and military architecture – factors that severely constrain Islamabad's capacity to wage and sustain a full-scale conflict. The deliberate mischaracterization of India's restraint as impotence serves neither the people of Pakistan nor its military establishment and economy in the long run. On April 22, 2025, India experienced a devastating terrorist attack in Baisaran Valley near Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, in which 26 civilians, including foreign tourists, were killed. In response, India initiated Operation Sindoor on May 7, 2025 – a precision military campaign directed at terrorist infrastructure and associated assets located in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir. Despite the operational efficacy of India's response, Pakistan swiftly declared a strategic victory, citing minimal damage and retaliatory actions allegedly taken against Indian Air Force assets. Such proclamations, however, fail to account for the conscious and strategic restraint exercised by India. Operation Sindoor was not conceived of as a full-spectrum military engagement but rather as a tactical operation intended to deliver a targeted and unequivocal message. Utilizing advanced airpower and missile technologies, Indian forces executed precision strikes targeting terrorist launchpads and logistical nodes. Verified open-source intelligence and satellite reconnaissance corroborate the neutralization of critical terrorist support infrastructure. According to media reports, among the key achievements of the operation was the confirmed elimination of Abdul Rauf Azhar, the mastermind behind the abduction and beheading of Wall Street Journal correspondent Daniel Pearl in 2002 along with scores of other terrorists. Abdul Rauf Azhar was reportedly operating from a fortified location within Pakistan-administered territory and had reestablished active links with multiple transnational extremist networks. His death, alongside the neutralization of scores of other high-value terrorist operatives, underscores the depth of India's intelligence penetration and its ability to deliver justice across borders. This strike was not merely symbolic; it represented India's unwavering resolve to dismantle the ecosystem of impunity that has allowed transnational terrorism to thrive. The operation fits squarely within India's long-standing doctrine of 'active but restrained' military engagement – an approach that seeks to diminish non-state militant capacities without destabilizing the broader regional order. This strategic calculus reflects not only India's military capabilities but also its broader commitment to responsible international behavior. India's restrained approach in Operation Sindoor should not be misinterpreted as an indicator of strategic limitation or military deficiency. Rather, it is a reflection of deliberate doctrinal planning and mature strategic thought. India possesses one of the most powerful military establishments globally, equipped to address a wide spectrum of conventional and unconventional threats. As of 2025, India's armed forces comprise over 1.45 million active personnel, ranking it second globally in terms of troop strength. The country's defense budget for fiscal year 2024–25 stood at approximately US$81 billion – eight times larger than Pakistan's allocation of around $10 billion. This financial advantage has enabled India to undertake significant modernization initiatives, investing in technological innovation, force restructuring, and multi-domain capabilities. The Indian Air Force (IAF) operates a fleet exceeding 2,200 combat and support aircraft, including advanced platforms such as the Su-30MKI, Rafale, and Tejas. During Operation Sindoor, the IAF's effectiveness was further underscored by its use of loitering munitions and long-range drones that executed precise strikes on key Pakistani targets – including airbases at Noor Khan and Rahimyar Khan – while evading and jamming Chinese-supplied air defense systems. The mission was completed in just 23 minutes, demonstrating India's operational and technological superiority. India's air defense capabilities also include a mix of legacy and modern indigenous systems, such as the Pechora, OSA-AK, LLAD guns and the Akash short-range surface-to-air missile system. Integrated with the Indian Air Force's IACCS (Integrated Air Command and Control System), these platforms formed a multi-tiered shield that effectively neutralized multiple retaliatory attempts by Pakistan on military installations across northern and western India. India's ability to detect and eliminate advanced foreign-supplied threats – including PL-15 missiles and Turkish-origin UAVs – highlighted the strength of its indigenously developed electronic warfare and counter-UAS systems. On land, the Indian Army commands over 4,200 main battle tanks and a formidable complement of mechanized infantry and artillery units. The use of advanced systems –such as the ATAGS (Advanced Towed Artillery Gun System), the Dhanush artillery platform, and the indigenously built Arjun MBT – exemplifies the modernization drive under the 'Make in India' initiative. These technologies played a critical role in layered ground-based air defense and strategic deterrence throughout Operation Sindoor. The Indian Navy, for its part, has made considerable strides in becoming a blue-water force, with 12 destroyers, 17 frigates, and two fully operational aircraft carriers – the INS Vikramaditya and the domestically constructed INS Vikrant – providing credible maritime dominance in the Indian Ocean Region. Complementing these assets are indigenous naval platforms including frigates, corvettes, and submarines, which contribute to a robust maritime security posture. India's strategic deterrence is further bolstered by its nuclear triad, composed of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and air-delivered nuclear weapons. With the development of MIRV-capable systems such as Agni-V, India has firmly established itself among the world's elite nuclear-capable states. These capabilities afford New Delhi significant deterrent power and strategic flexibility. Moreover, India's strategic posture has evolved to encompass new domains of conflict, including space and cyber operations. The creation of the Defense Space Agency and the Defense Cyber Agency marks a proactive shift in Indian military doctrine, ensuring preparedness across emerging and hybrid warfare theatres. India's space-based capabilities, particularly through ISRO, were evident in Operation Sindoor, where at least ten satellites continuously monitored India's 7,000 km coastline and northern borders, providing critical situational awareness and command synchronization. The drone warfare domain has also witnessed a transformative evolution. India's drone industry, supported by the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme and a ban on imported drones, has matured rapidly. Entities like the Drone Federation of India now represent over 550 companies and 5,500 pilots. Indigenous UAVs and suicide drones, such as those developed by Alpha Design Technologies, Tata Advanced Systems, and IG Drones, were central to the success of Operation Sindoor, making India's UAV capabilities both strategic and scalable. Viewed through this lens, Operation Sindoor must be interpreted not as a manifestation of weakness but as an intentional display of disciplined power projection. The limited nature of the operation was designed to assert deterrence, reestablish red lines, and prevent destabilization in an already volatile region. The doctrine of strategic restraint pursued by India in this instance is an articulation of state responsibility – not a failure of will. Despite possessing unmatched coercive capabilities, India remains steadfast in its commitment to non-violence and peaceful coexistence, in line with the Gandhian ideals that underpin its national identity. The use of force, for India, remains a last resort – invoked only when national security and civilian safety are gravely threatened. India's historical responses to terrorism further support this pattern of calibrated and judicious conduct. From the 1993 Mumbai bombings and the 2001 Parliament attack to the 2008 Mumbai siege and the 2019 Pulwama incident, India has consistently chosen precision over escalation, and legality over unilateralism. In every instance, it has pursued a path that balances deterrence with diplomacy. Pakistan's strategic posture, in contrast, is deeply undermined by its persistent internal vulnerabilities – ranging from economic fragility and political instability to deteriorating domestic security conditions. Despite its public declarations of preparedness, Pakistan lacks the institutional, fiscal, and social resilience to sustain a protracted conventional war with India. According to projections by the International Monetary Fund, Pakistan's GDP growth in 2025 is expected to remain subdued at approximately 2.6%, with inflation averaging 6.0%. Public debt has surpassed 73% of GDP, and the country's external debt obligations now exceed USD 130 billion – indicating a severe limitation on Islamabad's fiscal capacity to finance large-scale military operations. Politically, Pakistan remains in turmoil. The 2024 general elections were fraught with allegations of rigging, authoritarianism, and interference by the military establishment – undermining democratic legitimacy and fragmenting national consensus. The civilian leadership remains in conflict with the military, further eroding institutional cohesion at a time when unity is critical for national defense. Domestically, Pakistan faces intensifying threats from various insurgent and extremist groups. The resurgence of the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), along with escalating sectarian violence and an active Baloch separatist insurgency, has claimed over 300 lives among security personnel in the past year alone. These internal security challenges place enormous strain on Pakistan's military and intelligence apparatus, reducing its operational bandwidth to respond to external threats effectively. Beyond domestic turmoil, Pakistan's military readiness for sustained conflict is deeply questionable. While it fields a sizable military force, independent assessments have raised concerns about munitions shortages, maintenance issues, and outdated command structures. Reports suggest that Pakistan lacks the capacity to engage in prolonged high-intensity warfare without external assistance – a fact that further highlights the asymmetry in military preparedness between the two nations. Furthermore, political dysfunction impedes effective strategic planning. The absence of a unified political vision and frequent civil-military friction prevent the formation of coherent long-term defense strategies. In this context, Pakistan's capacity to respond meaningfully to a calibrated Indian military campaign remains severely constrained. Pakistan's growing strategic alignment with China, particularly in the context of the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), has introduced additional complexities. While CPEC promises investment worth over USD 62 billion, it has also generated concerns over debt dependence, sovereignty dilution, and localized resistance, particularly in Balochistan. Military cooperation with China, including joint exercises and arms transfers, has increased Islamabad's tactical capabilities. However, this dependency comes at the cost of strategic autonomy. The deepening asymmetry in the Sino-Pak relationship risks transforming Pakistan into a subordinate geopolitical appendage of Beijing, vulnerable to political coercion and economic exploitation. Domestic unrest over Chinese-funded infrastructure projects, especially among marginalized ethnic groups, reflects broader societal unease with this strategic entanglement. These dynamics raise serious questions about the long-term viability of Pakistan's current external alignments and their implications for national sovereignty. The temporary cessation of hostilities after Operation Sindoor should not be mistaken as a concession by India. Rather, it was a conditional and humanitarian decision. Indian officials made it unequivocally clear that the continuation of peace is contingent upon the cessation of cross-border terrorism. India retains both the legal justification and operational readiness to resume hostilities should Pakistan fail to comply. Claims of intercepting certain Indian missiles or downing a few aircraft – largely unsubstantiated when assessed against satellite imagery and independent verification – hold little significance in the broader strategic calculus. In strategic terms, victory is not determined by a handful of tactical successes but by the capacity to shape outcomes, sustain escalation dominance and reinforce deterrence. Operation Sindoor accomplished its core objectives: delivering a clear message, degrading militant capabilities and reaffirming India's regional primacy without triggering widespread destabilization. India's conduct during and after the operation reflects a profound maturity of strategic thinking. It embodies a responsible power's refusal to be baited into uncontrolled conflict while defending its citizens and sovereignty with resolve and precision. In contrast, Pakistan must undertake an urgent recalibration of its national priorities. It has to abandon adventurist policies, address its internal fragmentation and pursue meaningful reforms to ensure both domestic economic and political stability and regional peace. The future of South Asia's strategic stability will depend not on bellicose rhetoric, but on rational policy, mutual respect, and an unwavering commitment to coexistence. India has demonstrated its commitment. The onus now lies with Pakistan to reciprocate with equal seriousness and responsibility.
Indian Express
11-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Tavleen Singh writes: India had no choice
War is always ugly and painful but this time India had no choice. What happened in Pahalgam was so awful, so calculatedly cruel that if some action had not been taken against the Islamist republic next door every Indian would have been left enraged, ashamed and feeling hopeless. Pakistan's spokespersons and sympathisers have gone to extraordinary lengths to convince the world that India acted without proof that there was Pakistani involvement in the Pahalgam atrocity. They miss the point. There has been ample proof given by India in the past and it has been pointless. Besides, the kind of monsters who can shoot husbands dead before their new brides and fathers in front of their children are those who subscribe to the ideology of Pakistan. It is the sort of ideology that breeds monsters who can behead a journalist like Daniel Pearl simply because he was Jewish. The kind of ideology that can shelter Osama bin Laden for years in a military station and lie about this to the world. What I have found depressing in the past few days is that someone as important as the American President should dismiss what happened as a fight that has gone on 'for decades, maybe centuries'. Donald Trump probably said what he did because the entire Western media has described India's Pahalgam response as just another war over Kashmir. This is because of Pakistani propaganda. General Asim Munir said days before the Pahalgam attack that Kashmir was Pakistan's 'jugular vein'. It is time that Pakistan got over its Kashmir obsession. Kashmir is going nowhere, and most sensible Pakistanis know this. The war that India has been forced into this time is a war against jihadi terrorism. It is not at all about Kashmir. Pakistan needs to get used to living without its 'jugular vein' and stop bringing up generations of schoolchildren on the mythical possibility that Kashmir will one day become part of their country. Those who subscribe to the 'Akhand Bharat' myth privately admit that it is not going to be 'akhand' again. And Punjabis like me learned long ago to accept that the homes our parents left behind on the other side of the border are gone for good. It is tiresome to hear supposedly educated and intelligent Pakistanis bang on about how there will be peace with India as soon as there is a 'solution' to the Kashmir problem. They know that their real problem with India is that it has moved so far ahead economically that Pakistan can no longer compete. There was a time not that long ago when Pakistan was ahead of us in many ways. Karachi had a modern airport long before Delhi and Mumbai and there was an access-controlled highway from Lahore to Islamabad long before any existed in India. This is because we were paralysed by socialist economic policies that kept us poor and backward. So, it did seem as if the one country in the world created in the name of Allah was correct to believe that Islam was the reason for its prosperity. The sad truth is that it was not. And the only way to keep ordinary Pakistanis engaged with Pakistan's reason for being was to resort to breeding jihadist terrorists whose purpose was to harm India economically. Let us remember that the attack on Mumbai had everything to do with crippling our commercial capital and almost nothing to do with Kashmir. It was after that attack that distances between India and Pakistan really grew and became increasingly difficult to cross. But it was Indian prime ministers who continued to try and lessen these distances and the response from Pakistani's military rulers was always to reject their overtures. It is hard to say what will happen next. I write this at a time when there have been attempts by Pakistan to attack fifteen of our cities and when they claim to have brought down five Indian fighter jets so it is safe to say that the war will last longer than we thought. It is also hard to say whether the destruction of the headquarters of jihadi terrorists like Hafiz Saeed and Maulana Masood Azhar will send a clear message to Pakistan's military rulers. The fog of war is now thick and impenetrable. Once it lifts, there needs to be a serious effort on India's part to convince the leaders of the world that we are no longer 'fighting over Kashmir'. We are fighting the same war that is being fought in other countries which is a war against jihadi terrorism. India has been a victim of this barbarous, cowardly violence for longer than most other countries, but we have somehow not been able to convince the world that this is not about Kashmir. It is time for the leaders of the world to believe us and stop believing Pakistani propaganda. It is also time for Pakistan's 'bonsai democracy' to grow some deeper roots. Allah seems not to like military men putting popular leaders in prison or executing them even if, as with General Asim Munir, they have learned the Quran by heart. Pakistan's military rulers often talk of India as an 'existential threat' without noticing that it is they who are the existential threat. But these are things for later. For now, we need to see what is likely to happen when the fog of war lifts.
Hindustan Times
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Daniel Pearl's father blasts Pakistan Army for attending funeral of terrorists linked to son's murder
The Indian Armed Forces carried out a precision military operation on Tuesday targeting nine terrorist installations across Pakistan and Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir (PoK). The strikes included hits on the headquarters of Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) in Bahawalpur and a Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) base in Muridke, Pakistan. Following the strikes, a photo surfaced on social media showing uniformed Pakistan Army personnel attending the funeral of three terrorists killed in the strikes. Standing alongside them was Hafiz Abdul Rauf, a US-designated global terrorist. The photo drew criticism from Judea Pearl, father of slain American journalist Daniel Pearl, who was kidnapped and murdered in Pakistan in 2002. Pearl expressed his outrage on X, writing, 'I wish these dignitaries could tell us: What exactly are you mourning? What role models you wish your children to revere? What have you learned from this man?' Abdul Rauf Azhar, the brother of JeM chief Masood Azhar, was reportedly among those killed in the missile strike on Bahawalpur. He died along with nine members of his family. Rauf Azhar's death has rekindled international focus on the Daniel Pearl case. Pearl, a journalist with The Wall Street Journal, was kidnapped and later beheaded in Karachi in 2002 by al-Qaeda operative Omar Saeed Sheikh. Judea Pearl reacted to Rauf Azhar's killing, writing on X, 'Azhar was a Pakistani extremist and leader of the terrorist organization Jaish-e-Mohammed. While his group was not directly involved in the plot to abduct Danny, it was indirectly responsible. Azhar orchestrated the hijacking that led to the release of Omar Sheikh—the man who lured Danny into captivity. Sheikh was later sentenced to death but ultimately released from prison and kept in a 'Government Safe House.'' Also Read: G7 condemns Pahalgam attack, reacts to India-Pakistan conflict: 'Express our support for…' At a press briefing, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri addressed the strikes and their connection to the Pearl case. 'Bahawalpur is the headquarters of the Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorist group that is proscribed by the UN. Its leader Masood Azhar is a proscribed individual,' Misri said. 'The JeM was in some way directly or indirectly responsible for the death of Daniel Pearl.'
Time of India
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
Operation Sindoor: Slain journalist Daniel Pearl's father sings Israel national anthem on learning son's killers eliminated
Daniel Pearl's father reacts to the news of his son's killers neutralised. Judea Pearl , the father of slain Wall Street Journal journalist Daniel Pearl , sang the Israeli national anthem after finding out about the elimination of Pakistani Jaish-e-Mohammed commander Abdul Rauf Asghar, who was indirectly involved in his son's murder. The JeM leader was reportedly killed by Indian strikes under 'Operation Sindoor' on Wednesday. "Justice for Daniel Pearl. Operation Sindoor India's air defence systems shoot down Pak drones in J&K, Punjab & Rajasthan India-Pakistan tensions: Delhi airport issues travel advisory Operation Sindoor: Multiple explosions heard at several Pakistan air bases His father, Yuda Pearl, sings Israel's national anthem Hatikvah — 'The Hope'—after learning India avenged his son's murder. A moment of pain, pride, and justice," Jerusalam post columnist Zina Rakhamilova posted the video on X. Judea also questioned Pakistan's leadership over why dignitaries and army officers attended funerals of terrorists killed in strikes. Sharing details about Rauf's role in Daniel's killing wrote on X, Judea said, "His group wasn't directly involved in Daniel's abduction but was indirectly responsible, as his (Rauf's) actions led to Omar Sheikh's release from prison during the Kandahar hijack. Sheikh, later sentenced to death, lured Daniel into captivity." Sheikh was later released from prison and kept in a 'govt safe house,' he added. Judea said that two key figures in his son's murder remain unpunished - Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who planned the 9/11 attacks, and Omar Sheikh. "I hope this incident will help refocus attention on two other criminals directly involved in Danny's murder," he said, continuing his quest for justice. Daniel was kidnapped by terrorists in January 2002 in Karachi, Pakistan. He was en route to what he believed would be an interview with Pakistani religious cleric Mubarak Ali Gilani. Pearl questioned Pakistan's claim of taking action against his son's killers, dismissing it as eyewash. He also challenged Pakistani leaders about what they were mourning at the terrorists' funerals and what role models they wanted their children to follow.
