Latest news with #OperationParakram
Economic Times
a day ago
- Business
- Economic Times
Geopolitics vs portfolio: Why Sensex doesn't get scared easily
Looking Back at Market Behaviour During Conflicts Live Events Why Markets Don't Stay Spooked for Long So, What Should You Do as an Investor? Final Thoughts (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel When geopolitical tensions rise between India and Pakistan, it's natural for investors to feel a wave of anxiety. After all, war-like headlines don't just impact national morale — they rattle the markets too. The recent flare-up between the two nations is no different. Media coverage has been intense, emotions are high, and many investors are left wondering: Should I pull out my money? Will the Sensex crash?But before you rush into any decision, take a moment to zoom out. What does history say about the Indian stock market 's response to these cross-border escalations? Surprisingly, it tells a story of resilience and even understand this better, let's look at how the Sensex has performed during some of the major India-Pakistan confrontations over the past few decades. These include both military actions and terror attacks that led to significant national and global the Kargil War in 1999. Despite being a high-stakes, prolonged conflict, the Sensex rose by a remarkable 36.9% during that period. One year from the start of the war, it was still up by 28.3%. Fast forward to 2008, after the horrific Mumbai terror attacks that killed over 160 people, the market initially dipped by around 2.1%, but within a year, it had bounced back with an impressive 86.7% return. Even recent events like the Pulwama attack and Balakot airstrikes in 2019 saw the market hold steady, posting a modest gain of 0.5% during the crisis and 15% over the next the other hand, events like Operation Parakram (post-Parliament attack in 2001) did trigger a larger dip of -12.7% in the short term. But again, if you had simply held on, the Sensex would've rewarded your patience with a 31.2% gain over the next five years. Short-term jolts? Yes. Long-term derailments? pattern reveals a deeper truth: Indian equity markets are remarkably adept at absorbing geopolitical shocks. Often, the market's reaction is sharp but short-lived. Investors quickly pivot back to fundamentals, and the larger economic momentum tends to explains this resilience? It's partly psychological and partly structural. While geopolitical crises dominate headlines, equity markets are forward-looking. They price in not just fear, but also fundamentals like earnings, growth outlook, and Indian stock market has historically demonstrated a strong ability to 'look through' temporary uncertainty. The events may be tragic and disruptive, but markets often distinguish between political noise and long-term economic potential. This is especially true in a country like India, where domestic consumption, infrastructure development, and corporate earnings tend to recover when there was a dip, such as the -1.6% drop following the 2016 surgical strikes, the market quickly recovered. The muted response during the Pulwama-Balakot standoff in 2019 further underlined how seasoned investors have learnt not to panic with every geopolitical the threat of war intensifies, the urge to take action can be overwhelming. However, successful investing is less about reacting to headlines and more about following a plan. Here are four timeless principles to keep in mind:First, focus on what you can control. You cannot predict when tensions will escalate or cool down. You cannot forecast oil prices, global sanctions, or international diplomacy. But you can control your asset allocation, your time horizon, and your ability to stay calm. If your goals and risk appetite are aligned, there's no reason to change revisit your portfolio, but don't overhaul it. If the volatility is making you nervous, check whether your equity-debt mix suits your current risk tolerance. Sometimes, a small rebalance can restore your peace of mind. But resist the urge to exit completely. Selling in panic almost always does more harm than keep investing systematically. SIPS are designed to thrive in volatile markets. When prices fall, your SIP buys more units, bringing down your average cost and positioning you for higher returns when markets rebound. Don't pause your SIP during a dip. That's like walking out of the gym the moment the workout gets avoid a short-term mindset. If your goal is less than 2–3 years away, equity might not be the right vehicle anyway. However, for long-term objectives such as retirement, financial freedom, or wealth creation, geopolitical events, including wars, serve as mere obstacles on a significantly longer all major India-Pakistan confrontations, the pattern is clear: markets may wobble, but they don't collapse. They recover, grow, and reward the fear is real. But so is the data. And the data says: don't sell in panic. If the companies you've invested in are fundamentally strong, and your financial plan is sound, then war headlines shouldn't dictate your next investment take a deep breath. Stay focused. And let time, not fear, shape your returns.(The author is Cofounder & Executive Director, Prime Wealth Finserv): Recommendations, suggestions, views, and opinions given by experts are their own. These do not represent the views of the Economic Times)
Time of India
a day ago
- Business
- Time of India
Geopolitics vs portfolio: Why Sensex doesn't get scared easily
Looking Back at Market Behaviour During Conflicts Live Events Why Markets Don't Stay Spooked for Long So, What Should You Do as an Investor? Final Thoughts (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our ETMarkets WhatsApp channel When geopolitical tensions rise between India and Pakistan, it's natural for investors to feel a wave of anxiety. After all, war-like headlines don't just impact national morale — they rattle the markets too. The recent flare-up between the two nations is no different. Media coverage has been intense, emotions are high, and many investors are left wondering: Should I pull out my money? Will the Sensex crash?But before you rush into any decision, take a moment to zoom out. What does history say about the Indian stock market 's response to these cross-border escalations? Surprisingly, it tells a story of resilience and even understand this better, let's look at how the Sensex has performed during some of the major India-Pakistan confrontations over the past few decades. These include both military actions and terror attacks that led to significant national and global the Kargil War in 1999. Despite being a high-stakes, prolonged conflict, the Sensex rose by a remarkable 36.9% during that period. One year from the start of the war, it was still up by 28.3%. Fast forward to 2008, after the horrific Mumbai terror attacks that killed over 160 people, the market initially dipped by around 2.1%, but within a year, it had bounced back with an impressive 86.7% return. Even recent events like the Pulwama attack and Balakot airstrikes in 2019 saw the market hold steady, posting a modest gain of 0.5% during the crisis and 15% over the next the other hand, events like Operation Parakram (post-Parliament attack in 2001) did trigger a larger dip of -12.7% in the short term. But again, if you had simply held on, the Sensex would've rewarded your patience with a 31.2% gain over the next five years. Short-term jolts? Yes. Long-term derailments? pattern reveals a deeper truth: Indian equity markets are remarkably adept at absorbing geopolitical shocks. Often, the market's reaction is sharp but short-lived. Investors quickly pivot back to fundamentals, and the larger economic momentum tends to explains this resilience? It's partly psychological and partly structural. While geopolitical crises dominate headlines, equity markets are forward-looking. They price in not just fear, but also fundamentals like earnings, growth outlook, and Indian stock market has historically demonstrated a strong ability to 'look through' temporary uncertainty. The events may be tragic and disruptive, but markets often distinguish between political noise and long-term economic potential. This is especially true in a country like India, where domestic consumption, infrastructure development, and corporate earnings tend to recover when there was a dip, such as the -1.6% drop following the 2016 surgical strikes, the market quickly recovered. The muted response during the Pulwama-Balakot standoff in 2019 further underlined how seasoned investors have learnt not to panic with every geopolitical the threat of war intensifies, the urge to take action can be overwhelming. However, successful investing is less about reacting to headlines and more about following a plan. Here are four timeless principles to keep in mind:First, focus on what you can control. You cannot predict when tensions will escalate or cool down. You cannot forecast oil prices, global sanctions, or international diplomacy. But you can control your asset allocation, your time horizon, and your ability to stay calm. If your goals and risk appetite are aligned, there's no reason to change revisit your portfolio, but don't overhaul it. If the volatility is making you nervous, check whether your equity-debt mix suits your current risk tolerance. Sometimes, a small rebalance can restore your peace of mind. But resist the urge to exit completely. Selling in panic almost always does more harm than keep investing systematically. SIPS are designed to thrive in volatile markets. When prices fall, your SIP buys more units, bringing down your average cost and positioning you for higher returns when markets rebound. Don't pause your SIP during a dip. That's like walking out of the gym the moment the workout gets avoid a short-term mindset. If your goal is less than 2–3 years away, equity might not be the right vehicle anyway. However, for long-term objectives such as retirement, financial freedom, or wealth creation, geopolitical events, including wars, serve as mere obstacles on a significantly longer all major India-Pakistan confrontations, the pattern is clear: markets may wobble, but they don't collapse. They recover, grow, and reward the fear is real. But so is the data. And the data says: don't sell in panic. If the companies you've invested in are fundamentally strong, and your financial plan is sound, then war headlines shouldn't dictate your next investment take a deep breath. Stay focused. And let time, not fear, shape your returns.(The author is Cofounder & Executive Director, Prime Wealth Finserv): Recommendations, suggestions, views, and opinions given by experts are their own. These do not represent the views of the Economic Times)
The Print
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Print
Manish Tewari on Congress's Narender Surrender jibe—‘nature of politics, back-channel talks nothing new'
'So whenever there is a crisis, and if that crisis is between two nuclear weapon states, obviously, the rest of the world does not or cannot ignore it. So there are active conversations which take place in the back channel,' Tewari said Thursday, pointing out that under US President Donald Trump, such talks have been foregrounded. In an interview to ThePrint, Tewari said the Congress leadership's position that the Modi government bowed to the US pressure could be an outcome of the 'bitterly contested' nature of the Indian politics where 'nobody is prepared to give any quarter'. The Chandigarh MP travelled to Egypt, Qatar, Ethiopia and South Africa as a member of the delegation headed by NCP (SP) MP Supriya Sule. New Delhi: Former Union minister Manish Tewari, who travelled as part of an Operation Sindoor multi-party delegation, has downplayed the Congress party leadership's claim that the US President forced India to 'surrender' during May's four-day military conflict with Pakistan, saying back-channel conversations during such tense events were nothing new. 'It has been going on since 1990 as I documented with the Robert Gates mission when Pakistan started flashing the N (nuclear) word even eight years before its nuclear test in response to some fantasized Indian buildup in the western deserts, to Operation Parakram in 2001, to the Mumbai terror outrage in 2008, to Uri to Pulwama, and to Pahalgam and its aftermath. The only difference is while earlier back channeling was a quiet process, but now you have an incumbent in the White House who believes that back channeling is front channeling,' Tewari said. His remarks assume significance against the backdrop of Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's 'Narender Surrender' jibes, suggesting that Prime Minister Narendra Modi gave in to US pressure to call off the military operation against Pakistan on 10 May. Gandhi reiterated his allegation Friday while addressing a rally in Bihar. Tewari, who is also a lawyer, suggested that Trump's claims that his administration played the role of a mediator was likely to be a stretch as that was a completely different format altogether. In contrast, the UN's attempt to resolve the Kashmir dispute in 1948 at the insistence of New Delhi was an attempt at mediation, Tewari said. 'Mediation has a more structured connotation to it, but, fortunately or unfortunately these terms keep getting used alternatively. And therefore it leads to a certain sense of ambiguity. But as I was earlier pointing out that when we took the dispute to the United Nations in 1948, the Jammu and Kashmir question at that point in time in pursuance of the UN resolution, there was the UN group on India and Pakistan on Kashmir. 'There was an attempt at a structured mediation. You see, a mediation or an arbitration or an alternative dispute resolution is when two parties agree to the terms of reference of a dispute, which then they allow an arbitrator or a mediator to try and adjudicate,' said Tewari. Asked about the Congress's official position, Tewari said it could be the reflection of a 'bitterly contested political space' where 'nobody is prepared to give any quarter' to the other side. 'In fact, even when the delegation was traveling, the kind of rhetoric which was being articulated by certain sections of the NDA/BJP establishment, was also something which was completely avoidable. But that unfortunately is the nature of our politics, whether you like it or not,' said Tewari, serving his third term as a Lok Sabha MP. However, Tewari added, there needs to be consensus on the fact that Pakistan has been a chronic sponsor of low-intensity conflict which needs to be exposed in the court of global opinion, 'as against whatever may be your internal dynamics or the questions that you may have surrounding the events of 7th 8th of May, the night of 7th, 8th of May till the 10th of May.' 'I, for one, understand and appreciate that distinction, and that's why we were completely focused on exposing Pakistan and trying to tell our interlocutors that this is not only a threat to the stability of South Asia, this is a threat to the stability of the world, given the very nature and the the chronic disposition of that state to use violence as a means of trying to achieve its senses,' he said. Responding to a question on the Congress leadership being upset over the Centre picking leaders like him, Shashi Tharoor, Salman Khurshid for the delegations instead of the names suggested by Gandhi and party chief Mallikarjun Kharge, Tewari said such things do not bother him. 'Honestly, we have been in this contested, politically acerbic, bitter space for 25 years. And there is a larger national interest, which is at play, and that larger national interest is proscribing Pakistan, which uses terror as an instrument of state policy. And to me, that was the objective. And the rest of it, for someone who has been a card-carrying member of this noise for the last two-and-a-half decades, it's really no skin off my back,' he said. (Edited by Tony Rai) Also Read: Ex-Congress minister who worked with Indira, Narasimha Rao, heads to RSS HQ to 'bridge Sangh-tribals gap'
India Gazette
5 days ago
- General
- India Gazette
"We will make rough assessment": CDS Anil Chauhan on losses incurred by India during Operation Sindoor
Pune (Maharashtra) [India], June 3 (ANI): Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General Anil Chauhan on Tuesday said that the armed forces would evaluate the data concerning the strikes' results based on technical parameters and come out with a rough assessment shortly informing about the aircraft and radars destroyed by India during Operation Sindoor. 'Since there's always this inquisitivity as to the result of strikes, which was visible more in the psychological domain, to all of us and everyone globally. We will take out this particular data based on technical parameters and share it with you. We will tell you how many aircraft we destroyed and how many radars we destroyed. We'll make a rough assessment and come out with that shortly,' CDS Chauhan said while delivering a special lecture on 'Future Wars and Warfare' at Savitribai Phule University. When asked about the losses incurred by the Pakistani side, he discussed people's inquisitiveness about them and asserted that it was not important to discuss losses since the crucial aspects that need to be considered are the results yielded and the actions taken during the conflict. 'When I was asked about losses on our side, I said these are not important. The results and how you act are important. It would not be very correct to talk about you go in a cricket test match, and you win by an innings defeat, there's no question of how many wickets, how many balls and how many players,' CDS Chauhan added. He further revealed that Pakistani army chief General Asim Munir made communal statements against India and Hindus in a speech that was given weeks before the Pahalgam terrorist attack. 'Venom was spewed by General Asim Munir against India and Hindus in a speech, weeks before what happened in and blood cannot flow have raised the bar by connecting terror to water and drawing new lines for military operations,' the CDS said. General Chauhan added that Operation Sindoor created history in air warfare because India was able to penetrate the adversary's air defence networks. He said that there was a need to keep the guard up, given that Operation Sindoor was not over and the agreement for cessation of hostilities between India and Pakistan was only temporary. 'Operation Sindoor created history as far as air warfare is concerned. Successful operations were carried out against an you are able to carry out relentless operations deep inside with precision and offensive intent. It was a big achievement, and we were able to penetrate those air defence networks,' he said. 'Operation Sindoor is not over as yet. It continues. It's a temporary cessation of hostilities. There is a need to keep our guard up,' he added. Talking about India's intentions not to engage in a long-drawn conflict, CDS Chauhan recalled Operation Parakram, which was launched against Pakistan in response to the 2001 Parliament attacks, which incurred huge expenses since the security personnel were deployed for about nine months. 'From our side, we didn't want to get into a long-drawn conflict. We've seen our experience in Operation Parakram. We were there for almost nine months. It involves a lot of expenditure and disrupts everything. We had seen this to some extent after Balakot; there was a deployment, which we mobilised. In this particular case, what happened was that before this mobilisation could be completed, the operations were halted,' the CDS said. Making an informed guess, Chauhan said there could be two possibilities about Pakistan's decision to pick up the telephone to discuss halting the conflict, given that they were incurring losses at a long distance, and they would have thought that the losses would increase. 'As far as the Pakistani side is concerned, I can make two guesses. One that they were losing things faster at a very long distance, and they thought that if this continued for some more time, they were likely to lose more, and hence they picked up the telephone,' he added. (ANI)
The Print
28-05-2025
- Politics
- The Print
India has ditched the old, tragic way of dealing with threats. Now it prepares before crisis
In 2001, despite the establishment of the Multi-Agency Centre (MAC) after the Kargil War and the attack on Parliament, intelligence gaps remained. By the time 26/11 happened, the failure to connect the dots—collating and analysing—had become visible. There was no national agency tasked with terror investigation before 26/11. The response was fragmented, with national and state agencies operating in silos. Links between terrorism, narcotics, and finance were rarely explored. The response to Pakistan after 26/11 was diplomatic and verbose, not strategic. After the Parliament attack, India nearly went to war with its neighbour in Operation Parakram, yet gained little deterrence. For years, India's national security response to terror attacks followed a familiar, tragic cycle—condemnation, outrage, and a scramble for action. After the 1993 Mumbai blasts, 2001 Parliament attack, and the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks, India found itself reacting rather than responding. Condemnation was swift, coordination was weak, and response was nil. New laws were passed in haste, but without any coherent strategy. Societal morale was high, but national readiness was low. Harvard professor and crisis management expert Juliette Kayyem often says that preparedness is a 'moving target'—that is, it is constantly evolving. She draws a distinction between the 'left of boom' (before a crisis occurs) and the 'right of boom' (after a crisis has occurred). True preparedness, she argues, is what a nation does before the crisis occurs—how it plans, trains, and builds resilience in the system to reduce the severity of crisis. India has long lived in the shadow of boom. Today, it has stepped firmly into the realm of preparedness. The media too often acted without restraint. During terror strikes, live coverage gave away operational positions. Some journalists played to the gallery, perhaps even against national interest. A quiet revolution in security preparedness A lot has changed over the past few years. India is no longer waiting for the boom. It is preparing before the crisis happens. And when it does, the response is swift, surgical, and strategic. India now has a robust terror jurisprudence. The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) was significantly strengthened in 2019, empowering the government to designate individuals—not just organisations—as terrorists. It also enhanced the powers of the National Investigation Agency (NIA), enabling it to investigate and seize properties linked to terror cases. The NIA, formed after 26/11, has become truly national in its role. As Union Home Minister Amit Shah said during the debate on the new criminal laws in Parliament, terrorism is now clearly defined in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), giving a firm legal foundation to security action. India now operates with a preemptive mindset, ready to neutralise threats before they turn into crises. The 2022 crackdown on the now-banned Popular Front of India (PFI) is one such example. In a single day, locations across the country were raided and more than 100 arrests made. It showed how a coordinated, multi-agency effort could dismantle a pan-India threat. The same integrated approach is being seen in the fight against narco-terrorism and Left Wing Extremism. The missing terror-finance-narcotics link is now a focus area for the NIA. The Multi-Agency Centre itself has been upgraded at a cost of Rs 500 crore. Inaugurated by Amit Shah this month, the new MAC at North Block is designed to be India's internal security grid, unifying intelligence and operations against terrorism, organised crime, and cyber threats. Also read: Lessons for airpower from Operation Sindoor—unified command to tech advancements A new response doctrine India's military response to terrorism has also evolved. After the 2016 Uri attack, India launched surgical strikes across the LoC, targeting terror launchpads. After the Pulwama attack in 2019, it conducted airstrikes across the border in Balakot. In both cases, Pakistan's retaliatory attempts were countered without escalation. But the biggest shift came after the recent Pahalgam attack. India launched wide-ranging airstrikes on nine terror camps in Pakistan. In response to Pakistan's air provocations, India targeted its air force infrastructure—putting real costs on the table. This isn't posturing; this is strategy. As Prime Minister Narendra Modi declared, if there is a terror attack on India, it will respond firmly on its own terms—striking at the roots, rejecting nuclear blackmail, and treating terror masterminds and their state sponsors as one, with Operation Sindoor now India's new normal. From victimhood to resolve Earlier, India was often seen as the complainant in the global court of opinion. Now, it acts first and informs later. It does not wait for mediation. It sets the narrative. During the Kargil War in 1999, India scrambled to import ammunition. In contrast, 88 per cent of the Army's ammunition needs today are met domestically. Moreover, India now manufactures 65 per cent of its defence equipment domestically—a remarkable turnaround from the earlier 65 per cent import dependency, underscoring India's growing self-reliance in defence. The defence ecosystem has expanded—from BrahMos and Pinaka to advanced radars and drone systems. The Akashteer air defence system intercepted every Pakistani missile and drone during Operation Sindoor. The indigenous D4 anti-drone system and Bhargavastra hard-kill drones neutralised the threat of swarm drones, including Turkish ones. Defence-tech firms like BEL, Paras Defence, IdeaForge, and Zen Technologies now power India's preparedness. India's diplomacy too remained firm. Even while responding to terror, the government signed a free trade agreement (FTA) with the UK and PM Modi addressed a global space conference. This is not a business-as-usual mindset. It reflects the maturity of a nation handling multiple challenges at once. The media has also matured. Gone are the days of breathless reporting during an attack. A new generation of tech-savvy journalists understands operational sensitivity. They help decode misinformation during conflict and give citizens factual updates when calm returns. Access journalism has given way to informed, analytical reporting. Also read: Operation Sindoor is a springboard in India's new confidence in Make in India weapons The road ahead India is now in a better place—legally, operationally, and strategically. From reacting with outrage to responding with resolve, the transformation has been slow but steady. Preparedness is never final. It is a moving target. But India is now moving with it—and, more importantly, ahead of it. Abhishek is an electrical engineer turned policy professional. He is currently on an academic break to pursue a Mid-Career Master's in Public Administration (MC-MPA) at the Harvard Kennedy School. He tweets @Abhis_chaudhari. Views are personal.
