Connect with us

Pakistan News

A War, A Ceasefire, and A Shattered Indian Myth

Published

on

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : In one of the most consequential military escalations in recent South Asian history, the May 2025 conflict between India and Pakistan concluded not with a decisive proclamation of victory, but with an abrupt and uneasy ceasefire—sought under growing international pressure. Initiated by India under the pretext of retribution for the tragic terrorist attack in Pahalgam, the confrontation ended with Pakistan not only holding its ground militarily, but emerging diplomatically strengthened and strategically vindicated.
CNN’s Nic Robertson, reporting from Islamabad, offered a compelling account of Pakistan’s response to India’s deep airstrikes. He described it as a “relentless barrage of missiles and rockets” launched against Indian military targets across the Line of Control and into mainland India, targeting airbases, depots, and command structures with striking precision. Robertson called it a “calibrated show of strength” that reversed India’s offensive momentum and compelled New Delhi to urgently seek international mediation. His report echoed the sentiment that Pakistan’s counteroffensive had significantly altered the trajectory of the conflict and revealed serious gaps in India’s preparedness.
The ceasefire, brokered with the active involvement of U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance, culminated in a statement from President Donald J. Trump on his Truth Social platform:
“I am very proud of the strong and unwaveringly powerful leadership of India and Pakistan… Millions of good and innocent people could have died… I am proud the USA was able to help you arrive at this historic and heroic decision… Additionally, I will work with you both to see if, after a ‘thousand years,’ a solution can be arrived at concerning Kashmir.”
This marked a rare and notable moment—an American president publicly acknowledging Kashmir as the core issue and proposing to facilitate a long-term solution. For Pakistan, this was a diplomatic breakthrough, bringing to the fore a demand it had made for decades: international engagement on Kashmir. For India, it was an abrupt strategic recalibration, revealing the limits of unilateral aggression and the price of escalation in a nuclear environment.
India’s invocation of the Kashmir issue during back-channel negotiations signaled a significant shift. Having long resisted third-party involvement, India found itself using Kashmir as a bargaining lever to draw Pakistan into accepting U.S.-mediated talks. The irony was not lost on observers: India had inadvertently internationalized the very issue it had always insisted was bilateral.
Public sentiment in India reflected growing disillusionment. Social media platforms were awash with criticism of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Defence Minister Rajnath Singh. Many accused the government of dragging the nation into a conflict it could neither win nor sustain. A widely circulated post read:
“You couldn’t protect Indians. You couldn’t avenge their deaths. More Indians died in the crossfire. Why are you still in office?”
Another stated:
“India was so shocked by Pakistan’s military response, it had to beg Trump for a ceasefire. Don’t provoke a war you can’t manage.”
The backlash highlighted a growing credibility gap between India’s military rhetoric and its battlefield realities. Analysts from leading global outlets offered similar assessments. The Guardian termed the war a “miscalculated gamble” that ended in embarrassment for India. France 24 questioned the performance of India’s Rafale fleet after reports confirmed the downing of three by Chinese-origin jets. Al Jazeera highlighted the precision of Pakistan’s counterstrikes, while the BBC noted how India’s attempt to project strength backfired, leading to diplomatic retreat and external mediation.
Technologically, the mismatch was stark. Pakistan’s use of Chinese J-10CE and JF-17 Thunder jets, armed with PL-15 long-range missiles, displayed integrated network warfare capabilities. India’s multi-sourced fleet—combining French, Russian, and Israeli platforms—suffered from lack of system-wide coordination. This disparity contributed to India’s failure to repel deep strikes and safeguard critical infrastructure, including forward airbases and missile systems in Adampur.
Estimates from defense correspondents suggest at least five Indian aircraft were downed, including three Rafales. Pakistan’s deep penetration—reportedly 200 km into Indian territory—without interception, further dented the credibility of India’s air defense.
Symbolically, India’s perception as the “net security provider” in South Asia took a serious hit. Its attempt to display dominance instead exposed operational vulnerabilities and forced an unwanted climbdown. Conversely, Pakistan’s firm yet controlled response helped restore deterrence, drew international empathy, and opened diplomatic pathways that had long been closed.
Think tanks responded swiftly. The Council on Foreign Relations noted that “India’s effort to assert dominance has backfired, exposing strategic weaknesses.” The International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) observed that “Pakistan has demonstrated battlefield coherence, technological integration, and strategic restraint.”
Within India, the political consequences may be far-reaching. The ruling BJP, already facing domestic challenges, now confronts criticism over its handling of national security. The opposition is likely to seize on the events as a turning point in public confidence, particularly among young voters who have grown increasingly skeptical of nationalist bluster.
Though the war lasted just a few days, its implications will reverberate far longer. Pakistan demonstrated not only its military resolve but also its growing stature as a rational and capable state actor. It forced a reevaluation of strategic assumptions in the region and made clear that peace in South Asia hinges not on rhetoric, but on addressing long-standing disputes—beginning with Kashmir.
The May 2025 conflict has redrawn the strategic contours of the subcontinent. For Pakistan, it was not just a matter of defending its borders, but of asserting its place on the regional and global stage. For India, it was a sobering lesson in the limits of power projection without preparation.

Pakistan News

PM Shehbaz again thanks Trump for ‘bold and decisive leadership’ in brokering Pak-India ceasefire

Published

on

By

Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on Saturday, once again, thanked the “bold and decisive leadership” of US President Donald Trump for brokering a ceasefire between Pakistan and India during the conflict between the two nuclear neighbours in May.

While addressing Azerbaijan’s Victory Day parade in Baku, the premier praised President Trump’s exemplary leadership, which led to the success of the peace efforts.

“It was President Trump’s, bold and decisive leadership, that brought about, the ceasefire, between Pakistan and India, restoring peace in South Asia — averting a major war, and saving millions of people.”

In his speech, the PM reiterated that Pakistan, “just like their Azerbaijani and Turkish brothers”, seeks peace, adding that no one can ever be allowed to challenge its sovereignty or undermine its territorial integrity.

The premier recalled that the Azerbaijani and Turkish military contingents had “proudly” marched alongside the Pakistani armed forces in Islamabad amid tremendous applause on August 14 this year, when they celebrated ‘Marka-i-Haq’ to commemorate their “historic victory” in the four-day war with India.

The Pakistan Army had named the period of conflict with India from the April 22 Pahalgam attack to the May 10 conclusion of Operation Bunyanum Marsoos as “Marka-i-Haq” in May.

PM Shehbaz highlighted how, five years ago, “the courageous sons of Azerbaijan, under the bold and visionary leadership of President Ilham Aliyev, rose to respond to the call of history”.

“The world witnessed in awe as Azerbaijan’s brave armed forces liberated their ancestral lands of majestic Karabakh,” the PM stated. “Throughout this entire struggle for liberation, Pakistan stood like a rock with its brotherly country Azerbaijan.”

According to PM Shehbaz, Azerbaijan’s victory in Karabakh was a “glorious vindication” of a just cause and a beacon of hope for all nations striving for sovereignty and self-determination, including the brave and resilient people of Gaza and Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir.

The prime minister arrived in Baku on Friday for a two-day official visit to Azerbaijan at Aliyev’s invitation and to attend the country’s Victory Day ceremony.

Referring to the recent flare up with the Afghan Taliban regime, the prime minister said that their common resolve for peace has most recently been tested in the case of Afghanistan and expressed gratitude to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan as well as to Emir of Qatar Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani for their “invaluable contribution” in facilitating, the peace efforts, between Pakistan and Afghanistan.

“This is a true reflection of the strong and time-tested fraternal ties between our countries that stand together, through thick and thin,“ he opined.

Victory Day is observed to “commemorate the historic victory in the 44-day-long Karabakh Liberation War against Armenia”, according to the PM’s Office.

Continue Reading

Pakistan News

Bill for 27th Constitutional Amendment tabled in Senate after federal cabinet’s approval

Published

on

By

Shortly after getting approval from the federal cabinet, the bill for the 27th Constitutional Amendment was tabled before the Senate on Saturday and subsequently referred to the standing committees on law and justice.

A joint session of both the NA and Senate standing committees on law and justice was then summoned to discuss the amendment.

However, during the session of the standing committees, two Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam-Fazl (JUI-F) members, Aliya Kamran and Senator Kamran Murtaza, boycotted the meeting and said the proposed draft included amendments that were discarded in the 26th Amendment bill.

Following deliberations on the proposed amendment, the law committees of both Houses adjourned the moot till Sunday.

‘Discussions will continue till consensus is reached’

Law Minister Azam Nazeer Tarar, speaking to the media after the adjournment of the committees, said all parties were participating in the session and they had also “requested the opposition to participate”.

“Aliya Kamran had informed us that they have instructions from their party not to attend the session; however, all other parties were in attendance. We even asked the opposition to be a part of the session.”

Tarar said the “long-awaited” proposed amendment has been in discussion for the last 10-15 years. “Even today we are having a constructive debate on the matter.”

“At the time of the 18th Amendment, it was on the constitutional agenda, and even earlier, during the 26th Amendment, but due to certain reasons, one of which was Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s suggestion that such a major change should not be made and that it would be better to move towards transition and form constitutional benches,” said Tarar.

The law minister elaborated that the formation of the benches increased the workload of the judiciary, as the same judges were hearing cases fixed for the bench and otherwise.

“The objective was to ensure that the cases fixed in the Supreme Court are not delayed further and the common man gets relief.”

Tarar added that one of the aims of the proposed changes is also to do away with the criticism of a “court within a court”. “All members have reviewed it (proposed constitutional amendment) and we have completed arguments on around 60pc of the clauses.”

The law minister said a few questions have been raised by some members, clarifying that they are legal in nature and “not fundamental issues”.

“We will reconvene again tomorrow morning at 11am and continue our discussions. And till the time we do not reach a consensus, from all members of both Houses, the discussions will continue,” said the law minister.

The Senate and standing committee sessions will resume on Sunday, November 9.

Farooq H. Naek said no decision has been reached yet after deliberations on the proposed constitutional amendment, and claimed around 80pc of the bill was discussed.

He added that certain “mistakes” in the draft will be corrected and the law ministry has been made aware.

When asked about changes to Article 243, he said it was not discussed during today’s session.

Tarar tables bill in Senate

The bill, which was tabled in the Senate by the law minister, proposed the formation of a Federal Constitutional Court, changes in the process for appointing high court judges, changes to the threshold for provincial cabinets, and changes to the military leadership structure.

At the outset of the session, Tarar — who had earlier in the day briefed the media on some features of the proposed legislation after the federal cabinet meeting — requested the suspension of the question hour and other house business so he could brief lawmakers on the amendment.

The law minister then moved the bill before the upper house, with Chairman Yousuf Raza Gillani referring it to the National Assembly and Senate standing committees on law and justice for review and consideration. He said that both committees may hold joint meetings for a detailed review and consideration, and the report would be presented before the House.

Continue Reading

Pakistan News

PTI, Imran should ‘take a step back’; govt should create space for engagement: Fawad

Published

on

By

Former PTI leader Fawad Chaudhry said on Monday that both the government and the PTI, along with Imran Khan, need to show flexibility in order to create space for engagement to decrease the political friction in the country.

Fawad is one of the three former PTI leaders who say they have been engaging with the party’s incarcerated leadership to put an end to politics of confrontation as part of their political outreach initiative.

They also visited PTI leader Shah Mahmood Qureshi, after he was taken to a hospital in Lahore from prison, on Thursday, to convince him to join their campaign.

“I’ve said this from the first day, the government should move one step forward and the PTI and Imran Khan should move back one step so space is created,” said the former PTI leader while speaking during an interview on DawnNewsTV show ‘News Wise’.

He maintained that both sides would have to decide on the need to bring down the temperature, warning that if the PTI did not pursue engagement and talks, it would face similar treatment as the disbanding and ban on the proscribed Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan.

“The government needs this, because whatever international successes they have gained are not translating into Pakistan … so both sides need the temperature to come down. We think the leaders of Lahore should play the role of a pivot and take this forward.”

Chaudhry added that the immediate need was to lower the political temperature, saying talks could not proceed if both sides could not even bear to see each other.

Defending his former party’s obstinacy against engagement in talks, he said it was also due to the behaviour of the government, which had made a policy of “crushing and sidelining” the opposition.

“The two ruling parties, the establishment and the PTI, are the four big players and the political temperature between them should come down. How will that happen? …you will have to give the leadership in Lahore’s jail the chance to talk to Imran Khan.”

He further said that the establishment and the government needed to decide whether the country needed a reduction in political temperature or not. “I am very hopeful they have this view too.”

Referring to the group’s recent activities, Chaudhry said they had a meeting of at least 45 minutes with Qureshi.

He added that the proposal being carried by the group was not even their own, instead pointing to a letter by incarcerated PTI leaders in Lahore earlier this year, which called for a reduction in political friction and encouraged engagement.

Chaudhry was not without criticism for the government, saying it had backed the PTI into a corner. “If you don’t engage with the PTI, the only way forward it has is to protest,” he said.

The former federal minister added that in such a situation, the PTI could lead a protest to Islamabad and resign from the National Assembly, while the government would attempt to impose governor’s rule in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, which would be resisted by the party.

“Another event like November 26, 2024, will happen, and as a result of this, the tensions and political temperature in Pakistan will increase. The problem right now is that, we the people, living in Pakistan are being severely impacted by this,” he said, adding that the group had requested the incarcerated PTI leaders in Lahore that if there was no implementation of their earlier recommendation, it would lead to great loss for both the party and the government.

He also said the fact that the group was allowed to meet the incarcerated PTI leadership in Kot Lakpat jail was an encouraging sign.

“Senior government ministers called me and appreciated the effort,” he said, pointing to Information Minister Attaullah Tarar’s welcoming of the development in particular.

“Senior PTI leadership also called and said that this is the only way.”

Continue Reading

Trending