Connect with us

Pakistan News

Modi Reemerges: Humbled, Hurt, and Unreformed

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 : When tragedy struck in Pahalgam on April 22, Prime Minister Narendra Modi seized the moment—not for justice or truth, but for electoral gain. Assuming the roles of victim, judge, and executioner, Modi promptly blamed Pakistan without investigation, forensic inquiry, or evidence. In doing so, he shielded India’s bloated security establishment from scrutiny and used the incident to ignite nationalist passions just ahead of elections.
On May 12, in his first national address since the escalation began, Modi resurfaced to glorify “Operation Sindoor” as a surgical strike on terror. He painted a picture of technological precision, national unity, and decisive leadership. He boasted of eliminating over 100 terrorists and destroying terror camps in Bahawalpur and Muridke, celebrating India’s new doctrine of proactive defense. But the actual events bore little resemblance to this narrative.
Modi claimed that Operation Sindoor had carved a new benchmark in India’s fight against terror, framing it as a new normal. What he didn’t admit was the colossal failure of India’s intelligence and defense apparatus, and the devastating retaliation India faced from a militarily and economically smaller Pakistan. Instead of acknowledging the risks he plunged the region into—and the global threat such recklessness posed—he offered a hollow narrative that concealed more than it revealed.
In reality, India’s multi-pronged strikes by air, land, and sea killed no terrorists. They destroyed civilian homes, mosques, and empty fields. No confirmed terrorist casualties were reported. It was a spectacle designed for optics, not justice.
Then came the shock: on the very first day of hostilities, six Indian fighter jets, including three much-hyped Rafales, were downed by Pakistan’s lean but precise Air Force. A smaller, resource-constrained Pakistan had exposed the hollowness of India’s military bravado. Indian forces launched waves of drone and missile strikes, but Pakistan’s air defenses stood firm. Retaliatory strikes by Pakistan targeted and damaged Indian military infrastructure, shaking the very myth of India’s invincibility.
Between his lines, Modi hinted at the scale of Pakistan’s retaliation. He admitted that Pakistani forces struck military bases, schools, temples, gurdwaras, and other sites—though framed them as attacks on civilians. He emphasized that India’s air defenses shot down Pakistani drones and missiles, but these assertions rang hollow against the verified losses and visible destruction within Indian territory.
What he deliberately omitted was the fact that several Indian missiles misfired and landed within Indian-administered Kashmir and East Punjab, killing and maiming civilians—a damning failure of India’s command and control systems.
Crucially, Modi ignored how India had to turn to Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United States to plead for de-escalation. While portraying Pakistan as the one seeking ceasefire, it was India—bloodied and embarrassed—that sought mediation. Modi attempted to mask this diplomatic retreat by saying it was Pakistan that “contacted our DGMO” and “begged for peace,” but the timeline and international reports suggested otherwise.
From May 5 to May 10, the Prime Minister vanished from public view. In those tense days of peak escalation, Modi chose silence. His disappearance was not tactical restraint but a tacit admission of miscalculation. When he finally returned to deliver his May 12 speech, it was less a declaration of victory and more an exercise in damage control.
His rhetoric turned to nuclear threats and pseudo-moral posturing. He vowed to respond to future attacks on Indian terms, claimed that India would no longer tolerate nuclear blackmail, and blurred the lines between governments and terrorists. He decried Pakistani officers for offering funeral prayers for those killed, presenting it as evidence of state-sponsored terrorism. Yet, the speech revealed more desperation than dominance.
He further championed India’s “Made in India” weapons and New Age Warfare capabilities, asserting that the operation validated indigenous defense manufacturing. However, it was evident to the world that India’s weaponry failed to protect its skies or maintain strategic superiority. Most ironically, some of those weapons malfunctioned and fell on Indian soil—a bitter embarrassment Modi dared not mention.
Perhaps the most overlooked and revolutionary aspect of this confrontation was Pakistan’s demonstration of indigenously developed soft warfare capabilities. Pakistan showcased its ability to launch effective cyberattacks, disrupt unmanned aerial vehicles midair, and induce critical errors in India’s missile command and control systems. Using precision electronic warfare tools, Pakistan successfully diverted, reprogrammed, and redirected multiple Indian missiles midflight, neutralizing their threat without conventional interception. Moreover, it identified and targeted high-value military assets in real time using its sophisticated soft skills architecture.
This capability—honed quietly over years—has now catapulted Pakistan into the ranks of countries mastering the next-generation battlefield. It may well be the first nation to have demonstrated such multi-domain, integrated, soft offensive capabilities in a live conflict. These assets played a decisive role in establishing Pakistan’s air, land, and sea superiority during the conflict, negating India’s numerical and technological advantages.
One particularly dangerous narrative that Modi had often championed before this conflict—the threat to divert rivers flowing from India into Pakistan—has now been permanently shelved. The harsh lesson taught by Pakistan during this war has ensured that weaponizing water will remain a non-option. The idea of choking Pakistan’s lifeline has backfired, permanently.
Despite his thunderous declarations, Modi could not undo the most significant outcome of this conflict: the re-internationalization of the Kashmir issue. For years, India had worked to suppress international discourse on Kashmir. But now, thanks to its own aggression, Pakistan gained sympathy, legitimacy, and diplomatic traction. U.S. President Donald Trump once again offered mediation, forcing India to confront the very topic it sought to bury.
Operation Sindoor, contrary to Modi’s celebratory framing, will be remembered not as a triumph but as a strategic blunder. It exposed the limitations of India’s military, the hollowness of its regional hegemony claims, and the perils of using warfare as an electoral tool.
India’s dream of uncontested regional supremacy has been reduced to rubble. Its myth of military superiority lies shattered. The chest-thumping nationalism that sought to project dominance has instead exposed deep vulnerabilities. From this humiliation, India may take years to recover—if at all. For now, the illusion of the subcontinent’s sole superpower has gone up in smoke, replaced by wreckage, remorse, and rhetorical retreat.

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