Pakistan News
Pakistan’s Retaliation Will Be Loud and Lethal
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 a bold, assertive, and unambiguous press briefing, Major General Choudhary Sharif, Director General of ISPR, addressed the nation and the world with a clarity that left no room for ambiguity. He declared with complete confidence that the Pakistan Air Force had downed five Indian aircraft. These aircraft, in defiance of Pakistani airspace, were tracked, targeted, and neutralized — despite India’s so-called advanced air defense systems. His assertion has now been validated by independent international observers and defense analysts, dismantling India’s narrative of aerial supremacy.
General Sharif assured the public and the international community that Pakistan’s surveillance, detection, and defensive capabilities are fully active. Every hostile object — missile, drone, or aircraft — that enters or nears Pakistani territory is being detected, evaluated, and decisively countered. He emphasized that India had chosen the timing of its aggression; now it is Pakistan’s turn to respond — at a time of its choosing, with weapons of its choice, and on targets that will reverberate not just within India, but across the world.
Refuting Indian media propaganda, General Sharif categorically denied that Pakistan had launched any strikes into Sikh-majority regions or East Punjab. “We don’t need Indian media to announce our operations,” he said sharply. “When Pakistan strikes, the world will know. It will not be through propaganda — it will be through precision, impact, and undeniable facts on the ground.”
These words — clear, confident, and chilling for the Indian establishment — signify more than just a rhetorical counterpunch. They reflect a dangerous escalation, a warning wrapped in surgical calm, and a signal to global powers that Pakistan is neither weak nor reckless, but prepared and determined.
India, intoxicated by its perceived aerial, land, and economic might, seems to have lost the capacity for rational cost-benefit analysis. Its decision to attack Pakistan in response to the Pahalgam incident — an incident not proven to involve Pakistan in any way — was nothing short of reckless. The entire operation backfired dramatically. Not only did Kashmiris on the ground refuse to accept the Indian narrative blaming Pakistan, but even sections of the Indian public, civil society, and media demanded an internal inquiry into the massive security lapse.
How, they asked, could such an attack take place in what is considered one of the most heavily militarized zones on Earth? Who was asleep at the helm? Instead of offering answers, the Indian government launched missiles at Pakistani territory.
In return, India has so far lost approximately $1.5 billion worth of military assets — including five fighter jets, among them three of its prized French-built Rafales. These aircraft, considered the pride of the Indian Air Force, were destroyed by Pakistan’s integrated air defense systems and electronic warfare units, which not only intercepted their communications but reportedly disrupted regional mobile networks to blind and isolate them mid-flight.
On the other hand, Pakistan has reported no losses. Zero.
General Sharif’s message left no doubt: Pakistan’s response will be measured, proportional, and devastating. It will not be impulsive or reactionary; it will be strategic. Pakistan now holds the initiative and will strike at the time, place, and with the force it chooses.
India, meanwhile, waits in dread. It has transitioned from aggression to anxiety, from roaring threats to trembling anticipation. The very public that cheered the initial missile attacks on Pakistan is now worried, speculating where and how Pakistan might retaliate. Indian leadership, once chest-thumping and confident, is reportedly in panic mode.
And rightly so.
Pakistan has proven that it can shoot down India’s most sophisticated aircraft, blind its pilots, and disrupt its military infrastructure without crossing borders or engaging in full-scale war. It has, in effect, neutralized India’s military advantage through superior strategy, better training, and tested deterrence doctrines.
India’s self-image as the “regional policeman,” backed by the United States and Western allies as a counterweight to China, has distorted its judgment. It believed that grandstanding, hollow threats, and missile posturing would intimidate Pakistan. But it failed to account for Pakistan’s military maturity, its battle-hardened forces, and its commitment to defend its sovereignty at all costs.
India’s loss is not just military. Its global standing has taken a hit. Its security narrative has collapsed. Its so-called Rafale deterrent has turned into a liability. And its propaganda, amplified by a complicit media ecosystem, has been discredited.
Now, India stands exposed — not just to Pakistan, but to the world.
The ball is now in Pakistan’s court. And Pakistan will act. But the larger question remains: what comes after?
Pakistan must and will neutralize the damage inflicted upon it — militarily, diplomatically, and psychologically. It is within its sovereign right to respond, and it will do so with credibility and clarity. However, once the score is settled, India must demonstrate restraint, recalibrate its posture, and abandon its fantasies of unipolar regional domination.
New Delhi must initiate an independent inquiry — perhaps under international supervision — into the Pahalgam attack. It must apologize and offer compensation for the civilian casualties and infrastructure damage caused by its unprovoked missile strikes on Pakistan. Failing that, it will continue to lose credibility and stature, not only in the eyes of Pakistanis but globally.
The United Nations, the OIC, and all peace-loving nations must now step in. It is not enough to call for restraint after the damage is done. They must hold India accountable for its unilateral aggression. They must recognize Pakistan’s right to self-defense. And they must ensure that mechanisms are put in place to prevent such reckless military adventurism in the future.
Pakistan’s message is simple: Don’t mistake composure for weakness. Don’t confuse diplomacy with docility. And never underestimate a nation that has fought for its survival since birth.
The final message to India is this: never take your adversary for granted. Arrogance may lift your chest for a day, but reality will hit like a missile. Today, India has a bloody nose. Tomorrow, if it does not change course, it may lose much more.
Pakistan has shown restraint. But it has also shown resolve. And now, the countdown has begun — not for war, but for a correction in the regional balance, forced upon India by its own folly.
QUETTA: The business community in Quetta on Friday condemned India’s boycott campaign against Turkish and Azerbaijani products and the cancellation of travel tickets to these countries by Indian citizens, calling it a reflection of frustration over support extended to Pakistan by Ankara and Baku during the recent conflict.
Quetta Chamber of Commerce and Industry President Haji Muhammad Ayub Miriani, Senior Vice-President Haji Akhtar Kakar, Vice-President Engineer Mir Wais Khan Kakar and former QCCI president and business leader Haji Ghulam Farooq Khilji said that in light of India’s decision, “it is the responsibility of the government of Pakistan and the business community to come forward and establish strong trade relations with the brotherly Islamic countries — Turkiye and Azerbaijan”.
“The business community of Balochistan is ready to play a frontline role in this regard,” the leaders said in a discussion at the QCCI, adding that they “hope the government will also take steps for stronger trade ties with both the friendly countries”.
https://www.dawn.com/news/card/1911469
The business figures claimed that during the recent conflict, where Pakistan launched “Operation Bunyanum Marsoos,” India suffered “heavy losses” and is now “trying to cover up its failure by blaming countries like Turkiye, Azerbaijan, and China”.
They contended, “The Modi government and the Indian public, in fear of Pakistan’s allies, are now boycotting their products and cancelling confirmed tickets to their tourist destinations.”
They also emphasised Pakistan’s aspiration to expand global trade ties, noting that economic growth depends on international cooperation.
“Pakistan aspires to have good trade relations with all countries of the world and is striving for rapid economic growth, which is not possible without expanding trade,” they said.
The QCCI officials also said their organisation is working to resolve issues faced by industrialists and workers across various sectors, including import-export, agriculture, livestock and transportation.
“We affirm that the Quetta Chamber of Commerce and Industry will play a leading role in improving business ties with countries like Turkiye and Azerbaijan,” they concluded.
Published in Dawn, May 17th, 2025
Former foreign minister and PTI leader Shah Mahmood Qureshi has been moved from Lahore’s Kot Lakhpat Jail to the Punjab Institute of Cardiology (PIC) on Saturday after he suffered heart pain, his lawyer said on Saturday.
Qureshi has been indicted in multiple cases pertaining to the May 9, 2023 riots and has remained behind bars since August 2023.
Speaking to Dawn.com today, Advocate Rana Mudassar, Qureshi’s lawyer, said his client suffered heart pain early in the morning after Fajr prayers. He underwent a medical assessment by prison doctors.
“He was shifted to the PIC by Rescue 1122 after his health failed to improve,” Mudassar said, adding that Qureshi was currently undergoing various tests at the hospital.
The PTI leader’s family had been informed about his condition, the lawyer added.
In July 2024, the PTI vice-president was indicted by a Lahore anti-terrorism court in a case registered by the Shadman police over allegedly attacking and burning the police station.
The same month, he was transferred from Adiala Jail in Rawalpindi to Kot Lakhpat on a police request. It had stated that frequent transportation of the PTI leader from Rawalpindi to Lahore was not feasible for the authorities as well as for the jailed ex-minister.
In November last year, a Lahore ATC indicted Qureshi and other senior PTI leaders in multiple cases relating to May 9 riots. The former foreign minister has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
To live along the Line of Control (LoC) – the volatile de facto border that separates India and Pakistan – is to exist perpetually on the razor’s edge between fragile peace and open conflict.
The recent escalation after the Pahalgam attack brought India and Pakistan to the brink once again. Shells rained down on both sides of the LoC, turning homes to rubble and lives into statistics. At least 16 people were reportedly killed on the Indian side, while Pakistan claims 40 civilian deaths, though it remains unclear how many were directly caused by the shelling.
“Families on the LoC are subjected to Indian and Pakistani whims and face the brunt of heated tensions,” Anam Zakaria, a Pakistani writer based in Canada, told the BBC.
“Each time firing resumes many are thrust into bunkers, livestock and livelihood is lost, infrastructure – homes, hospitals, schools – is damaged. The vulnerability and volatility experienced has grave repercussions for their everyday lived reality,” Ms Zakaria, author of a book on Pakistan-administered Kashmir, said.
India and Pakistan share a 3,323km (2,064-mile) border, including the 740km-long LoC; and the International Border (IB), spanning roughly 2,400km. The LoC began as the Ceasefire Line in 1949 after the first India-Pakistan war, and was renamed under the 1972 Simla Agreement.
The LoC cutting through Kashmir – claimed in full and administered in parts by both India and Pakistan – remains one of the most militarised borders in the world. Conflict is never far behind and ceasefires are only as durable as the next provocation.
Ceasefire violations here can range from “low-level firing to major land grabbing to surgical strikes“, says Happymon Jacob, a foreign policy expert at Delhi’s Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU). (A land grab could involve seizing key positions such as hilltops, outposts, or buffer zones by force.)
The LoC, many experts say, is a classic example of a “border drawn in blood, forged through conflict”. It is also a line, as Ms Zakaria says, “carved by India and Pakistan, and militarised and weaponised, without taking Kashmiris into account”.
Such wartime borders aren’t unique to South Asia. Sumantra Bose, professor of international and comparative politics at Krea University in India and author of Kashmir at the Crossroads: Inside a 21st-Century Conflict, says the most well-known is the ‘Green Line’ – the ceasefire line of 1949 – which is the generally recognised boundary between Israel and the West Bank.
Not surprisingly, the tentative calm along the LoC that had endured since the 2021 ceasefire agreement between the two nuclear-armed neighbours crumbled easily after the latest hostilities.
“The current escalation on the LoC and International Border (IB) is significant as it follows a four-year period of relative peace on the border,” Surya Valliappan Krishna of Carnegie India told the BBC.
Violence along the India-Pakistan border is not new – prior to the 2003 ceasefire, India reported 4,134 violations in 2001 and 5,767 in 2002.
The 2003 ceasefire initially held, with negligible violations from 2004 to 2007, but tensions resurfaced in 2008 and escalated sharply by 2013.
Between 2013 and early 2021, the LoC and the IB witnessed sustained high levels of conflict. A renewed ceasefire in February 2021 led to an immediate and sustained drop in violations through to March 2025.
“During periods of intense cross-border firing we’ve seen border populations in the many thousands be displaced for months on end,” says Mr Krishna. Between late September and early December 2016, more than 27,000 people were displaced from border areas due to ceasefire violations and cross-border firing.
It’s looking increasingly hairy and uncertain now.
Tensions flared after the Pahalgam attack, with India suspending the key water-sharing treaty between India and Pakistan, known as the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT). Pakistan responded by threatening to exit the 1972 Simla Agreement, which formalised the LoC – though it hasn’t followed through yet.
“This is significant because the Simla Agreement is the basis of the current LoC, which both sides agreed to not alter unilaterally in spite of their political differences,” says Mr Krishna.
Mr Jacob says for some “curious reason”, ceasefire violations along the LoC have been absent from discussions and debates about escalation of conflict between the two countries.
“It is itself puzzling how the regular use of high-calibre weapons such as 105mm mortars, 130 and 155mm artillery guns and anti-tank guided missiles by two nuclear-capable countries, which has led to civilian and military casualties, has escaped scholarly scrutiny and policy attention,” Mr Jacob writes in his book, Line On Fire: Ceasefire Violations and India-Pakistan Escalation Dynamics.
Mr Jacob identifies two main triggers for the violations: Pakistan often uses cover fire to facilitate militant infiltration into Indian-administered Kashmir, which has witnessed an armed insurgency against Indian rule for over three decades. Pakistan, in turn, accuses India of unprovoked firing on civilian areas.
He argues that ceasefire violations along the India-Pakistan border are less the product of high-level political strategy and more the result of local military dynamics.
The hostilities are often initiated by field commanders – sometimes with, but often without, central approval. He also challenges the notion that the Pakistan Army alone drives the violations, pointing instead to a complex mix of local military imperatives and autonomy granted to border forces on both sides.
Some experts believe It’s time to revisit an idea shelved nearly two decades ago: turning the LoC into a formal, internationally recognised border. Others insist that possibility was never realistic – and still isn’t.
“The idea is completely infeasible, a dead end. For decades, Indian maps have shown the entire territory of the erstwhile princely state of Jammu and Kashmir as part of India,” Sumantra Bose told the BBC.
“For Pakistan, making the LoC part of the International Border would mean settling the Kashmir dispute – which is Pakistan’s equivalent of the Holy Grail – on India’s preferred terms. Every Pakistani government and leader, civilian or military, over the past seven decades has rejected this.”
In his 2003 book, Kashmir: Roots of Conflict, Paths to Peace, Prof Bose writes: “A Kashmir settlement necessitates that the LoC be transformed – from an iron curtain of barbed wire, bunkers, trenches and hostile militaries to a linen curtain. Realpolitik dictates that the border will be permanent (albeit probably under a different name), but it must be transcended without being abolished.”
“I stressed, though, that such a transformation of the LoC must be embedded in a broader Kashmir settlement, as one pillar of a multi-pillared settlement,” he told the BBC.
Between 2004 and 2007, turning the LoC into a soft border was central to a fledgling India-Pakistan peace process on Kashmir – a process that ultimately fell apart.
Today, the border has reignited, bringing back the cycle of violence and uncertainty for those who live in its shadow.
“You never know what will happen next. No one wants to sleep facing the Line of Control tonight,” an employee of a hotel in Pakistan-administered Kashmir told BBC Urdu during the recent hostilities.
It was a quiet reminder of how fragile peace is when your window opens to a battlefield.
Indian boycott of Turkish goods condemned in Quetta
PTI’s Shah Mahmood Qureshi moved to cardio institute due to heart pain
-
Europe News3 months agoChaos and unproven theories surround Tates’ release from Romania
-
American News3 months agoTrump Expels Zelensky from the White House
-
Pakistan News2 months agoCan Pakistan be a Hard State?
-
Politics3 months agoUS cuts send South Africa’s HIV treatment ‘off a cliff’
-
American News3 months agoZelensky bruised but upbeat after diplomatic whirlwind
-
American News2 months agoTrump expands exemptions from Canada and Mexico tariffs
-
Art & Culture3 months agoInternational Agriculture Exhibition held in Paris
-
American News2 months agoU.S. Tariff Policies: A Historical Perspective