Parl braces for fiery debate on Pahalgam, Op Sindoor
Top guns on both sides like Defence Minister Rajnath Singh, Home Minister Amit Shah, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar, Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi, Samajwadi Party's Akhilesh Yadav and Trinamool Congress' Abhishek Banerjee are likely to speak in Lok Sabha during the debate.
Singh is expected to be the first speaker, and he will spell out the contours of Operation Sindoor and subsequent developments, including the circumstances of the ceasefire and claims of US President Donald Trump that he brokered the de-escalation.
All eyes will be on Singh on whether he would reveal the details of fighter aircraft India lost in the military confrontation, an issue on which the Opposition has been insisting that the government clean. Similarly, it will be keenly watched whether Congress would list Shashi Tharoor as a speaker, as he is at loggerheads with his party over his endorsement of the Modi government on the issue and leading a delegation to the US and other countries.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is likely to intervene in the 'Special Discussion on India's Strong, Successful and Decisive Operation Sindoor in Response to the Terrorist Attack in Pahalgam for which 16 others have been allocated. The debate in the Rajya Sabha will start on Tuesday where also 16 hours is earmarked.
The ruling BJP would be highlighting the Indian military's successful dismantlingof terror infrastructure in Pakistan, including Jaish-e-Mohammed headquarters in Bahawalpur and hitting for the first time the Pakistani side of Punjab since the 1971 war.
The party would also try to corner the Congress by highlighting the inner-party differences over its MPs participating in the multi-party delegations sent by the government.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
11 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Operation Sindoor debate: Home minister Amit Shah counters Opposition with data, digs into Congress past
New Delhi: Union home minister Amit Shah slammed the Opposition in Lok Sabha for demanding proof of Operation Sindoor and criticised former home minister P Chidambaram for questioning Pakistani links of terrorists involved in Pahalgam attack. In his 75-minute intervention in the discussion on Operation Sindoor, Shah blamed Nehru-Gandhi family for erroneous decisions in the past and linked them to the current problem of terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir. "If PoK exists today with a separate identity, it is because of Nehru's decision to stop the war in 1948. It was a unilateral ceasefire, which was opposed by Sardar Patel," he said. "In 1948, Indian armed forces were in decisive position to take back PoK but then PM Nehru declared unilateral ceasefire." Tearing into opposition, Shah said, "I was pained yesterday when former Home Minister P Chidambaram raised the question that what was the proof that the Pahalgam terrorists came from Pakistan? What is Chidambaram trying to say? Whom does he want to save? What will you gain by saving Pakistan?" The Home Minister also slammed the then Manmohan Singh government for its response on terror attacks. "Following Operation Sindoor, our DGMO informed the Pak DGMO that India has attacked terror infrastructure on their land as per our right of self-defence. It cannot be like how it happened during Manmohan Singh's government, that terrorists come and kill us and we sit quietly...," Shah said. Following the Opposition's question over efficacy of the Modi government's decision to revoke Article 370, Shah said: "The number of terror attacks have gone down from 7,214 during UPA's regime 2004-14 to 2,150 in our 10 years from 2015-25," said Shah adding, "21 organisations with terror links that had been banned by the current government. "If you have ostrich-like mentality, you will not even be able to see the sun." aid Shah.
Indian Express
11 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Donald Trump warns India of 25% tariffs if trade deal not reached
US President Donald Trump on Tuesday said that Indian imports could face tariffs as high as 25% if the two countries are unable to finalise a trade agreement soon. 'They are going to pay 25%,' Trump told reporters, according to CNN. When asked whether India would be charged tariffs between 20% and 25%, Trump replied, 'Yeah, I think so. India has been; they're my friends.' The United States and India have been discussing a trade deal for months, but no final agreement has been reached. Trump has been pressing for greater access for American goods to the Indian market. He has often made similar demands in other trade negotiations. US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said further talks would be needed to move things forward. 'They have expressed strong interest in opening portions of their market,' Greer said in an interview with CNBC on Monday, as reported by CNN. 'We, of course, are willing to continue talking to them. But I think we need some more negotiations on that with our Indian friends to see how ambitious they want to be.' This is a developing story
Indian Express
11 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Marjorie Taylor Greene calls crisis in Gaza ‘genocide,' first Republican lawmaker to do so
Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has said that a 'genocide' is taking place in Gaza, making her the first Republican in the US Congress to use the term to describe the humanitarian crisis unfolding there. In a social media post on Monday evening, Greene wrote: 'It's the most truthful and easiest thing to say that October. 7 in Israel was horrific and all hostages must be returned but so is the genocide, humanitarian crisis, and starvation happening in Gaza,'. Her comments reflect a growing shift in tone among some Republicans, and stand in contrast to the position of most of her party, which has consistently supported Israel since the conflict began. Over the past several weeks, Greene has gradually increased her criticism of how the war is being handled. Earlier this month, she said Israel had bombed a Catholic church in Gaza and that the area's population was being wiped out. She had also tried to remove $500 million in US military aid to Israel from the annual defence spending bill. That proposal failed, with only six members of Congress supporting it two Republicans and four Democrats, including Representative Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, the only Palestinian American in Congress. Greene had previously clashed with Tlaib over Gaza. Two years ago, she led a failed effort to censure the Democrat for comments made at a pro-Palestinian rally, accusing her of antisemitism and support for terrorism. Greene's comments this week were also a direct response to remarks made by Florida Republican Randy Fine. In a social media post last week, Fine dismissed images of starving children in Gaza as 'Muslim terror propaganda' and wrote: 'Release the hostages… until then, starve away.' Fine, a first-term lawmaker and a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has defended Israel's military actions and framed criticism of its operations as unfair. Greene rejected that position. On Sunday, she said in a post that she could 'unequivocally say' that the killings in Israel on 7 October were horrific 'just as I can unequivocally say that what has been happening to innocent people and children in Gaza is horrific.' I can unequivocally say that what happened to innocent people in Israel on Oct 7th was horrific. Just as I can unequivocally say that what has been happening to innocent people and children in Gaza is horrific. This war and humanitarian crisis must end! — Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene🇺🇸 (@RepMTG) July 27, 2025 President Donald Trump, who was in Scotland on Monday to open a new golf course, also spoke about the crisis. He said he believed there was real starvation in Gaza and called for more aid. 'That's real starvation stuff I see it, and you can't fake that,' Trump said after meetings with European leaders. 'We have to get the kids fed,'. Though Greene made her recent comments before Trump's remarks, others in the pro-Trump faction of the Republican Party have since echoed similar concerns about the need to protect civilians. (With inputs from The New York Times)
