Exclusive: Pakistan, India close to completing border troop reduction, senior Pakistani general says
Both sides used fighter jets, missiles, drones and artillery in four days of clashes, their worst fighting in decades, before a ceasefire was announced.
The spark for the latest fighting between the old enemies was an April 22 attack in Indian Kashmir that killed 26 people, most of them tourists. New Delhi blamed the incident on "terrorists" backed by Pakistan, a charge denied by Islamabad.
On May 7, India launched missiles at what it said were "terrorist infrastructure" sites across the border and as Pakistan responded with its own attacks, both countries built up additional forces along the frontier.
General Sahir Shamshad Mirza, Pakistan's chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, said the two militaries had started the process of drawing down troop levels.
"We have almost come back to the pre-22nd April situation... we are approaching that, or we must have approached that by now," said Mirza, the most senior Pakistani military official to speak publicly since the conflict.
India's ministry of defence and the office of the Indian chief of defence staff did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment on the remarks by Mirza.
Mirza, who is in Singapore to attend the Shangri-La Dialogue forum, said while there was no move towards nuclear weapons during this conflict, it was a dangerous situation.
"Nothing happened this time," he said. "But you can't rule out any strategic miscalculation at any time, because when the crisis is on, the responses are different."
He also said the risk of escalation in the future had increased since the fighting this time was not limited to the disputed territory of Kashmir, the scenic region in the Himalayas that both nations rule in part but claim in full. The two sides attacked military installations in their mainlands but neither has acknowledged any serious damage.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi warned Pakistan this month that New Delhi would target "terrorist hideouts" across the border again if there were new attacks on India.
The two countries have fought three major wars, two of them over Kashmir, and numerous armed skirmishes since both were born out of British colonial India in 1947.
India blames Pakistan for an insurgency in its part of Kashmir that began in 1989 and has killed tens of thousands. Pakistan says it provides only moral, political and diplomatic support to Kashmiris seeking self-determination.
"This (conflict) lowers the threshold between two countries who are contiguous nuclear powers...in the future, it will not be restricted to the disputed territory. It would come down to (the) whole of India and (the) whole of Pakistan," Mirza said. "This is a very dangerous trend."
Reuters has reported that the rapid escalation of hostilities ended in part because of behind-the-scenes diplomacy involving the U.S., India and Pakistan, and the key role played by Washington in brokering peace. India has denied any third-party role in the ceasefire and said that any engagement between India and Pakistan has to be bilateral.
But Mirza warned that international mediation might be difficult in the future because of a lack of crisis management mechanisms between the countries.
"The time window for the international community to intervene would now be very less, and I would say that damage and destruction may take place even before that time window is exploited by the international community," he said.
Pakistan was open to dialogue, he added, but beyond a crisis hotline between the directors general of military operations and some hotlines at the tactical level on the border, there was no other communication between the two countries.
India's foreign ministry spokesperson said on Thursday "talks and terror don't go together" in response to a question on the possibility of dialogue with Pakistan.
Mirza said there were no backchannel discussions, or informal talks, to ease tensions. He also said he had no plans to meet General Anil Chauhan, India's chief of defence staff, who is also in Singapore for the Shangri-La forum.
"These issues can only be resolved by dialogue and consultations, on the table. They cannot be resolved on the battlefield," Mirza said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
26 minutes ago
- Reuters
India PM Modi faces opposition fury after Trump's 25% tariff threat
NEW DELHI, July 31 (Reuters) - Indian opposition parties criticised the government on Thursday, describing U.S. President Donald Trump's threat of a 25% tariff as a diplomatic failure for New Delhi, while the rupee currency tumbled and equity indexes slid in response to the news. The 25% rate would single out India more harshly than other major trading partners, and threatens to unravel months of talks, undermining one of Washington's strategic partners in the region, viewed as a counterbalance to China. Trump said the tariff on goods imports from India would start from Friday, in addition to an unspecified penalty for Russian dealings and involvement in the BRICS grouping of nations, but added later that trade talks continued. In response, the government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi said it was studying the implications of Trump's remarks and was dedicated to securing a fair trade deal. "This development reflects a broader collapse of foreign policy under the Modi government," a lawmaker of the main opposition Congress said in a notice asking for a discussion of the matter in the lower house. The debate would focus on the "government's economic and diplomatic failure in preventing the imposition of 25% U.S. tariffs plus penalties on Indian exports," it added. Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal is expected to brief the lower house later on Thursday, television news channels said. Economists warned the steep tariff could hurt India's manufacturing ambitions and trim up to 40 basis points from economic growth in the financial year to March 2026. India's benchmark equity indices, the Nifty 50 (.NSEI), opens new tab and BSE Sensex (.BSESN), opens new tab, fell about 0.6% each, while the rupee declined to 87.74, its lowest in more than five months, before paring losses. India has received a "raw deal", said Priyanka Kishore, an economist at Asia Decoded. "While further trade talks may bring the tariff rate down, it appears unlikely that India will secure a significantly better outcome than its eastern neighbours," she added. That would raise questions about India's relative appeal as a China plus one destination, she said, referring to a strategy of diversifying supply chains through manufacturing outside China to reduce geopolitical and operational risks. Trade talks continued, Trump said on social media, however, as nations face a Friday deadline to strike deals on reciprocal tariffs or have a U.S. tariff slapped on their exports. The U.S. levy on India exceeds those achieved by some other nations in deals with the Trump administration. For example, the tariff on Vietnam is set at 20% and on Indonesia at 19%, with levies of 15% on Japanese and European Union exports. On Wednesday, Trump said Washington had reached a trade deal with India's arch-rival Pakistan that Islamabad said would lead to lower tariffs on its exports, but neither side have yet revealed the agreed rate. Since India's short but deadly conflict with Pakistan in May, New Delhi has been unhappy about Trump's closeness with Islamabad and has protested, casting a shadow over trade talks. Despite former public displays of bonhomie between Trump and Modi, India has taken a slightly harder stance against the United States in recent weeks. Trump has repeatedly taken credit for the India-Pakistan ceasefire he announced on social media on May 10, but India disputes his claim that it resulted from his intervention and trade threats. "The country is now bearing the cost of Narendra Modi's friendship," Congress said. The United States, the world's largest economy, now has a trade deficit of $45.7 billion with India, the fifth largest. Russia remained India's top oil supplier during the first six months of 2025, accounting for 35% of overall supplies. "I don't care what India does with Russia," Trump said in a Truth Social post on Thursday, adding, "They can take their dead economies down together, for all I care."
BBC News
26 minutes ago
- BBC News
Malegaon: India court acquits all seven in 2008 blast case
A court in India has acquitted all seven accused in a deadly bombing that struck a Muslim-majority town in Maharashtra state nearly 17 years least six people were killed and nearly a hundred injured in the blasts that hit Malegaon in September 2008. Among the seven acquitted are Sadhvi Pragya Singh Thakur, a former MP of India's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), and a serviceman, Lt Col Shrikant Prasad Purohit. According to legal portal Live Law, the judge noted that the prosecution failed to prove the motorbike that allegedly triggered the blasts belonged to Thakur. The court also observed that while the prosecution had proven a bomb blast did occur, it failed to establish that the explosive was planted on the Purohit - who was accused of raising funds to purchase explosives for a right-wing outfit and organising meetings to plan the attack - the court said there was "no evidence of storing or assembling the explosives at Shrikant Prasad Purohit's residence," according to the verdict cited by news agency special court in Mumbai cleared the accused of all charges, including under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act - an anti-terror law. "Terrorism has no religion because no religion can advocate violence. The court cannot convict anyone merely on perception and moral evidence; there has to be cogent evidence," ANI reported, quoting the of the victims' families said they will challenge the acquittal in the High Court and file an appeal independently. The blasts occurred at a Muslim graveyard in Malegaon, a town in Maharashtra's Nashik district, about 260km (160 miles) northeast of Mumbai. The explosions took place on Shab-e-Barat, a night when Muslims pray for their dead. No group claimed case was initially handled by Maharashtra's Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) before being transferred to India's premier counter-terror agency, the National Investigation Agency (NIA), in politically important case was one of the first major instances where right-wing Hindu nationalist groups were directly accused of militant activity. Over the years, the case saw several twists and turns. More than 300 witnesses were examined during the trial, with at least 34 later turning 2016, NIA filed a chargesheet and said they could not find sufficient evidence against Thakur and three others. It recommended dropping charges against the court acquitted the three, it ordered that Thakur must still stand 2018, an NIA special court formally framed charges against the remaining seven accused under the anti-terror law, charges of criminal conspiracy, murder and promoting enmity between religious verdict, initially expected in May, was postponed after the judge ordered all accused to be present in court.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Minister dismisses claims that recognising Palestinian state risks breaching international law
Update: Date: 2025-07-31T07:50:32.000Z Title: Matt Dathan, Ali Mitib Content: Good morning. Keir Starmer has been widely criticised for his announcement on Monday that the UK will recognise a Palestinian state unless Israel agrees a ceasefire in Gaza and commits to the two-state solution (which Benjamin Netanyahu's government does not support). There have been two main objections. The Tories, and others, are mostly dismissing this as pointless, a gesture that will appease Labour MPs without having any practical, positive impact for Palestinians. The other line of attack argues that the move will have an impact, because it will reward Hamas for their attack on Israel, and incentivise them not to make peace or release the remaining hostages. This is what the Israeli government is saying, but the person who has made this argument most forcefully is Emily Damari, a British-Israeli woman held hostage by Hamas for more than a year. Her words have provided the Daily Mail with its splash. Today the decision is under fire on a third front. According to a story by and Geraldine Scott on the Times front page, the move may be illegal. They say 40 members of the House of Lords have put this point to Lord Hermer, the attorney general, in a letter. They report: Some of Britain's most prominent lawyers have warned Sir Keir Starmer that his government's pledge to recognise a Palestinian state risks breaking international law. Their intervention, signed by 40 members of the House of Lords, said a Palestinian state would not meet the criteria for recognition as set out under the Montevideo Convention, a treaty signed in 1933 … The signatories point out that Starmer's pledge risked undermining the government's commitment that international law goes 'absolutely to the heart' of its foreign policy. Under the Montevideo Convention, to qualify for statehood under international law, a state must have a permanent population, a defined territory, a government and the capacity to enter into relations with other states. The peers argue that arguablely Palestine does not meet any of these four conditions. According to the Times, the signatories include seven KCs, including Lord Pannick, Lord Collins of Mapesbury, a former supreme court judge, former Tory ministers including Eric Pickles and Andrew Lansley, and Arlene Foster, the former DUP leader. Thursday's TIMES: Palestine vow breaks law, claim top lawyers#TomorrowsPapersToday Keir Starmer is speaking the media later today, but Gareth Thomas, the business minister, has been doing the interview round this morning and he told Times Radio that the government thinks recognising a Palestinian state would be compliant with international law. He explained: We haven't signed up to the Montevideo Convention, but is there a clear population in in Palestine? Yes, there is in Gaza and the West Bank. We have made clear that we think you would recognise the state of Palestine, and that state of Palestine would be based on the 1967 borders. Of course, there would have to be land swaps and there would be a shared capital of Jerusalem. They are well-regarded international views. As I say, 140 other countries have already recognised the state of Palestine. The prime minister was in talks this week with a series of countries, including Canada, and Canada have overnight, as you will have seen, taken the decision to recognise Palestine in September. Here is the agenda for the day. 9.30am: The Ministry of Justice publishes figures covering prison numbers, and assaults, deaths and self-harm in jails. 11am: Mourners attend the funeral of Norman Tebbit at St Edmundsbury Cathedral in Bury St Edmunds. Morning: Keir Starmer and Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, are on a visit in the south-west of England to promote plans to penalise firms that pay their suppliers late. They are due to give media interviews. Also, at some point today, Heathrow Airport will submit its third runway plans to the government. If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line when comments are open (normally between 10am and 3pm at the moment), or message me on social media. I can't read all the messages BTL, but if you put 'Andrew' in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word. If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. You can reach me on Bluesky at @ The Guardian has given up posting from its official accounts on X, but individual Guardian journalists are there, I still have my account, and if you message me there at @AndrewSparrow, I will see it and respond if necessary. I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos. No error is too small to correct. And I find your questions very interesting too. I can't promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.
