Modi vows strong response to any 'terrorist attack'
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has vowed to respond strongly to any future "terrorist attack". Photo: Indian Press Information Bureau via AFP
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi vowed on Monday to respond strongly to any future "terrorist attack", and warned that New Delhi would not tolerate "nuclear blackmail" in the event of further conflict with Pakistan.
A weekend ceasefire appeared to be holding, after four days of intense jetfighter, missile, drone and artillery attacks -- the worst violence between the two nuclear-armed neighbours since 1999.
US President Donald Trump on Monday said American intervention had prevented a "bad nuclear war".
"We stopped a nuclear conflict... millions of people could have been killed," he told reporters at the White House.
Modi, in a televised address to the nation -- his first since hostilities began last Wednesday -- said Pakistan has chosen to attack rather than help it fight "terrorism".
"If another terrorist attack against India is carried out, a strong response will be given," he said.
The alarming spiral towards all-out war began before dawn on Wednesday, when India launched missile attacks destroying what it called "terrorist camps" in the Pakistan-administered part of Kashmir.
"If Pakistan wants to survive, it will have to destroy its terror infrastructure," Modi said.
The conflict followed an April 22 attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir which killed 26 civilians.
India accused Pakistan of backing the attack, but Islamabad denied involvement. (AFP)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South China Morning Post
2 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
China denies FBI chief's accusation; customised robots for rent: SCMP daily highlights
Catch up on some of SCMP's biggest China stories of the day. If you would like to see more of our reporting, please consider subscribing Claims by the head of the FBI that China is a threat to the Indo-Pacific are groundless, Beijing said as the American security agency opened its first permanent office in New Zealand. The US government sent mixed messages on Thursday on where the latest trade agreement with China, including a possible extension of the pause on tariff hikes, is headed. The containerised launch system was seen in footage from President Donald Trump's visit to the US Army's Fort Bragg base in June. Photo: X/Dan Scavino China's military has warned that America's new containerised missile and rocket launch system could 'seriously undermine regional strategic stability'.
AllAfrica
3 hours ago
- AllAfrica
Why Trump can't stop the Ukraine and Gaza wars
In yet another twist in his unpredictable decision-making, US President Donald Trump has dramatically shortened his original 50-day ultimatum to Vladimir Putin to call a ceasefire in Ukraine to a mere ten days. It's an unmistakable sign of Trump's frustration with the Russian leader, whom he now appears to view as the main obstacle to ending the war. Progress has been similarly limited on another of Trump's flagship foreign policy projects: ending the war in Gaza. As a humanitarian catastrophe engulfs the territory, Trump and some of his MAGA base are finally challenging Israel's denials that, after almost two years of war, many Gazans now face a real risk of starvation. In neither case have his efforts to mediate and bring an end to the violence borne any fruit. But not all of Trump's efforts to stop violence in conflicts elsewhere in the world have been similarly futile. The administration brokered a ceasefire between Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), which the two countries' foreign ministers signed in Washington on June 27. The US president has also claimed to be behind the ceasefire between India and Pakistan in May after the two sides had engaged in several days of fierce combat following a terror attack in Indian-administered Kashmir by a Pakistan-backed rebel group. And, drawing a clear parallel between this conflict and the border clashes between Cambodia and Thailand in July, Trump announced he had pushed both countries' leaders to negotiate a ceasefire. All of these ceasefires, so far, have held. By contrast, the ceasefire in the war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, to which Trump contributed in January, even before he was inaugurated for his second term, broke down in March and fighting has escalated ever since. A short-lived ceasefire in Ukraine in April was barely worth its name given the countless violations. Three factors can explain Trump's mixed record of peacemaking to date. First, the US president is more likely to succeed in stopping the fighting where he has leverage and is willing to use it to force foreign leaders to bend to his will. For example, Trump was very clear that there would be no trade negotiations with Thailand or Cambodia 'until such time as the fighting STOPS.' The crucial difference, so far, with the situation in the war against Ukraine is that Trump has, and has used, similar leverage only with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelensky. This led to a US-Ukraine agreement on a 30-day ceasefire proposal just two weeks after the now-notorious row between Trump and Zelensky in the Oval Office. The mere threat of sanctions against Russia, by contrast, has done little to persuade Putin to accept whatever deal might Trump offer him. Trump's threats – which he has never followed through on – did not work in January or May. The Kremlin's initial reactions to the latest ultimatum from the White House do not indicate a change in Putin's attitude. A second factor that may explain why Trump has had peacemaking success in some cases but not others is the level of complexity of US interests involved. When it comes to US relations with Russia and Israel, there is a lot more at stake for Trump. The US president still appears keen to strike a grand bargain with Russia and China under which Washington, Beijing and Moscow would agree to recognize, and not interfere in, their respective spheres of influence. This could explain his hesitation so far to follow through on his threats to Putin. Similarly, US interests in the Middle East – whether it's over Iran's nuclear program or relations with America's Gulf allies – have put strains on the alliance with Israel. Trump also needs to weigh carefully the impact of any move against, or in support of, Israel on his domestic support base. In the deal Trump brokered between Rwanda and the DRC, the issues at stake were much simpler: access for US investors to the mineral riches of the eastern DRC. Just days into his second term, Trump acknowledged that the conflict was a 'very serious problem.' Congo's president, Felix Tshisekedi, responded by offering the US access to minerals in exchange for pushing Rwanda to a deal to end the invasion and stop supporting proxy forces in the DRC. This leads to the third factor that has enabled Trump's peace-making success so far: simpler solutions are easier to achieve. Thailand and Cambodia and India and Pakistan can go back to the situation before their recent fighting. That does not resolve any of the underlying issues in their conflicts, but returns their relations to some form of non-violent stability. It is ultimately also in the interests of the conflict parties. They have had a chance to make their violent statements and reinforce what they will and won't tolerate from the other side. The required investment by an external mediator to end battles that have achieved what the warring sides want anyway – to avoid further escalation – is consequently quite limited. Getting to any kind of stability in Ukraine or the Middle East, by contrast, requires prolonged engagement and attention to detail. These conflicts are at a stage in which a return to how things were before is not in the interests of the parties or their external backers. Nudging warring parties along on the path to agreement under such conditions requires a well-designed process, which is absent in Ukraine and failing in Gaza. Thanks to funding and personnel cuts, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio is now required to perform multiple roles. Trump relies on personal envoys with at best limited foreign policy expertise, while insisting he makes all the decisions. This ultimately suggests that the White House simply may not have the bandwidth for the level of engagement that would be necessary to get to a deal in Ukraine and the Middle East. This is a self-inflicted opportunity lost, not only for the United States but also for the long-suffering people of Ukraine and the Middle East. Stefan Wolff is professor of international security, University of Birmingham This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
RTHK
5 hours ago
- RTHK
Yoon gets down and dirty to stymie interrogation
Yoon gets down and dirty to stymie interrogation Yoon Suk-yeol is said to have refused arrest by 'lying on the floor without wearing his prison-issued clothing'. File photo: Reuters South Korea's impeached former president Yoon Suk-yeol lay on his prison cell floor in his underwear to resist attempts to interrogate him, prosecutors said on Friday. Prosecutors obtained a fresh arrest warrant on Thursday to forcibly bring the former leader in for questioning over allegations of election tampering. However, they were "unable to do so due to his strong refusal", prosecutor Oh Jeong-hee said. "The suspect refused arrest while lying on the floor without wearing his prison-issued clothing," she said. "Due to concerns over safety incidents, physical force was withheld, and the execution of the warrant was temporarily suspended." Yoon was wearing "a sleeveless top and prison-issued briefs," prosecutors said, calling it the "most appropriate way" to describe his attire given the "serious nature of the situation". Prosecutors informed Yoon they would have to carry out physical force if necessary in the next attempt. Yoon was arrested after he tried to impose martial law on December 3, sending troops to parliament to prevent lawmakers from voting down his declaration and plunging the country into political turmoil. He faces a litany of charges, from insurrection to election tampering, but has refused multiple times to appear at his summons. Yoon's legal team said the prosecutors had shown a "disturbing disregard" for "basic human decency". "The special counsel turned what should have been a press briefing into a stage for personal humiliation," Yoon's lawyer Yoo Jeong-hwa said. "What kind of legal institution in a civilised country gives a real-time report and commentary to journalists on a detainee's clothing, especially in a cramped cell nearing 40 degrees [Celsius]?" Yoon's lawyers said the former president suffers from "several underlying conditions that pose significant challenges to maintaining his health", making it difficult for him to fully cooperate with the investigation. South Korea's justice minister told a parliamentary hearing that it was "frankly embarrassing for a former president to behave that way". "He had been wearing a short-sleeved top and trousers, but reportedly removed his prison uniform when the special counsel team attempted to enforce the arrest warrant, only to put it back on immediately after they left," Jung Sung-ho said. "We will ensure he is treated with appropriate dignity, without raising any suspicion of preferential treatment, in light of his former position," he added. (AFP)
