
Govt transparency can contain Trump taunts and help India emerge stronger
Despite having the upper hand at a critical juncture, India did not sufficiently degrade Pakistan's military capabilities—particularly its air force. This was a squandered opportunity. Given the extent of the provocation and the clarity of intelligence on militant operations emanating from Pakistani soil, a more decisive and sustained military response could have had a greater deterrent effect. To compound matters, a perception soon took root that New Delhi had accepted a premature ceasefire, allegedly under pressure from the United States. Although there has been no official confirmation of Washington's role, the circumstantial evidence—including the timing and statements by US officials, and subsequent diplomatic moves—suggests that American pressure could have indeed influenced New Delhi's decision-making. If true, this only reinforces the view that India ceded strategic ground just when it had the moral and military high ground. This impression, unless effectively countered, can prove damaging in the long run. It can send the wrong message to both adversaries and allies, thus affecting India's deterrence posture and complicating future military and diplomatic calculations. The government now needs to set the record straight—and do that through transparency. An impartial and comprehensive inquiry must be conducted into the entire episode.
The inquiry must investigate the military objectives, the chain of decisions taken at the highest levels, the diplomatic pressures involved, and the actual outcomes, both in terms of gains and losses. This would not only help bring clarity to the sequence of events but also serve as a vital learning tool for future conflicts. Over two months have passed since the hostilities ended, and the public, as well as Parliament, deserves to know the facts. How many casualties were there? What were the exact losses on both sides? What were the goals set out by the political leadership, and were they achieved? Without this information, speculation will continue to fill the vacuum, potentially harming public morale and weakening trust in the government. In democracies, transparency is not a luxury but a necessity. A government that withholds information under the guise of national interest risks undermining that very interest by alienating its people. If the Modi government continues to remain tight-lipped, it will not only prolong the confusion and unease surrounding the incident but may also damage its own credibility in the eyes of the electorate. India must chart its own strategic course—assertively, confidently, and transparently. Only then can India emerge stronger.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
a minute ago
- Time of India
‘Us' bashes ‘Them'
Attacks on immigrants in West & internal migrants in India extract big socio-economic costs In one variation of the trolley dilemma, you can stop a runaway tram and save five lives by throwing a heavy man on the track, but almost nobody likes this solution. It's because humans – despite all the gore in history – are not normally comfortable with violence. Yet, Charanpreet Singh was bashed up in Adelaide on Saturday evening. A few hours later, another Indian was brutally assaulted in Dublin. Both cases have the appearance of hate crime, which is a growing problem around the world. It might not be the age of peak hate against foreigners because something like America's Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, which practically barred immigration from China for about 60 years, seems unthinkable today. But that could be the result of political correctness. Data from America – self-appointed guardian of democracy and liberal values – shows a 13% jump in hate crimes in the top 10 cities between 2022 and 2023. As Indians, we narrowly focus on attacks targeting Indians, whether in US, Canada, UK, Australia, or elsewhere, but other nationalities are equally targets of hate. In Jan, Nigeria issued an advisory for its citizens travelling to Australia. Let's not forget that internal migrants in India are often targeted by goonish groups. It is normal for people to be suspicious of the outsider – different in speech, appearance, garb, customs – and be reserved, but violence is hard to explain. What might trigger it? Toxic ideology was the culprit in Nazi Germany. Now, there are reactionary ideologues everywhere. Even Trump's Maga push relies on the vilification of immigrants. But as economist Michael Martell points out in a paper, hate is not the way to achieve national greatness. In fact, it has enormous social and economic costs. Martell cites the 2012 shooting at a gurdwara in Wisconsin that left six dead. Not a high toll at first glance, but its cost to society quickly added up. The gurdwara upgraded its security. Alongside, mosques and Hindu temples took note of the attack and spent on better security systems. Terrorised immigrants curbed their movement, affecting local businesses. And this was just one case of hate crime among many. The cumulative cost of fatal and non-fatal hate crimes in US, in 2019, was estimated at $3.4bn. The economic loss from all the hate crime around the world would be many times more. The social cost enormous. As a community leader in Dublin pointed out, immigrants are crucial for keeping services running. Even demographically young India needs Chinese manufacturing experts, and US needs Indian scientists and engineers. So, all countries – India included – must make an effort to dial down xenophobia. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.


India.com
a minute ago
- India.com
Tulsi Gabbard Drops Bombshell, Claims Obama Led Deep State Coup To Sabotage Trump With Russia Hoax
Washington: Tulsi Gabbard stood behind a thick wooden podium under the lights of the press room. The former Congresswoman, now the director of the National Intelligence, did not hesitate. She held up a stack of papers, freshly declassified, with all the gravity her voice could carry. Her words cut through the room like a knife. She said the documents revealed a deliberate effort by top officials under Barack Obama to use U.S. intelligence against a political rival, Donald Trump. 'This is not politics. This is something darker and calculated,' she told reporters. WATCH: Tulsi Gabbard MASTERFULLY laid out every step in Obama's Russia Collussion Hoax Every minute of this is worth watching. Tulsi is exposing EVERYTHING. It's the DOJ's turn now. — Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) July 23, 2025 In a statement she also posted online, she described what she called 'the most egregious weaponization and politicization of intelligence in American history'. According to her, the newly declassified House Intelligence Committee majority staff report, originally compiled in 2017 when Republicans controlled the chamber, uncovered how the Obama administration had knowingly engineered a narrative tying Trump's 2016 victory to Russian interference. Gabbard accused the Obama team of pushing forward with an intelligence assessment in January 2017 that they allegedly knew to be false. 'They promoted the lie that Putin and the Russian government helped President Trump win. They conspired to subvert the will of the American people, working with their partners in the media to promote the lie, in order to undermine the legitimacy of President Trump... essentially enacting a years-long coup against him,' she wrote. New evidence has emerged of the most egregious weaponization and politicization of intelligence in American history. Per President @realDonaldTrump's directive, I have declassified a @HouseIntel oversight majority staff report that exposes how the Obama Administration… — DNI Tulsi Gabbard (@DNIGabbard) July 23, 2025 "There is irrefutable evidence that detail how President Barack Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment that they knew was false." - @DNIGabbard — The White House (@WhiteHouse) July 23, 2025 Within hours, former President Obama's team issued an unusually sharp rebuttal. 'Out of respect for the presidency, we usually ignore the noise from this White House. But these claims are outrageous enough to merit a response,' said Patrick Rodenbush, Obama's spokesperson. He called the allegations 'bizarre', 'ridiculous' and a 'weak attempt at distraction'. He said nothing in the declassified report changed the widely accepted conclusion that Russia had indeed tried to influence the 2016 election. He pointed to the 2020 Senate Intelligence Committee report, led by Republican Senator Marco Rubio, which affirmed those findings while also noting no votes had been altered. Meanwhile, Trump seized the moment. At a rally, he did not mince words. 'We caught Hillary Clinton. We caught Barack Hussein Obama. And then you have many, many people under them – Susan Rice, all of them. They figured they would hide this forever in classified information. It does not work that way,' he said, waving his hand for emphasis. Gabbard's report has already sent ripples through Washington. The New York Times confirmed that the report she declassified was drafted years ago by the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee. Kash Patel, now Trump's FBI director, was one of the chief authors. Only GOP members worked on the report, including its updates in 2020. While the document challenged the Intelligence Community's conclusion that Putin favoured Trump, it did not dispute the broader finding that Russia had interfered. The House report said the intelligence agencies 'rushed' their work. A more recent CIA analysis echoed that claim, suggesting the process lacked some of the standard professional rigor. Still, major news outlets like CNN and The New York Times remain clear. There is no concrete evidence that Obama, Clinton or other officials ran a 'coup' or conspired to overthrow Trump. On the contrary, they emphasise, Trump's own efforts to subvert the 2020 election remain under scrutiny. Inflation remains high, they note. Tariffs loom. And America's political battlefield remains as bitterly divided as ever. But on this July day, Gabbard's voice landed like a thunderclap, setting the stage for yet another storm in America's long war over truth, power and the ghosts of 2016.


NDTV
16 minutes ago
- NDTV
PM Modi In London: UK, India To Sign Landmark Free Trade Pact
London: Britain and India will sign a landmark free trade agreement on Thursday during a visit by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, sealing a deal to cut tariffs on goods from textiles to whisky and cars and allow more market access for businesses. The two countries concluded talks on the long-coveted free trade pact in May after three years of stop-start negotiations, with both sides hastening efforts to clinch a deal in the shadow of tariff turmoil sparked by U.S. President Donald Trump. The agreement between the world's fifth and sixth largest economies aims to increase bilateral trade by a further 25.5 billion pounds ($34 billion) by 2040. It will take effect after the British parliament and India's federal cabinet approve it, likely within a year. "Our landmark trade deal with India is a major win for Britain. It will create thousands of British jobs across the UK, unlock new opportunities for businesses and drive growth," British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said. The agreement will be signed during PM Modi's fourth visit to the UK since he took office in 2014. The leaders will also sign a strategic partnership covering areas such as defence and climate, and strengthen co-operation on tackling crime. Under the trade agreement, tariffs on Scotch whisky will drop to 75% from 150% immediately, and then slide to 40% over the next decade, according to the British government. On cars, India will cut duties to 10% from over 100% under a quota system that will be gradually liberalised. In return, Indian manufacturers are expected to gain access to the UK market for electric and hybrid vehicles, also under a quota system, Indian commerce ministry officials said. The ministry has said 99% of Indian exports to Britain would benefit from zero duties under the deal, including textiles, while Britain will see reductions on 90% of its tariff lines. The agreement represents Britain's most significant trade deal since it left the EU in 2020, though the projected boost to British economic output, of 4.8 billion pounds a year by 2040, is small compared to the country's gross domestic product of 2.6 trillion pounds in 2024. The deal will also facilitate easier access for temporary business visitors, though visas are not covered. Britain and India also agreed to ensure workers no longer have to make social security contributions in both India and Britain during temporary postings in the other country. Under the trade deal, British firms will be able to access India's procurement market for projects in sectors such as clean energy, and it also covers services sectors such as insurance. India didn't succeed in its efforts to get an exemption from Britain's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) - which could levy higher taxes on polluters from 2027 - as part of the deal. The two sides also haven't concluded talks over a separate bilateral investment treaty, which were held in parallel to trade negotiations but still continue.