logo
In the course of the day

In the course of the day

Express Tribune2 days ago
Listen to article
I am visiting abroad and not able to keep up with the 24/7 television news which would sink a day into an unending cycle of how great we are doing, how insidious the enemy is, and how PTI continues to be the anathema to our collective drive to greatness. But I do catch glimpses here and there to know where the rest of the world is going — not great places, I can assure you, and how I have found my relative freedom from such imbecile engagement.
Two things though still caught my eye: Qasim and Suleman, Imran Khan's kids, are the new threat and they need to be closely monitored for they may upturn the system of power in Pakistan.
And second, in continuation of how intimately we are waltzing with the new US administration in Trump's repeated infatuation with power, even if it emerged from the F-10/PL-15 combo — China brand — there was better sense and a promise when Ishaq Dar spoke to a Washington think-tank and suggested Pakistan can and may be ready to look at out-of-box solutions on Kashmir, such as moving away from the UNSC Resolutions which are binary and do not per se provide the option to expand the list of options where Kashmiris can have the right to seek a third option other than the zero-sum choice of India or Pakistan as their homeland.
What if they now, after seventy-eight years, seek a country of their own? The interpretation and the argument are entirely mine. No politician worth his salt would risk being seen with these words. All he reportedly said was that it doesn't have to be one or the other — India or Pakistan — but what the Kashmiris want. There is enough plausibility for denial built into this 'official' and 'reported' statement.
The rest is left to imagination, primordial or ideational. Not a soul though will stand for what is not safe and official. Hence, life will be as it has been for the rest of our lifetimes. So much for breakthroughs and an improved Pakistani recognition and space on the global stage.
A few things should be clear. The US is in no position to arbitrate on Kashmir. Yes, they did the region a huge favour in intervening to stop the war but that's about it. Our compulsions are local and so are our issues though with implications that can mushroom globally and hence, the world has kept running to keep us from our periodically default conflict-prone recourse. Pakistan did great in reestablishing and reinforcing the deterrent — a combination of the conventional and the nuclear — against India.
This is a huge positive which endowed greater freedom of action to Pakistan to work on challenges which are mostly internal along a broad spectrum. How long will such space remain is to be seen. Will India try another hand on testing the threshold? Probably not yet or not right away. There are serious gaps that have come to light in its own system of forces which needs time and attention.
It would like to have all her bases covered before she indulges in another adventure. She might utilise other avenues in the lower spectrum with transient or lower effects as is being evinced for some time now on the Afghan border and in Balochistan. Also, not the very best of a nation's defence is needed to counter such a threat which can be effectively handled by counter-terror police and paramilitary forces. Though this threat needs to be fully neutralised early enough to avoid casting adversely on Pakistan's economy and society. Cumulatively, it can leave a debilitating fatigue and a lingering sense of inevitable unease. Pakistan should not let that set in.
But then there is that gap and liberty of action in policy innovation that Pakistan can pursue to solve and resolve Kashmir — I use both terms deliberately. It may not change the paradigm of engagement in South Asia, but it will eliminate a major source of triggering a wider conflict of the kind that India and Pakistan almost entered in May and barely escaped from its most dreadful consequences with outside help.
Like in the Cold War, if the level of animosity is such that the two must still bring the other down for whatever reason — civilisational, arrogance of assumed power, or mere subjugation — at least the means can remain restricted to proxy only as is currently the case. This can still be handled and neutralised with a focused effort. But what it leaves is a more formal, political space for dealing with the root cause plaguing the region. The Foreign Minister was not only right, but brave to think beyond the shackles of an anachronistic policy which has kept the region locked in inaction on this front. They can fight wars but not solve issues.
Politically, if India puts forward status quo as its preferred dialectic, the response option remains with Pakistan to move India away from its entrenched position. The cost on the battlefield for forcing policy options is horrendously unsustainable for either side as the small war showed. Hence the crying need instead to get to the table.
The world at large too is desperate to hear differently from the region of how to assist. The zero-sum option formalised in the UNSC statutes generates its own fatigue and most of the world simply walks by such an argument. It is time to break the mold of our own response and see if it can entice public and international attention. In that sense Ishaq Dar's statement even if to initiate an academic discussion is a welcome break.
I have long proposed an independent Kashmir on the lines of Switzerland as a breakout option from the logjam that has held us in an eternal face-off. What seemed right under the principles of the partition then would have surely changed as Kashmiris have fought for their independence with a cost paid in almost 100,000 lives in the last three decades. It is about time that the world noticed their fundamental right to determine their own future.
How can Pakistan or India decide what their future might be? It is time that the issue of Kashmir be looked at in a new light. This may also unshackle the potential of this region and its people towards far greater prosperity and promise than what has fallen their way bound in unimaginative policy. If we have garnered space at the world stage, courtesy of some great work done by our warriors, rather than fizzle in useless chest thumping it be put to constructive use. It may return a blank but then we already have that. The space should be used to turn the almost dead stone over.
In the meanwhile, Qasim and Suleman have ended their brief sojourn to the US and decided to let Pakistani politics proceed at its own pace. The threat of them pulling a rabbit out of the hat stands thankfully postponed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Imran's sons call on Trump to intervene for father's release
Imran's sons call on Trump to intervene for father's release

Express Tribune

time27 minutes ago

  • Express Tribune

Imran's sons call on Trump to intervene for father's release

Listen to article The sons of former prime minister Imran Khan have appealed for international attention to what they describe as their father's 'inhumane' incarceration, calling particularly on former US President Donald Trump to use his influence to support his release. In a wide-ranging interview with British journalist Piers Morgan, the two brothers expressed deep concern over the deteriorating health and prison conditions of their father, who has been in custody at Adiala Jail since August 2023. 'We'd urge Pakistan's leaders to respect democracy, respect the will of the Pakistani people — which was clear despite the massive rigging in February's elections — and to give him a fair trial,' said Sulaiman Khan. The brothers, who have largely avoided the spotlight in the past, broke their public silence over their father's imprisonment in May this year. The brothers said they were compelled to speak out due to the desperate circumstances surrounding their father's detention. 'We're quite private people… but it's getting to a stage where we're desperate. We want to do whatever we can,' said Kasim. Sulaiman and Kasim revealed that they have not seen their father in nearly three years, and have not spoken to him for over four months. Read More: Imran being kept in 'poor conditions', says Kasim Khan 'A Pakistani court mandated weekly phone calls, but we would sometimes go two or three months without contact,' said Sulaiman. 'Often, we'd receive a message at 2am saying we would speak to him at 9am. If we missed that, the chance was gone — it rolled on another two months.' The brothers said they had not been allowed a single phone call since their last public interview, suggesting that authorities were using this to 'cause him further distress.' Describing Khan's current conditions in jail, the brothers alleged he was confined to a small cell for 22 hours a day with limited access to books, his legal team, and even his physician. 'He's washing himself with visibly murky, discoloured water. The hygiene levels are abysmal,' said Kasim. 'Ten people have died in that prison due to hepatitis C, which is believed to have spread through unsanitary conditions.' They also alleged that authorities had restricted access to the few books Khan was allowed to read, and said his physical and mental well-being was increasingly at risk. Also Read: Iranian president lands in Pakistan on first official visit 'There have been moments where I've thought: am I going to see him again?' Kasim said quietly. 'This is the longest I've gone without speaking to him. The fear is very real.' The brothers said they had explored the possibility of visiting Pakistan to see their father but were warned by sources within the Pakistani government and their own extended network that they would likely be arrested upon arrival. 'We still applied for visas and haven't received any response yet,' they said, adding that they remained hopeful of travelling to Pakistan when circumstances allowed. Sulaiman and Kasim also called on the international community — particularly US President Donald Trump — to use his influence to support their father's release. Read: Pakistan Army inducts Z-10ME attack helicopters under COAS' supervision 'If anyone can make a difference, it's him,' said Sulaiman. 'Trump and my father had a great relationship when both were in office. They respected each other, and we know he's one of the few people who could get the establishment in Pakistan to act.' They also acknowledged support from US Special Presidential Envoy Richard Grenell, who has publicly advocated for Khan's release on social media. 'We would love to speak to Trump or find some way he could help. At the end of the day, all we want is to free our father, restore democracy in Pakistan, and ensure his basic human rights are respected,' Sulaiman said.

How Pakistan shot down Indian jets with Chinese tech
How Pakistan shot down Indian jets with Chinese tech

Express Tribune

time2 hours ago

  • Express Tribune

How Pakistan shot down Indian jets with Chinese tech

Rafale fighter jet taxis on the tarmac during its induction ceremony at an air force station in Ambala, India, September 10, REUTERS Listen to article Just after midnight on May 7, the screen in the Pakistan Air Force's operations room lit up in red with the positions of dozens of active enemy planes across the border in India. Air Chief Mshl. Zaheer Sidhu had been sleeping on a mattress just off that room for days in anticipation of an Indian assault. New Delhi had claimed Islamabad for backing militants who carried out an attack the previous month in Indian Kashmir, which killed 26 civilians. Despite Islamabad denying any involvement, India had vowed a response, which came in the early hours of May 7 with air strikes on Pakistan. Sidhu ordered Pakistan's prized Chinese-made J-10C jets to scramble. A senior Pakistani Air Force (PAF) official, who was present in the operations room, said Sidhu instructed his staff to target Rafales, a French-made fighter that is the jewel of India's fleet and had never been downed in battle. "He wanted Rafales," said the official. The hour-long fight, which took place in darkness, involved some 110 aircraft, experts estimate, making it the world's largest air battle in decades. The J-10s shot down at least one Rafale, Reuters reported in May, citing US officials. However Pakistan downed at least 6 jet aircrafts in the war. Its downing surprised many in the military community and raised questions about the effectiveness of Western military hardware against untested Chinese alternatives. Read More: FO slams India's 'Operation Mahadev' as 'entirely fabricated' Shares of Dassault, which makes the Rafale, dipped after reports the fighter had been shot down. Indonesia, which has outstanding Rafale orders, has said it is now considering purchasing J-10s – a major boost to China's efforts to sell the aircraft overseas. But Reuters interviews with two Indian officials and three of their Pakistani counterparts found that the performance of the Rafale wasn't the key problem: Central to its downing was an Indian intelligence failure concerning the range of the China-made PL-15 missile fired by the J-10 fighter. China and Pakistan are the only countries to operate both J-10s, known as Vigorous Dragons, and PL-15s. The faulty intelligence gave the Rafale pilots a false sense of confidence they were out of Pakistani firing distance, which they believed was only around 150 km, the Indian officials said, referring to the widely cited range of PL-15's export variant. "We ambushed them," the PAF official said, adding that Islamabad conducted an electronic warfare assault on Delhi's systems in an attempt to confuse Indian pilots. Indian officials dispute the effectiveness of those efforts. "The Indians were not expecting to be shot at," said Justin Bronk, air warfare expert at London's Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think-tank. "And the PL-15 is clearly very capable at long range." A Chinese Chengdu J-10 fighter aircraft performs a flight during the Aviadarts competition, as part of the International Army Games 2021, at the Dubrovichi range outside Ryazan, Russia, August 27, REUTERS The PL-15 that hit the Rafale was fired from around 200km (124.27 mi) away, according to Pakistani officials, and even farther according to Indian officials. That would make it among the longest-range air-to-air strikes recorded. India's defense and foreign ministries did not return requests for comment about the intelligence mistakes. Delhi hasn't acknowledged a Rafale being shot down, but France's air chief told reporters in June that he had seen evidence of the loss of that fighter and two other aircraft flown by India, including a Russian-made Sukhoi. A top Dassault executive also told French lawmakers that month that India had lost a Rafale in operations, though he didn't have specific details. Pakistan's military referred to past comments by a spokesperson who said that its professional preparedness and resolve was more important than the weaponry it had deployed. China's defense ministry did not respond to Reuters' questions. Dassault and UAC, the manufacturer of the Sukhoi, also did not return requests for comment. "Situational awareness" Reuters spoke to eight Pakistani and two Indian officials to piece together an account of the aerial battle, which marked the start of four days of fighting between the two nuclear-armed neighbors that caused alarm in Washington. The officials all spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss national security matters. Not only did Islamabad have the element of surprise with its missiles' range, the Pakistani and Indian officials said, but it managed to more efficiently connect its military hardware to surveillance on the ground and in the air, providing it with a clearer picture of the battlefield. Such networks, known as "kill chains," have become a crucial element of modern warfare. Four Pakistani officials said they created a "kill chain," or a multi-domain operation, by linking air, land and space sensors. The network included a Pakistani-developed system, Data Link 17, which connected Chinese military hardware with other equipment, including a Swedish-made surveillance plane, two Pakistani officials said. The system allowed the J-10s flying closer to India to obtain radar feeds from the surveillance plane cruising further away, meaning the Chinese-made fighters could turn their radars off and fly undetected, according to experts. Pakistan's military did not respond to requests for comment on this point. Delhi is trying to set up a similar network, the Indian officials said, adding that their process was more complicated because the country sourced aircraft from a wide range of exporters. Retired UK Air Mshl. Greg Bagwell, now a fellow at RUSI, said the episode didn't conclusively prove the superiority of either Chinese or Western air assets but it showed the importance of having the right information and using it. 'The winner in this was the side that had the best situational awareness,' said Bagwell. Change in the tactics After India in the early hours of May 7 struck targets in Pakistan that it claimed terrorist infrastructure, Sidhu ordered his squadrons to switch from defense to attack. Also Read: India's rhetoric fueling instability: FO Five PAF officials said India had deployed some 70 planes, which was more than they had expected and provided Islamabad's PL-15s with a target-rich environment. India has not said how many planes were used. The May 7 battle marked the first big air contest of the modern era in which weaponry is used to strike targets beyond visual range, said Bagwell, noting both India and Pakistan's planes remained well within their airspaces across the duration of the fight. Five Pakistani officials said an electronic assault on Indian sensors and communications systems reduced the situational awareness of the Rafale's pilots. The two Indian officials said the Rafales were not blinded during the skirmishes and that Indian satellites were not jammed. But they acknowledged that Pakistan appeared to have disrupted the Sukhoi, whose systems Delhi is now upgrading. Other Indian security officials have deflected questions away from the Rafale, a centerpiece of India's military modernization, to the orders given to the air force. India's defense attaché in Jakarta told a university seminar that Delhi had lost some aircraft "only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack (Pakistan's) military establishments and their air defenses." India's chief of defense staff Gen. Anil Chauhan previously told Reuters that Delhi quickly "rectified tactics" after the initial losses. After the May 7 air battle, India began targeting Pakistani military infrastructure and asserting its strength in the skies. Its Indian-made BrahMos supersonic cruise missile repeatedly sliced through Pakistan's air defenses, according to officials on both sides. On May 10, India claimed it struck at least nine air bases and radar sites in Pakistan. It also hit a surveillance plane parked in a hangar in southern Pakistan, according to Indian and Pakistani officials. A ceasefire was agreed later that day, after US officials held talks with both sides. 'Live inputs' In the aftermath of the episode, India's deputy army chief Lt. Gen. Rahul Singh accused Pakistan of receiving 'live inputs' from China during the battles, implying radar and satellite feeds. He did not provide evidence and Islamabad denies the allegation. When asked at a July briefing about Beijing's military partnership with Pakistan, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters the work was "part of the normal cooperation between the two countries and does not target any third party." Beijing's air chief Lt. Gen. Wang Gang visited Pakistan in July to discuss how Islamabad had used Chinese equipment to put together the "kill chain' for the Rafale, two PAF officials said. China did not respond when asked about that interaction. The Pakistani military said in a statement in July that Wang had expressed "keen interest in learning from PAF's battle-proven experience in Multi Domain Operations."

How Pakistan shot down India's cutting-edge fighter using Chinese gear
How Pakistan shot down India's cutting-edge fighter using Chinese gear

Business Recorder

time2 hours ago

  • Business Recorder

How Pakistan shot down India's cutting-edge fighter using Chinese gear

ISLAMABAD/NEW DELHI: Just after midnight on May 7, the screen in the Pakistan Air Force's operations room lit up in red with the positions of dozens of active enemy planes across the border in India. Air Chief Mshl. Zaheer Sidhu had been sleeping on a mattress just off that room for days in anticipation of an Indian assault. New Delhi had blamed Islamabad for backing militants who carried out an attack the previous month in Indian Kashmir, which killed 26 civilians. Despite Islamabad denying any involvement, India had vowed a response, which came in the early hours of May 7 with air strikes on Pakistan. Sidhu ordered Pakistan's prized Chinese-made J-10C jets to scramble. A senior Pakistani Air Force (PAF) official, who was present in the operations room, said Sidhu instructed his staff to target Rafales, a French-made fighter that is the jewel of India's fleet and had never been downed in battle. 'He wanted Rafales,' said the official. The hour-long fight, which took place in darkness, involved some 110 aircraft, experts estimate, making it the world's largest air battle in decades. France's Dassault and India's Tata to produce Rafale fuselage in Hyderabad The J-10s shot down at least one Rafale, Reuters reported in May, citing U.S. officials. Its downing surprised many in the military community and raised questions about the effectiveness of Western military hardware against untested Chinese alternatives. Shares of Dassault, which makes the Rafale, dipped after reports the fighter had been shot down. Indonesia, which has outstanding Rafale orders, has said it is now considering purchasing J-10s – a major boost to China's efforts to sell the aircraft overseas. But Reuters interviews with two Indian officials and three of their Pakistani counterparts found that the performance of the Rafale wasn't the key problem: Central to its downing was an Indian intelligence failure concerning the range of the China-made PL-15 missile fired by the J-10 fighter. China and Pakistan are the only countries to operate both J-10s, known as Vigorous Dragons, and PL-15s. The faulty intelligence gave the Rafale pilots a false sense of confidence they were out of Pakistani firing distance, which they believed was only around 150 km, the Indian officials said, referring to the widely cited range of PL-15's export variant. India signs $7.4 billion deal to buy 26 Rafale fighter jets 'We ambushed them,' the PAF official said, adding that Islamabad conducted an electronic warfare assault on Delhi's systems in an attempt to confuse Indian pilots. Indian officials dispute the effectiveness of those efforts. 'The Indians were not expecting to be shot at,' said Justin Bronk, air warfare expert at London's Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) think-tank. 'And the PL-15 is clearly very capable at long range.' The PL-15 that hit the Rafale was fired from around 200km (124.27 mi) away, according to Pakistani officials, and even farther according to Indian officials. That would make it among the longest-range air-to-air strikes recorded. India's defense and foreign ministries did not return requests for comment about the intelligence mistakes. Delhi hasn't acknowledged a Rafale being shot down, but France's air chief told reporters in June that he had seen evidence of the loss of that fighter and two other aircraft flown by India, including a Russian-made Sukhoi. A top Dassault executive also told French lawmakers that month that India had lost a Rafale in operations, though he didn't have specific details. After Pakistan downed Indian jets, Indonesia weighs purchase of China's J-10s Pakistan's military referred to past comments by a spokesperson who said that its professional preparedness and resolve was more important than the weaponry it had deployed. China's defense ministry did not respond to Reuters' questions. Dassault and UAC, the manufacturer of the Sukhoi, also did not return requests for comment. 'Situational awareness' Reuters spoke to eight Pakistani and two Indian officials to piece together an account of the aerial battle, which marked the start of four days of fighting between the two nuclear-armed neighbors that caused alarm in Washington. The officials all spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss national security matters. Not only did Islamabad have the element of surprise with its missiles' range, the Pakistani and Indian officials said, but it managed to more efficiently connect its military hardware to surveillance on the ground and in the air, providing it with a clearer picture of the battlefield. Such networks, known as 'kill chains,' have become a crucial element of modern warfare. Four Pakistani officials said they created a 'kill chain,' or a multi-domain operation, by linking air, land and space sensors. The network included a Pakistani-developed system, Data Link 17, which connected Chinese military hardware with other equipment, including a Swedish-made surveillance plane, two Pakistani officials said. The system allowed the J-10s flying closer to India to obtain radar feeds from the surveillance plane cruising further away, meaning the Chinese-made fighters could turn their radars off and fly undetected, according to experts. Pakistan's military did not respond to requests for comment on this point. Delhi is trying to set up a similar network, the Indian officials said, adding that their process was more complicated because the country sourced aircraft from a wide range of exporters. Retired U.K. Air Mshl. Greg Bagwell, now a fellow at RUSI, said the episode didn't conclusively prove the superiority of either Chinese or Western air assets but it showed the importance of having the right information and using it. 'The winner in this was the side that had the best situational awareness,' said Bagwell. Change in tactics After India in the early hours of May 7 struck targets in Pakistan that it called terrorist infrastructure, Sidhu ordered his squadrons to switch from defense to attack. Five PAF officials said India had deployed some 70 planes, which was more than they had expected and provided Islamabad's PL-15s with a target-rich environment. India has not said how many planes were used. The May 7 battle marked the first big air contest of the modern era in which weaponry is used to strike targets beyond visual range, said Bagwell, noting both India and Pakistan's planes remained well within their airspaces across the duration of the fight. Five Pakistani officials said an electronic assault on Indian sensors and communications systems reduced the situational awareness of the Rafale's pilots. The two Indian officials said the Rafales were not blinded during the skirmishes and that Indian satellites were not jammed. But they acknowledged that Pakistan appeared to have disrupted the Sukhoi, whose systems Delhi is now upgrading. Other Indian security officials have deflected questions away from the Rafale, a centerpiece of India's military modernization, to the orders given to the air force. India's defense attaché in Jakarta told a university seminar that Delhi had lost some aircraft 'only because of the constraint given by the political leadership to not attack (Pakistan's) military establishments and their air defenses.' India's chief of defense staff Gen. Anil Chauhan previously told Reuters that Delhi quickly 'rectified tactics' after the initial losses. After the May 7 air battle, India began targeting Pakistani military infrastructure and asserting its strength in the skies. Its Indian-made BrahMos supersonic cruise missile repeatedly sliced through Pakistan's air defenses, according to officials on both sides. On May 10, India said it struck at least nine air bases and radar sites in Pakistan. It also hit a surveillance plane parked in a hangar in southern Pakistan, according to Indian and Pakistani officials. A ceasefire was agreed later that day, after U.S. officials held talks with both sides. 'Live inputs' In the aftermath of the episode, India's deputy army chief Lt. Gen. Rahul Singh accused Pakistan of receiving 'live inputs' from China during the battles, implying radar and satellite feeds. He did not provide evidence and Islamabad denies the allegation. When asked at a July briefing about Beijing's military partnership with Pakistan, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters the work was 'part of the normal cooperation between the two countries and does not target any third party.' Beijing's air chief Lt. Gen. Wang Gang visited Pakistan in July to discuss how Islamabad had used Chinese equipment to put together the 'kill chain' for the Rafale, two PAF officials said. China did not respond when asked about that interaction. The Pakistani military said in a statement in July that Wang had expressed 'keen interest in learning from PAF's battle-proven experience in Multi Domain Operations.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store