Latest news with #VikramMisri
Hindustan Times
15 hours ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
India rejects Hague court's ruling on plea filed by Pak
India on Friday rejected a ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague that it can continue hearing a case related to Pakistan's objections to Kishenganga and Ratle hydropower projects despite New Delhi's decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty, and said it has never recognised this court. India rejects Hague court's ruling on plea filed by Pak The Indian side has never participated in the proceedings at the Permanent Court of Arbitration since Pakistan raised objections to certain design elements of the 330-MW Kishanganga and 850-MW Ratle hydropower projects in 2016 under the provisions of the Indus Waters Treaty. On Friday, the Court of Arbitration considered the impact of the Indian government's decision of April 23 to keep the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance on its competence to take up the case lodged by Pakistan. In a unanimous decision, the court ruled that India's decision 'does not limit' its competence over the dispute and that the ruling 'is binding on the Parties and without appeal'. The external affairs ministry categorically rejected the 'so-called supplemental award' of the Court of Arbitration, just as it 'rejected all prior pronouncements of this body'. The ministry said in a statement that the Court of Arbitration is illegal and was 'purportedly constituted under the Indus Waters Treaty…albeit in brazen violation of it'. A day after the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22 that killed 26 civilians, India unveiled a slew of punitive diplomatic and economic measures against Pakistan, including the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960. At the time, foreign secretary Vikram Misri declared the treaty 'will be held in abeyance with immediate effect, until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism'. Prior to suspending the treaty, the Indian side always contended that there is a graded mechanism under the pact for addressing disputes, and that two different approaches can't be simultaneously initiated to tackle differences. While Pakistan sought the appointment of a neutral expert to handle its objections to the Kishenganga and Ratle projects in 2015, it unilaterally retracted this in 2016 and sought a Court of Arbitration. In 2016, the World Bank appointed both a neutral expert and the Court of Arbitration, which wasn't recognised by India. India has attended meetings convened by the neutral expert but stayed away from proceedings of the Court of Arbitration. India has 'never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration, and India's position has all along been that the constitution of this so-called arbitral body is in itself a serious breach of the Indus Waters Treaty', the external affairs ministry said. Any proceedings in this and 'any award or decision taken by it are also for that reason illegal and per se void', the ministry said. The ministry reiterated the reasons for suspending the Indus Waters Treaty after the Pahalgam attack. India exercised its rights as a sovereign nation under international law and placed the treaty in abeyance until Pakistan 'abjures its support for cross-border terrorism'. 'Until such time that the Treaty is in abeyance, India is no longer bound to perform any of its obligations under the Treaty,' the ministry said. 'No Court of Arbitration, much less this illegally constituted arbitral body which has no existence in the eye of law, has the jurisdiction to examine the legality of India's actions in exercise of its rights as a sovereign.' The external affairs ministry described the Court of Arbitration's ruling as the 'latest charade at Pakistan's behest', and said this was 'yet another desperate attempt by [Pakistan] to escape accountability for its role as the global epicenter of terrorism'. 'Pakistan's resort to this fabricated arbitration mechanism is consistent with its decades-long pattern of deception and manipulation of international forums,' the ministry said. The Indus Waters Treaty, which was brokered by the World Bank, allocated the western rivers – Indus, Jhelum, Chenab – to Pakistan, and the eastern rivers – Ravi, Beas and Sutlej – to India. It allowed each country certain uses on the rivers allocated to the other. The Kishenganga and Ratle projects are run-of-river hydroelectric projects that India is permitted by the treaty to build on tributaries of the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab before the rivers flow into Pakistan. India had also rejected the Court of Arbitration's earlier ruling of July 2023 regarding its competence to hear the dispute over the two hydropower projects. Following India's suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, Pakistan's leadership said any diversion of waters allocated to it by the pact would be seen as an 'act of war'. Pakistani ministers also said they planned to challenge India's action at the Permanent Court of Arbitration or the International Court of Justice.
Hindustan Times
a day ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
‘Charade at Pak's behest': India rejects Hague court ruling on hydro projects
NEW DELHI: India on Friday rejected a ruling by the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague that it can continue hearing a case related to Pakistan's objections to Kishenganga and Ratle hydropower projects despite New Delhi's decision to suspend the Indus Waters Treaty, and said it has never recognised this court. The external affairs ministry said India has 'never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration,'. (HT FILE PHOTO/Waseem Andrabi) The Indian side has never participated in the proceedings at the Permanent Court of Arbitration since Pakistan raised objections to certain design elements of the 330 MW Kishanganga and 850 MW Ratle hydropower projects in 2016 under the provisions of the Indus Waters Treaty. On Friday, the Court of Arbitration considered the impact of the Indian government's decision of April 23 to keep the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance on its competence to take up the case lodged by Pakistan. In a unanimous decision, the court ruled that India's decision 'does not limit' its competence over the dispute and that the ruling 'is binding on the Parties and without appeal'. The external affairs ministry categorically rejected the 'so-called supplemental award' of the Court of Arbitration, just as it 'rejected all prior pronouncements of this body'. The ministry said in a statement that the Court of Arbitration is illegal and was 'purportedly constituted under the Indus Waters Treaty…albeit in brazen violation of it'. A day after the Pahalgam terror attack on April 22 that killed 26 civilians, India unveiled a slew of punitive diplomatic and economic measures against Pakistan, including the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty of 1960. At the time, foreign secretary Vikram Misri declared the treaty 'will be held in abeyance with immediate effect, until Pakistan credibly and irrevocably abjures its support for cross-border terrorism'. Prior to suspending the treaty, the Indian side always contended that there is a graded mechanism under the pact for addressing disputes, and that two different approaches can't be simultaneously initiated to tackle differences. While Pakistan sought the appointment of a neutral expert to handle its objections to the Kishenganga and Ratle projects in 2015, it unilaterally retracted this in 2016 and sought a Court of Arbitration. In 2016, the World Bank appointed both a neutral expert and the Court of Arbitration, which wasn't recognised by India. India has attended meetings convened by the neutral expert but stayed away from the proceedings of the Court of Arbitration. India has 'never recognised the existence in law of this so-called Court of Arbitration, and India's position has all along been that the constitution of this so-called arbitral body is in itself a serious breach of the Indus Waters Treaty', the external affairs ministry said. Any proceedings in this and 'any award or decision taken by it are also for that reason illegal and per se void', the ministry said. The ministry reiterated the reasons for suspending the Indus Waters Treaty after the Pahalgam attack. India exercised its rights as a sovereign nation under international law and placed the treaty in abeyance until Pakistan 'abjures its support for cross-border terrorism'. 'Until such time that the Treaty is in abeyance, India is no longer bound to perform any of its obligations under the Treaty,' the ministry said. 'No Court of Arbitration, much less this illegally constituted arbitral body which has no existence in the eye of law, has the jurisdiction to examine the legality of India's actions in exercise of its rights as a sovereign.' The external affairs ministry described the Court of Arbitration's ruling as the 'latest charade at Pakistan's behest', and said this was 'yet another desperate attempt by [Pakistan] to escape accountability for its role as the global epicenter of terrorism'. 'Pakistan's resort to this fabricated arbitration mechanism is consistent with its decades-long pattern of deception and manipulation of international forums,' the ministry said. The Indus Waters Treaty, which was brokered by the World Bank, allocated the western rivers – Indus, Jhelum, Chenab – to Pakistan, and the eastern rivers – Ravi, Beas and Sutlej – to India. It allowed each country certain uses on the rivers allocated to the other. The Kishenganga and Ratle projects are run-of-river hydroelectric projects that India is permitted by the treaty to build on tributaries of the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab before the rivers flow into Pakistan. India had also rejected the Court of Arbitration's earlier ruling of July 2023 regarding its competence to hear the dispute over the two hydropower projects. Following India's suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, Pakistan's leadership said any diversion of waters allocated to it by the pact would be seen as an 'act of war'. Pakistani ministers also said they planned to challenge India's action at the Permanent Court of Arbitration or the International Court of Justice.
Russia Today
7 days ago
- Politics
- Russia Today
Pakistan recommends Trump for Nobel Peace Prize
The Pakistani government has formally recommended US President Donald Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize, citing his mediation efforts in ending the recent military conflict between Islamabad and New Delhi. India, however, insists Trump played no role in de-escalating the tensions. Relations between the two nuclear-armed neighbors escalated in late April after a deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam in Indian‑administered Kashmir, which New Delhi blamed on Pakistan‑backed militants. In a statement on Friday, the Pakistani government announced it 'decided to formally recommend' Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize 'in recognition of his decisive diplomatic intervention and pivotal leadership during the recent India-Pakistan crisis.' According to Islamabad, the American leader helped de-escalate a 'rapidly deteriorating situation' that could have triggered 'catastrophic consequences for millions in the region and beyond.' It also expressed gratitude to Trump for offering to help resolve the longstanding Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India. The US president has repeatedly claimed credit for the ceasefire on May 10 that halted the hostilities between the two neighboring states. However, the Indian government has denied that the US president played a decisive role. Speaking at a press briefing on Wednesday, Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri revealed that during a phone conversation with Trump the previous day, Prime Minister Narendra Modi stressed that 'India has never accepted mediation [to resolve its dispute with Islamabad over Jammu and Kashmir], does not accept and will never accept it.' Also on Wednesday, the US president invited Pakistan Army chief Asim Munir to a private lunch meeting, after the field marshal similarly called for Trump's Nobel nomination, Reuters reported, citing White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly. On Saturday, in a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump stated that he and Secretary of State Marco Rubio had arranged a 'wonderful treaty between the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the Republic of Rwanda in their war.' 'I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for this, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for stopping the War between India and Pakistan, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for stopping the War between Serbia and Kosovo, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for keeping Peace between Egypt and Ethiopia… and I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for doing the Abraham Accords in the Middle East,' Trump lamented. Speaking to reporters the previous day, the Republican made similar claims about his role in resolving those conflicts. 'I should have gotten [the Nobel Peace Prize] four or five times,' he insisted, claiming that this will not happen 'because they only give it to liberals.'
The Guardian
21-06-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Give Trump the Nobel peace prize for ‘stellar statesmanship', says Pakistan
Pakistan has said it will recommend Donald Trump for the Nobel peace prize for his work in helping to resolve the recent conflict between India and Pakistan. The move, announced on Saturday, came as the US president mulls joining Israel in striking Iran's nuclear facilities. 'President Trump demonstrated great strategic foresight and stellar statesmanship through robust diplomatic engagement with both Islamabad and New Delhi, which de-escalated a rapidly deteriorating situation,' Pakistan said in a statement. 'This intervention stands as a testament to his role as a genuine peacemaker.' Governments can nominate people for the Nobel peace prize. There was no immediate response from Washington. A spokesperson for the Indian government did not respond to a request for comment. In May, a surprise announcement by Trump of a ceasefire brought an abrupt end to a four-day conflict between nuclear-armed foes India and Pakistan. Trump has since repeatedly said that he averted a nuclear war, saved millions of lives and grumbled that he got no credit for it. Pakistan agrees that US diplomatic intervention ended the fighting, but India says it was a bilateral agreement between the two militaries. In a phone call with Trump last week, Narendra Modi had made it 'absolutely clear' that hostilities ceased only after Pakistan requested a ceasefire, and that no third-party mediation took place, said India's foreign secretary, Vikram Misri. In a social media post on Friday, Trump gave a long list of conflicts he said he had resolved, including India and Pakistan and the Abraham accords in his first term between Israel and some Muslim-majority countries. He added: 'No, I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do, including Russia/Ukraine, and Israel/Iran, whatever those outcomes may be, but the people know, and that's all that matters to me!' Pakistan's move to nominate Trump came in the same week its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, met the US leader for lunch. It was the first time that a Pakistani military leader had been invited to the White House when a civilian government was in place in Islamabad. Mushahid Hussain, a former chair of the senate defence committee in Pakistan's parliament, suggested nominating Trump for the peace prize was justified. 'Trump is good for Pakistan,' he said. 'If this panders to Trump's ego, so be it. All the European leaders have been sucking up to him big time.' But the move was not universally applauded in Pakistan, where Trump's support for Israel's war in Gaza has inflamed tensions. 'Israel's sugar daddy in Gaza and cheerleader of its attacks on Iran isn't a candidate for any prize,' said Talat Hussain, a prominent Pakistani television political talkshow host, in a post on X.
The Star
21-06-2025
- Politics
- The Star
Will return of Indian pilgrims to Tibet help ease tensions with China?
China has been urged to use the resumption of visits to Tibet by Indian pilgrims to improve relations between the two countries after years of tensions. Earlier this year, China said it would allow pilgrims to return to the Tibet autonomous region this summer to follow two pilgrimage routes after a five-year suspension caused by Covid controls and ongoing cross-border tensions. It is open to Indian citizens with valid passports who wish to travel to Mount Kailash and Lake Mansarovar for religious reasons. The sites are sacred to followers of Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Bon. The pilgrimages are usually organised by the Indian government and involve treks through the Lipulekh Pass in Uttarakhand or Nathu La Pass in Sikkim. This year, 5,561 people applied to make the journey, 750 of whom will be allowed to travel along the two routes between June and August, India's Ministry of External Affairs said last month. 'Pilgrimages by Indian devotees to Tibet have played a positive role in restoring stability in China-India relations during times of crisis,' Yang Yabo, director of the Institute of South Asia Studies at the Tibet Academy of Social Sciences in Lhasa, wrote in an article published in news platform ThePaper on Thursday. 'More importantly, they have promoted people-to-people exchanges and fostered mutual understanding between the two countries.' China and India have been working to mend relations in recent months following years of tensions following a deadly 2020 clash along their disputed border, including an agreement to disengage troops last October. Last week, Indian foreign secretary Vikram Misri held talks with Chinese foreign vice-minister Sun Weidong, and both sides agreed to work towards the resumption of direct flights and take other moves to boost exchanges on economics and trade. While Misri expressed his appreciation for China's decision to allow the Indian pilgrimages to resume, their long-running border dispute and rise of nationalist sentiment in both countries make this a fraught issue. Concerns have been expressed inside India about restrictions placed on pilgrims by the Chinese government, particularly regarding religious practices and access to holy sites. But in contrast, some Chinese nationalists are worried that allowing more religious activities might affect regional stability in Tibet, where Beijing has stressed religious activities must comply with national security rules. But Yang argued that the pilgrimage was a 'manageable' cultural exchange given the legal safeguards in place and small numbers involved. The numbers permitted this year are limited 'so we have the capacity and experience to ensure an orderly reception,' he said, and added that authorities have established a framework to oversee pilgrimages, including registration, route management and ecological protection. This move 'holds groundbreaking significance in shaping the pattern of friendly exchanges between China and India,' according to a commentary published on the website of party mouthpiece People's Daily's on Thursday. During their pilgrimage, Indian devotees will experience Tibet's religious culture, art and traditions, while Tibetans can interact with Indian pilgrims, fostering mutual understanding, it said. These exchanges will promote respect, cultural ties, and boost Tibet's tourism and services sectors, it added. 'This grass roots engagement helps eliminate misunderstandings and lays a solid public support foundation for the healthy and stable development of China-India relations,' it wrote. 'Such people-to-people interactions further promote cooperation across political, economic, and cultural fields, creating a positive environment for resolving historical issues.' - SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST
