India suspends flights at 24 airports amid Pakistan conflict
India has suspended civilian flights at 24 airports in the north following fighting with nuclear-armed rival Pakistan.
Nearly 50 people have perished, mainly in Pakistan, since India launched air strikes on Wednesday targeting 'terrorist camps' and sparking the worst clashes between the neighbours in decades.
Late on Thursday, the Indian government released a list of 24 airports that have been closed for civilian flights, including in the cities of Jodhpur, Ludhiana and Amritsar near the western border with Pakistan.
Some of India's biggest airlines, including Air India, IndiGo and SpiceJet, have cancelled over 100 flights since Wednesday.
Local media reported the suspension of civilian flights may be lifted on Saturday morning.
Indian airlines have also issued advisories to passengers flying out from other airports, asking them to arrive at least three hours before departure, citing a government notification on enhanced security measures.
The strikes on Wednesday came two weeks after New Delhi blamed Islamabad for backing an attack on tourists in the Indian-administered side of disputed Kashmir — a charge Pakistan denies.
The arch rivals have since exchanged drones and missiles, as well as artillery fire across their contested border in Kashmir.
The violence has raised fears of a wider conflict between the neighbours.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
a day ago
- ABC News
Iranian missiles strike hospital and apartment building
Overnight Iran has launched a wave of retaliatory airstrikes on Israel which hit several sites including a high-rise apartment building and a hospital. Sharren Haskel is the Deputy Foreign Minister of Israel, and she speaks to David Speers from Tel Aviv.
Daily Telegraph
a day ago
- Daily Telegraph
I've been to 119 countries, and I'll never stop counting
Antarctica isn't a country. It's an uninhabited continent governed by an international treaty. On no published list of all the countries in the world will you find Antarctica. But it's on mine. Why? What makes me more knowledgeable than the United Nations' finest geographers? To find out, we have to go all the way back to India, 1998, which is where and when I caught the travel bug. India was and remains a filthy, amazing, repellent, addictive and unique destination. It was my first foray into the developing world, and while I wasn't fond of two-day, third-class train journeys, it hooked me into a life of travel. If you travel a lot, at some point you're going to wonder how many countries you've visited. For me, this epiphany occurred in Buenos Aires five years later, at which point my total was just 27. Argentina was the beginning of a year-long ramble around South America and southern Africa, which took me to 39. See, the thing is, once you've started counting it's hard to stop. Naturally, my second thought revolved around the total number of countries in the world, which is not as simple a question as it sounds. What constitutes a country? There are myriad classifications of sovereignty spread around the globe, from overseas territories to protectorates to autonomous regions. Then there are occupied and annexed lands, and geopolitical disputes, all of which can be viewed through different lenses. For me, this epiphany occurred in Buenos Aires five years later, at which point my total was just 27. The most frequently cited list is that of the UN member states which, as of May 2025, puts the total at 193, a number that can fluctuate as a result of war, alliance, global warming etc. In the event of a partition, things can become complicated. If a country I've already visited is subsequently split into multiple states, I'll claim the new ones if they contain areas I've physically been to. For me, it's about coverage, not stamps. On the other hand, the creation of South Sudan was frustrating, because while I'd enjoyed my journey through the north, I hadn't ever planned to return to explore the south, an area that's been perpetually at war since 1956. The thing is, I don't agree with all the definitions on the UN list. For instance, for romantic or political reasons, I would count Tibet and Palestine as distinct countries. And Antarctica is surely significant enough to deserve a place. In 2019, I was approaching triple figures when I was offered a cruise to the White Continent. By my reckoning, Antarctica would be 98, but how much more poetic would it be were it 100? Fortunately, I was hiking in Switzerland that northern summer and tweaked my itinerary to encompass Lichtenstein and Luxembourg, lining me up for the century. I was hiking in Switzerland that northern summer and tweaked my itinerary to encompass Lichtenstein and Luxembourg. At some point I discovered the Travellers' Century Club, an organisation open only to those who have scored a ton. Established in 1954, the TCC offers its members social events, unique travel opportunities, and 'bragging rights' for a yearly fee of $US175. To be fair, the feat of visiting 100 countries was far more impressive 70 years ago than it is today. To reflect that, rather than fluctuating borders, the TCC now uses a list of 330 territories. This leads to quirks like the European and Asian 'halves' of Turkey and the logistical challenges of seven separate Antarctic territories. Although I have no intention of joining, my current score of 119 countries would assure me membership approval. (My TCC territory tally is 146, which sounds impressive but is actually below half.) I just turned 52, so at this rate I'll be 92 before I'm done. I'd better get a shift on. Originally published as I've been to 119 countries, and I'll never stop counting
ABC News
a day ago
- ABC News
Donald Trump hosts Pakistani army chief, disagrees with India over India-Pakistan war mediation
US President Donald Trump has hosted Pakistan's army chief at the White House, an unprecedented meeting that analysts say risks worsening a disagreement with India. The meeting on Wednesday local time was the first time a US president had hosted the powerful head of Pakistan's army, widely regarded as having sway over the country's national security policies, at the White House, unaccompanied by senior Pakistani civilian officials. Mr Trump told reporters he had thanked Field Marshal Asim Munir for ending the war with India, and also praised Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who he spoke to on Tuesday night. "Two very smart people decided not to keep going with that war; that could have been a nuclear war," Mr Trump told reporters. Asked earlier what he wanted to achieve from meeting Pakistan's army chief, Mr Trump told reporters: "Well, I stopped a war … I love Pakistan. I think Modi is a fantastic man. I spoke to him last night. We're going to make a trade deal with Modi of India. "But I stopped the war between Pakistan and India. This man was extremely influential in stopping it from the Pakistan side, Modi from the India side, and others," he said. "They were going at it — and they're both nuclear countries. I got it stopped." However, the Indian government says the US was not responsible. Mr Modi told Mr Trump in their call on Tuesday that the ceasefire was achieved through talks between the Indian and Pakistani militaries and not US mediation, India's most senior diplomat, Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri, said in a statement. "Talks for ceasing military action happened directly between India and Pakistan through existing military channels, and on the insistence of Pakistan. Prime Minister Modi emphasised that India has not accepted mediation in the past and will never do," said Mr Misri. The heaviest fighting in decades between India and Pakistan was sparked by an April 22 attack in Indian Kashmir that killed 26 people. New Delhi blamed "terrorists" backed by Pakistan, a charge Islamabad denies. Pakistan has thanked Washington for playing a mediating role; however, India has repeatedly denied any third-party mediation. "Islamabad is leaning on Trump to push India for direct India-Pakistan talks, while Delhi is refusing to hold bilateral talks on external pressures," said Muhammad Faisal, a South Asia security researcher based at the University of Technology Sydney. He said a "tense calm" has prevailed between the two sides. They have withdrawn troops after the escalation in Kashmir, but India is refusing to resume adherence to the Indus Waters Treaty. Tourism operators in Kashmir said there had been few tourists in the scenic Himalayan region since the attacks. Mr Trump said last month that India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire after talks mediated by the US, where he urged the countries to focus on trade instead of war. Previously, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that both sides had agreed to hold talks on a "broad set of issues at a neutral site". "Pakistan is now trying to hold India and the US to this commitment, while Delhi is distancing itself," Mr Faisal told the ABC. Michael Kugelman, of the Asia Pacific Foundation think tank, said India-US ties, which have thrived in recent years, could suffer if Trump continued to make remarks about a US role in the ceasefire. "For Delhi, it all boils down to an age-old question: How much can it tolerate US-Pakistan cooperation without having it spoil US-India relations — a partnership that's thrived in recent years." Mr Munir was expected to press Mr Trump not to enter Israel's war with Iran and seek a ceasefire, Pakistani officials and experts said. A section of Pakistan's embassy in Washington represents Iran's interests in the United States, as Tehran does not have diplomatic relations with the US. The meeting represented a major boost in US-Pakistan ties, which had largely languished under his predecessor Joe Biden, as both courted India as part of efforts to push back against China. ABC/wires
