India and Pakistan exchange fire despite ceasefire agreement
NEW DELHI, May 10 (Reuters) - India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire on Saturday after U.S.-led diplomacy, but hours later India said that Pakistan had violated the truce.
Here's how the conflict unfolded between the two nuclear-armed neighbors and where it stands now:
After four days of intense military exchanges, India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire on Saturday, facilitated by U.S.-led diplomatic efforts.
The ceasefire came amid heightened fears that the conflict could escalate into a broader confrontation, with both nations on high alert.
But within hours, violations were reported from the main cities of Indian Kashmir, the territory that had borne the brunt of four days of fighting.
The Indian armed forces were responding to ceasefire violations by Pakistan hours after the truce was reached on Saturday, Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri told a press briefing in New Delhi.
The current hostilities began after a deadly April 22 attack targeting Hindu tourists in Indian Kashmir, which left 26 people dead.
India blamed Pakistan-based militant groups for the assault, prompting New Delhi to launch air strikes earlier this week on what it described as "terrorist infrastructure" within Pakistan.
Pakistan, which denies involvement in the Kashmir attack, condemned the strikes and vowed to retaliate.
India said it struck nine "terrorist camps" in Pakistan on Wednesday, claiming these sites were indoctrination centers, training grounds, and launchpads for attacks. Some of these, according to Indian officials, were linked to the perpetrators of last month's violence.
Pakistan said the Indian attacks hit six locations in its territory, none of them militant camps.
Pakistan initially claimed it shot down five Indian fighter jets during the first wave of strikes, a claim the Indian embassy in Beijing dismissed as "misinformation."
In response to subsequent escalations, Pakistan said it shot down 25 Indian drones overnight, including some over its largest cities, Karachi and Lahore.
India, meanwhile, stated that it had "neutralized" Pakistani attempts to strike military targets with drones and missiles, including targeting air defense systems in Pakistan.
Global leaders have welcomed the de-escalation between India and Pakistan.
U.S. President Donald Trump credited American diplomatic efforts and described it as a result of "a long night of talks" mediated by the United States.
European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas welcomed the ceasefire as a "vital step toward de-escalation," while British Foreign Minister David Lammy urged both sides to maintain it.
The ceasefire agreement marks a significant step back from the brink of a major conflict.
However, despite the agreement, the Indus Waters Treaty, a key water-sharing pact between the two countries remains suspended, four government sources told Reuters.
Two Indian government sources also told Reuters that other punitive measures announced by India and reciprocated by Pakistan, such as trade suspension and visa cancellations, would remain in place for now.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
Suspend visas, stop aid: we must do whatever it takes to deport Pakistani child rapists
Qari Rauf and Adil Khan are among two of Britain's worst rape gang offenders. They were the ringleaders of a nine-strong gang of Asian men who sexually assaulted 47 girls – some as young as 12 – after plying them with drink and drugs. They are now out of prison, free to walk the same streets as the victims they terrorise. Convicted, but not properly punished. It's completely out of order. Why are these Pakistani nationals – who have committed evil crimes – still here, you will be asking. Well, they have exploited a loophole to renounce their Pakistani citizenship and the Pakistani government is refusing to take them back. I have some advice for the Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, on how to resolve this problem. He should pick up the phone to Pakistan's High Commissioner, summon him to the Foreign Office and give them a week to take back these men. If they don't, visas should be immediately suspended for all Pakistanis wanting to come to the UK. If they continue to refuse, aid should be suspended. It's that simple. That's what a Government motivated by keeping the British public safe would do. But right now we are being walked over and everyone can see it. These two rape gang perpetrators are really just the tip of the iceberg. Most have gone unpunished, their crimes ignored by authorities paralysed by fear of being called racist. The Telford inquiry found over a thousand girls were raped and abused. Just 10 men have been convicted for their crimes. The Rotherham inquiry found that 1400 girls were raped and abused. Just 60 or so men have gone to prison for their crimes. The national inquiry Starmer has been forced to announce is a step forward, but this can only be the beginning. Justice demands we punish every single perpetrator for their heinous crimes. The NCA must now pursue the abusers – they are much better placed than local police forces marred by the scandal – and the guilty men need full life sentences. If they are foreign nationals they must be added to the 18,982 foreign nationals subject to deportation proceedings currently in the community and the 9,800 foreign offenders in prison. All must be removed. For some foreign criminals the obstacle to their deportation is their home country refusing to cooperate, for others it is human rights obstacles – in many cases caused by the Strasbourg Court stretching the ECHR beyond recognition. There are some in Westminster who still say we shouldn't deport these people in case they are unfairly punished back in their home country. To that I say: tough luck. I couldn't care less. My sole interest is protecting the British public from dangerous criminals who have committed appalling crimes. I have long argued that reform of the ECHR is impossible. This week the head of the Council of Europe, Alain Berset, finally confirmed what many else have long suspected. He let the cat out the bag: 'I am not calling for reform of the ECHR… When states face complex challenges, the answer is not to dismantle the legal guardrails they themselves helped build.' There we have it. So, once David Lammy has finished delivering his ultimatum to the Pakistani government, he can report back to the Prime Minister that his ruse of 'reforming' the ECHR is a pointless charade. Starmer has an obvious choice: remain in a broken convention to appease his legal pals, or leave the convention to protect the British public and manage rights with responsibilities sensibly like America and Australia. Increasing the deportations of dangerous foreign criminals while we continue to import criminality from high-risk countries is like bailing out a sinking ship with a bucket. Restrictions on migration from high-risk countries – like Eritrea, whose nationals are estimated, based on conviction data from 2021 to 2023, to be twenty times more likely to account for sexual offence convictions than British citizens – are a prerequisite for safer streets.
Reuters
5 hours ago
- Reuters
Russia says it expects agreement next week on date for next peace talks with Ukraine
ST PETERSBURG, Russia, June 20 (Reuters) - Russia expects to agree with Ukraine next week on a date for a third round of peace talks, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Friday. Kremlin aide Vladimir Medinsky, who heads the Russian delegation, is in contact with his Ukrainian counterpart, Peskov said. Resuming negotiations after a gap of more than three years, the two sides held face-to-face talks in Istanbul on May 16 and June 2 that led to a series of prisoner exchanges and the return of the bodies of dead soldiers. But they have made no progress towards a ceasefire which Ukraine, with Western backing, has been pressing for. Russia says it wants a final settlement, not just a pause in the fighting, and is insisting on territorial and other demands that Ukraine says would be tantamount to capitulation. The conflict has intensified in recent weeks, with Russia carrying out some of its heaviest air attacks of the war and Ukraine mounting surprise drone strikes on airfields on June 1 that inflicted serious damage on Russia's nuclear-capable bomber fleet.
Telegraph
6 hours ago
- Telegraph
Putin's biggest threat is not from liberals but the nationalist Right
Despite intensive U.S. efforts to broker a ceasefire and staggering battlefield casualties, Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine continues unabated. earlier this week, a Russian drone and missile barrage killed at least 21 civilians in Kyiv, and Russian forces have accelerated their ground offensives in Sumy and Donetsk Oblasts. President Vladimir Putin's unwavering commitment to his maximalist ambitions in Ukraine has polarised Russian society. A March 2025 Levada Centre poll revealed that 59 per cent of Russians support the initiation of peace negotiations, and that figure soared to 76 per cent amongst Russians under the age of 24. Nonetheless, there is a vocal ultranationalist minority that is continuing to stoke the flames of war with Ukraine and perpetual conflict with Nato. Since Ukraine announced support for a thirty-day ceasefire in Jeddah on March 11, Russian ultranationalists have urged Putin to reject peaceful negotiations and escalate the war. Former Kremlin advisor Sergey Markov cautioned Putin against accepting a ceasefire unless it was paired with an arms embargo on Ukraine. In an April 2025 interview with ultranationalist outlet Tsargrad, fascist philosopher Alexander Dugin declared: 'Let's be realistic: we need to bet on our own strength and prepare for a new round of confrontation.' Dugin's target was the European Union and he argued that Europe was already preparing for war with Russia. Despite countervailing pressure from business-minded elites like Russia Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) chief Kirill Dmitriev and oligarch Vladimir Potanin, Putin's actions have aligned closely with the pro-war camp's agenda. Putin's stalling tactics have convinced the US to stop negotiating with Russia for the time being and the Russian military has stretched the frontlines to capitalise on Ukraine's war materiel constraints. The recent destruction of Russian strategic bombers via Ukraine's Operation Spiderweb has only strengthened Putin's intransigence. Why is Putin aligning with Russia's ultranationalist minority, even though doing so leads to tighter sanctions and only marginal offensive gains? Like many of the mysteries surrounding contemporary Russia, the answer can be found in Putin's understanding of Russian history. While Western experts have paid extensive attention to the threat of popular unrest and liberal dissidents like the now-deceased Alexey Navalny to authoritarian stability in Russia, history shows that the biggest threat to Putin's regime comes from the ultranationalist right. Tsar Nicholas II's suppression of the total war rhetoric of conservative philosopher Ivan Ilyin, and ultranationalist firebrand Vladimir Zhirinovsky's rise from the ashes of the 1993 constitutional crisis, are cautionary tales for Putin. The abortive June 2023 Wagner Group mutiny reaffirmed to Putin the significance of the threat from militant ultranationalists. Through acts of repression like Wagner Group chief Yevgeny Prigozhin's assassination and MH-17 perpetrator Igor Girkin's imprisonment, Putin has mitigated the immediate danger posed by ultranationalists to his regime's stability. He has co-opted the Russian Orthodox Church, the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and hawkish regional governors to ensure that an ultranationalist bloc does not consolidate. The militarisation of Russian society means that this is only a temporary fix, and ultranationalists could try to topple Putin if the war ends on unfavourable terms for Russia. As ultranationalists saw Russia's cessation of the 2008 Georgian War that left Mikheil Saakashvili in power and the the 2015 Minsk II Accords with Ukraine as gestures of appeasement of the West, the onus is on Putin to pursue total victory. The challenge for Putin is that he has few available escalation cards. The recommendations that Russia's most hawkish voices have pushed since the Ukraine invasion began in February 2022 are suicidal. If he pursues general mobilisation, he risks widespread socioeconomic unrest and the destruction of the current stealth conscription system that provides Russia with the manpower it needs to prosecute the war. If he gambles with tactical nuclear weapons use, Russia will likely destroy its partnership with China and image in the Global South. This means that Putin needs to appease ultranationalists by doing more of the same: indefinitely stalling a ceasefire and intensifying Russia's war against Ukrainian civilians. As it would take Russia 152 years to occupy all of Ukraine at its current monthly rate of advance, this strategy will not completely satisfy Russian ultranationalists. While Putin wields dictatorial power in modern Russia, his grip is weaker than it appears. This is why Putin needs to appease ultranationalists at the expense of peace in Europe and the lives of hundreds of thousands of his own people.
