‘There will be war': fear and defiance across border after Indian airstrikes in Pakistan
The crowd gathered in an angry frenzy, their slogans ringing out across the streets of the Pakistani city of Rawalpindi. 'There will be war,' they cried out in unison. 'The war will continue till Kashmir is freed. Till India is destroyed. There will be war.'
Just hours earlier, an alleged Indian drone had crashed amid the food stalls outside the cricket stadium, injuring a passing civilian. It was one of at least 25 drones that Pakistan claimed India had sent into Pakistani territory overnight, in what they described as a 'another blatant military act of aggression'.
The previous night, India had carried out the most extensive airstrikes on Pakistan in decades, as it used missiles and drones to target nine locations across the country.
India said it had struck only 'terrorist infrastructure', including alleged headquarters and training camps of militant groups behind some of the deadliest terror attacks carried out on India soil. However, women and several children were among the 31 killed in the strikes.
After India's alleged second incursion involving drones, which were shot down deep inside Pakistani territory early on Thursday, the mood on the streets of Rawalpindi was one of rage. The crowd had a single demand: 'Attack India and destroy India,' they roared. 'Hail Pakistan's military.'
Since the partition of India and the formation of Pakistan in 1947, the two countries have fought four wars. While people-to-people sentiments have often softened in times of peace, any sign of cross-border aggression is known to ignite deep-rooted suspicions and outright anger, and is often met with calls for powerful retaliation.
In Rawalpindi – home to the headquarters of Pakistan's military – there was deep frustration that Pakistan had yet to hit back at India after the strikes.
Usman Ali, 20, a tailor, said the military should not wait any longer to attack India in a show of strength. 'They fired missiles at us yesterday and today their drones have attacked Punjab again,' he said. ' We should respond to their military strike with more and more powerful military strikes inside Pakistan. Our military should not be silent. They should destroy India. They want a war. We must give them one very soon.'
The strikes on Wednesday were the first time since the 1971 war that India had launched missiles into Pakistan's most politically and militarily important province of Punjab. For many in the country, it was seen as a direct provocation that could not be ignored.
'What are we waiting for? Are we not a dignified and brave nation? Our military must strike now,' said a government servant, who asked to remain anonymous.
Many have argued that all-out war with India is the last thing that Pakistan needs. It is already fighting a shadow war with Taliban militants along the border with Afghanistan and with separatist militants in Balochistan, and is still emerging from a financial crisis that has left many Pakistanis facing severe economic hardship.
Even a few weeks ago, as the two countries exchanged mounting threats, the appetite for a hot war with India had remained largely lacklustre in Pakistan.
However, this week's aggressions have changed sentiments entirely, cutting across political divides and economic background, from vendors to students and lawyers. Nabeel Najaf, 34, a government employee, said that India was now 'taking advantage' of Pakistan's restraint. 'They want a war. The Pakistan military and the army chief should give them a war,' she said.
The decision on how Pakistan will respond now rests with its powerful military, in particular its chief, Gen Asim Munir. He is known for his hardline stance on India and his appetite for action over diplomacy, so many in the country believed that retaliatory strikes were imminent, especially given frustrations within the army rank-and-file at the lack of decisive action so far.
Pakistan's military has historically commanded vast loyalty among the masses, but that has been eroded in recent years. How Munir chooses to respond to India, and the success of any operation, could either re-ignite Pakistan's faith in its powerful generals or push the establishment into greater crisis.
Yet not all in the country were baying for war. 'The world must play its role to de-escalate the conflict,' said Yousaf Nisar, 30, a software engineer. 'The world powers are sleeping, sadly. If Pakistan strikes back, India will retaliate and this will go out of control into a full-fledged war.'
The consequences of war for Pakistan would be 'unbearable', said Nasir. 'People think war is a joke but imagine the cost to human lives, infrastructure, our economy.'
Over the border in India, a similar appetite for the full force of the military to rain down on Pakistan had been circulating for weeks, after a militant attack in Indian-controlled Kashmir killed 26 people. India accused Pakistan of involvement in the attack, in which Hindu men were singled out for their religion and killed, horrifying the Hindu-majority country.
After Wednesday's strikes, a mood of jubilance gripped Delhi. 'I thought it was a very smart strike by India,' said Amitav Gosal, a lawyer in Delhi. 'Pakistan can't get away with being a haven for terrorists who sit over the border and plot to kill innocent Indians. Taking out those terrorist camps makes us all safer.'
Yet others expressed anxiety, as fears of a Pakistan military response and an escalation of the conflict mounted on Thursday. Sheikh Abir, a security guard, shook his head nervously at the prospect. 'We have seen this issue with Pakistan many times before,' he said. 'It never ends well.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
India says it will never restore Indus water treaty with Pakistan
NEW DELHI, June 21 (Reuters) - India will never restore the Indus Waters Treaty with Islamabad, and the water flowing to Pakistan will be diverted for internal use, Home Minister Amit Shah said in an interview with Times of India on Saturday. India put into "abeyance" its participation in the 1960 treaty, which governs the usage of the Indus river system, after 26 civilians in Indian Kashmir were killed in what Delhi described as an act of terror. The treaty had guaranteed water access for 80% of Pakistan's farms through three rivers originating in India. Pakistan has denied involvement in the incident, but the accord remains dormant despite a ceasefire agreed upon by the two nuclear-armed neighbours last month following their worst fighting in decades. "No, it will never be restored," Shah told the daily. "We will take water that was flowing to Pakistan to Rajasthan by constructing a canal. Pakistan will be starved of water that it has been getting unjustifiably," Shah said, referring to the northwestern Indian state. The latest comments from Shah, the most powerful cabinet minister in Prime Minister Narendra Modi's cabinet, have dimmed Islamabad's hopes for negotiations on the treaty in the near term. Last month, Reuters reported that India plans to dramatically increase the water it draws from a major river that feeds Pakistani farms downstream, as part of retaliatory action. Pakistan's foreign ministry did not immediately respond to Reuters' request for comments. But it has said in the past that the treaty has no provision for one side to unilaterally pull back and that any blocking of river water flowing to Pakistan will be considered "an act of war". Islamabad is also exploring a legal challenge to India's decision to hold the treaty in abeyance under international law. ($1 = 86.5600 Indian rupees)
Times
5 hours ago
- Times
‘We can't sleep underground for ever — Iran must fall'
As night falls, the two sisters pack their essentials and leave their shared flat to head underground. They do so in the full knowledge that there may be nothing to return to when they emerge from Tel Aviv's subterranean vaults. 'We sleep here a week, since the start of the war. It's the safest place you can be. When there's a siren, we don't have to move. Even if there's a huge boom. This is the most protected place in the city,' said Yehudit Batat, 92ft deep inside a light railway station that has been carved into the alluvial sands on which Tel Aviv is built. Just the day before, an Iranian missile evaded Israel's air-defence system and hit close to their home in Ramat Gan, in Tel Aviv's diamond exchange district. For a week, residents without safe shelter, including single people afraid no one would find them if they were injured, the elderly, families, the homeless and immigrants have made use of Tel Aviv's vast underground realm, from car parks and hospitals to bus and railway stations. They are all hiding from Iran's powerful missile volleys. 'I'm sleeping in a public place, not in my bed, in my house, where everything is familiar to me. It's hard to fall asleep when there's noise in the background and there are fluorescent lights, but I prefer to sleep under these terms and know I am in a safe place,' said Yonatan Luzon, 15. Yonatan had camped out in the corner of the station with his two dogs, grandmother, mother and all his neighbours, as their building's shelter was too mouldy to hide in. Despite having missed out on years of schooling, with the wars almost immediately following the Covid lockdowns, Luzon believes Israel is doing the right thing by going to war with Iran. 'I think the war is right. Iran will have a nuclear weapon; if we didn't get rid of it, a catastrophe far worse than what what is happening now will happen,' he said. 'It's really hard to grow up here. I had plans that will never see the light of day.' Many Israelis have pinned their hopes on President Trump to finish the job — to use America's weaponry to hit the site of Iran's nuclear enrichment programme at Fordow, built into the side of a mountain 70-80m deep and impervious to Israeli strikes. Holding her daughter's hand as they walked through the rows of mattresses that lined the station walls, Katya, a swimming instructor, said Trump 'has to' go in. 'They won't let them [Iran] get the weapon. He has to go in. If not now, then when? We can't sleep here for ever,' she said. Noa, a kindergarten teacher who arrived at the shelter with her three sons, the youngest of whom was only two weeks old, said she hoped Trump would 'finish it off' so they could go back to their normal lives. 'I think that he wants to finish Iran because they tried to assassinate him, and because he doesn't want them to have a weapon,' Noa, 35, said. 'All those countries he's got friendly with — Saudi, Gulf [states] — they don't want that either. He has a responsibility to finish this off, to go all the way.' Yonatan added: 'I think Trump will go to war. I heard they have a weapon that can destroy the Iran nuclear facility, and it's the only one that can do it — and we don't have that. So I hope yes, he'll go in.' In the car park of the Dizengoff shopping centre, which was targeted by a suicide bomber in 1996, Ronen Koehler has organised tents to house those who need safe shelter as part of the 'Brothers and Sisters in Arms' social justice movement, initially formed to stop the prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, enacting judicial reforms. 'It's absolutely one of the safest places,' Koehler said. 'It's four floors down. I think someone even told me it's certified at an atomic level. These are iron-plated windows.' Tel Aviv almost has a mirror city beneath its sunny surface. Near the military headquarters, an underground network of tunnels dating back to the time of the Templer settlement — German colonies in the late 19th century — is reportedly used for military purposes, possibly leading to the so-called Fortress of Zion, the military command in the heart of Tel Aviv. • Building deep underground has allowed hospitals to shelter its most vulnerable. At the largest hospital in Israel, Sheba Medical Center, more than 500 people have been moved into underground facilities, and they are attempting to move many more. In Tel Aviv, which has borne the brunt of Iran's missile attacks, the belief is that if America cannot destroy the regime in Iran, Israel can. 'We don't need Trump. Israel doesn't,' said Tracey Papirani, 65, who emigrated with her entire family from New Zealand two years ago. 'We'll have to see what happens tonight; on the news they said something big is coming,' she said. 'Most Americans know, or they should know, that Iran hates them even more than Israel,' Papirani said, as her two grandchildren ran around barefoot on the filthy car park floor. 'They call us the Little Satan, but America is the Big Satan. They're possibly weeks away from a nuclear bomb. If they finish us, where do they go next? [Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali] Khamenei is not shy. He's saying it like it is. Israel's got this. They've had to take it all on, because no other country has had the chutzpah to do it. We've had to do it, because they were very close to annihilating us.' Batat and her sister were born near the Kiriya, a military base just outside Ramat Gan, before the Israel Defence Forces' headquarters were even built there. They too believe the army can take on Iran, with or without America. 'Donald Trump is crazy,' Batat said. 'He helps us. He provides weaponry; he arms our military. Rockets, interceptors, all of that — he's good. But he doesn't want to go to war. You know why? So World War Three won't break out. All the world powers will have to go in, and then it's a world war. 'Bibi [Netanyahu] says that they will get what they can, and if they can't, they'll bring in the Mossad to blow up the place — they'll send them in by foot, not by air. Israel will do it alone. We have no other choice.'
The Independent
8 hours ago
- The Independent
Trump whines he won't get a Nobel Peace Prize while weighing US strike on Iran
President Donald Trump has again complained he can't win a Nobel Peace Prize, this time, as he weighs whether to attack Iran. Trump took to Truth Social on Friday evening to highlight the peace deal he said his administration brokered between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda while lamenting he'll be denied the Nobel Peace Prize 'no matter what.' 'This is a Great Day for Africa and, quite frankly, a Great Day for the World,' Trump wrote. 'I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize for this,' Trump added, before listing other negotiations he says his administration led, including 'stopping the War between Serbia and Kosovo' and 'keeping Peace between Egypt and Ethiopia.' '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,' the president wrote. The post comes a day after Trump said he'd decide whether to strike Iran within the next two weeks. Earlier Friday, the Pakistani government said it plans to nominate Trump for the prize, citing his 'decisive diplomatic intervention and pivotal leadership during the recent India-Pakistan crisis.' Last month, India and Pakistan agreed to a ceasefire, a deal in which Trump claims he played a significant role. But Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi disagrees. Modi 'clearly conveyed' to Trump that he did not play a role in the ceasefire during a recent phone call, Indian Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri said on Tuesday. Instead, Modi says the ceasefire was achieved through direct talks with Pakistan. This isn't the first time Trump has pined over the Nobel Peace Prize, which is awarded to a 'person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses.' Trump has appeared frustrated that his predecessor, former President Barack Obama, received the award in 2009, less than a year into his first term. Obama received the award for his 'extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,' and particularly his 'vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.' Last year, Trump claimed that if he 'were named Obama,' he would've 'had the Nobel Prize given to me in 10 seconds.' John Bolton, Trump's former national security adviser who has since become a vocal opponent of the Republican, once told The New York Times that the 'center of his public life is the greater glory of Donald Trump, and the Nobel Peace Prize would be a nice thing to hang on the wall.'
