Rahim Yar Khan airbase stays shut as Pakistan extends NOTAM, a month after India's Operation Sindoor strike

Pakistan has extended the closure of its
Rahim Yar Khan airbase
until 4 July, according to a fresh Notice to Airmen (NOTAM). The runway has remained offline since India's precision strikes under Operation Sindoor in early May 2025. The extended shutdown signals continuing repair challenges for Pakistan's military after India's retaliatory strikes. The longer the runway stays idle, the more pressure Islamabad faces to restore full air‑defence coverage in southern Punjab.
Rahim yar khan air base notam extenrded to six weeks
Open‑source intelligence expert Damien Saymon posted, 'Pakistan once again issues a NOTAM for Rahim Yar Khan, the runway struck by India in May 2025 now remains offline estimated till 04 July 2025.' The update replaced an earlier NOTAM that was set to expire on 18 May.
— detresfa_ (@detresfa_)
India's response to Pahalgam terror attack
Operation Sindoor began after the 22 April terror attack in Pahalgam, Jammu & Kashmir. New Delhi said the operation hit nine terrorist sites in Pakistan and Pakistan‑occupied Jammu & Kashmir. The Indian government stated, 'carefully calculated move to neutralise Pakistan's military infrastructure while minimising collateral damage.'
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Elegant New Scooters For Seniors In 2024: The Prices May Surprise You
Mobility Scooter | Search Ads
Learn More
Undo
Rahim Yar Khan Airbase damage visible in released video
Footage released by the Indian Armed Forces showed a crater on the Rahim Yar Khan runway. The base lies about 200 km south of Bahawalpur and is a key part of Pakistan's air‑defence network.
Speaking about India's strikes, Prime Minister Narendra Modi told supporters, 'Pakistan couldn't destroy the airbase here. Not far from here is Pakistan's Rahim Yar Khan air base which is in ICU because of India's air strikes.'
Live Events
RECOMMENDED
STORIES FOR YOU
He added, 'They thought that India would sit quietly. They didn't expect us to strike back. The ones who were proud of their arms are now shattered under debris.'

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

First Post

31 minutes ago

• First Post

With a 2-hr closed-door meeting, Trump may have made it difficult for Asim Munir

While their meeting has been seen as a sign of US-Pakistan bonhomie, US President Donald Trump might have put Pakistani Army chief Asim Munir in a difficult position: Munir risks compromising ties with China with the turn to the United States and Trump's demands go against longstanding Pakistani foreign policy. read more Pakistan's Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir salutes after laying wreath on the martyrs' monument during a guard of honour ceremony at General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi. AFP While their meeting is definitely a sign of the brewing US-Pakistan bonhomie, US President Donald Trump appears to have put Pakistani Army chief Field Marshall Asim Munir in a difficult spot: while Trump's offerings are generous, his demands are taxing and risk compromising longstanding Pakistani position. Trump held a two-hour-long meeting with Munir on Wednesday, which was seen as a breakthrough in the US-Pakistan relationship. For one, Trump wants Pakistan to distance itself from China and pivot to the United States. That is a non-starter for Pakistan as China is invested so much in the country economically, politically, and militarily that distancing is not just infeasible but unthinkable. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD However, Trump's outreach to Pakistan —and offers— don't come for free. The risks for Munir are also substantial. Trump puts Munir in difficult spot While Trump made generous offers to Munir, he also sought substantial returns on his investment. Trump sought Pakistan's military bases and seaports from Munir in exchange for fifth-generation fighter planes, significant financial aid, and new trade and security deals, according to CNN-News 18. Trump told Munir that the offer rests on the condition that Pakistan would curtain dealings with China and Russia. A source further said that Trump would want Pakistan to be on the US side if he would decide to join Israel in attacking Iran. ALSO READ: Trump wants military bases from Munir, offers security-trade deals in US-Pak reset: Report While Trump's offerings are great, they put Munir in a tough spot as accepting these offers would mean diluting yearslong relationship with Pakistan and undoing the longstanding policy regarding Israel. Consider these facts: China accounts for around 23 of all Pakistan's trade, China is the largest source of foreign investment in Pakistan with a share of around 40 per cent, and just one project, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), adds 2-2.5 per cent of Pakistan's economy. Moreover, while Pakistan has historically used Western weapons, the military has been increasingly armed by China in recent years . In the past five years, around 80 per cent of Pakistan's military imports have been from China. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD With such dependence, it is impractical —if not impossible— for Munir to curtail ties and engagement with China and replace it with the United States as the principal partner of the United States. But, once you have had an audience with Trump and received such offers, it is not easy to bluntly say no. That means that either Munir would lose face in front of Trump by refusing the offers or he would try to reach middle ground that could upset both Trump and Xi Jinping of China. Trump seeks reset in US-Pakistan ties With his meeting with Munir, Trump has made it clear that he is seeking a reset in US-Pakistan ties. In an unprecedented meeting that lays bare who truly runs Pakistan, Trump held a meeting at the White House with Munir on Wednesday. This was the first time a President of the United States held a direct, formal meeting with a Pakistani army chief. Three previous army chiefs, Ayub Khan, Zia-ul-Haq, and Pervez Musharraf, held meetings with the US president but only when they were heads of state while running a military regime after a coup — not in capacity as army chiefs. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The reset in US-Pakistan relationship has come at a time when Trump's policies and actions have soured times with India . He has not just continued to falsely claim mediation in the India-Pakistan conflict last month but has also hyphenated India and Pakistan, intervened in the Kashmir dispute, and made deals with jihadists from West Asia to South Asia that adversely affect India's security interests. ALSO READ: Beyond Pakistan: Trump's open embrace of jihadist forces across Asia a new headache for India However, as mentioned above, Trump is not making offers but also seeking substantial returns. South Asia analyst Michael Kugelman describes it as a 'classic Trump' give-and-take approach. 'There's been US-Pakistan engagement on crypto, minerals and counter-terrorism, and Trump takes a deep personal interest in all of these. This is classic Trump: 'What can you do for me? What can I get out of this?' Kugelman, a Senior Fellow at Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada, told Guardian. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD

Time of India

32 minutes ago

• Time of India

Telangana cabinet to finalise reply to Ghose panel on KLIS and other key issues

HYDERABAD: The state cabinet meeting scheduled for Monday will deliberate on the information to be provided to the PC Ghose Commission, which has requested details of cabinet approvals by the previous govt for the Kaleshwaram Lift Irrigation Scheme (KLIS). The commission, currently investigating the sinking of piers at Medigadda and the damage to the Annaram and Sundilla barrages under KLIS, has cross-examined former chief minister K Chandrasekhar Rao and former ministers T Harish Rao and Eatala Rajender. Following their depositions, the commission is understood to have written to the govt seeking further details. KCR , Harish Rao, and Eatala reportedly informed the commission that the project was undertaken with cabinet approval. However, Agriculture minister Tummala Nageswara Rao, who served during the first term of the previous BRS govt, claimed that many decisions were made solely by KCR. "The chief minister's office has responded to the Ghose Commission stating that the requested information will be submitted by June 30. The matter will be discussed at the cabinet meeting on June 23," sources in the CMO said. Chief minister A Revanth Reddy has already stated that the cabinet will also consider the advantages and disadvantages of initiating discussions with Andhra Pradesh CM N Chandrababu Naidu to find an amicable resolution to the inter-state river water sharing issue, including the contentious Banakacharla project, between the two Telugu-speaking states. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Free P2,000 GCash eGift UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo "The chief minister and ministers are also expected to discuss the panchayat elections, the law department's report regarding the submission of material to the court on fixing reservations in local bodies, implementation of the Rythu Bharosa scheme, the Indiramma housing scheme, and other key issues," sources added.

The Print

32 minutes ago

• The Print

Moksha, not motor cars—BR Shenoy's idea of a truly Indian welfare state

Human well-being is inseparably bound up with the immediate and the ultimate purpose of human existence. We cannot escape the question, 'What are we here for?' Are we here to worship on the altar of man's standard of living? Would it be right to say that the purpose of human existence is to live a life of carefree comfort? Much of our thinking today seems to move in that direction. At first sight, this answer might seem to satisfy the question well enough. But it really begs the question. We have said little more than that welfare is equal to well-being of man. We are still far from formulating the issues. If we wish to be scientific and logically consistent, we cannot run away from certain fundamentals of the problem of welfare. The accent of the welfare state is, clearly, on welfare, as there can be no welfare state without welfare. The question at once arises: whose welfare does the welfare state aim at achieving? The answer, probably, would be the welfare of the common man. If it is objected that the common man is very hard to find, we would, probably, amend our answer and say that the objective of the welfare state is the welfare of the masses of people, the maximum well-being of the maximum [number] of people. What is the aim of life? What has [MK] Gandhi to say on the subject? He is always a good and safe guide in these matters. Gandhi had his feet firmly on Indian soil. His thinking went to the roots of our tradition. He has answered the question, 'What is the purpose of human existence,' in the Introduction to The Story of My Experiments with Truth. Says Gandhi: 'What I want to achieve—what I have been striving and pining to achieve these thirty years—is self-realisation,… to attain Moksha. I live and move and have my being in pursuit of this goal. All that I do by way of speaking and writing, and all my ventures in the political field, are directed to this same end' (p. 5). Since it is Gandhi that writes, he means every syllable of what he has recorded. The purpose of all his activities, public and private, political activities not excluded, was the attainment of Moksha. This goal of life conforms to the traditional teachings of this land. Our Institutions and our way of life were attuned to it. The attainment was done scientifically and with rigorous logical consistency. Our daily duties and responsibilities on the mundane plane broadly fall under two categories, the wealth or income-acquiring (Arthic) activities and the want-satisfying (Kamic) activities. Since both activities had to be so regulated as to attain Moksha, their roots had necessarily to be well-grounded in Dharma. For speeding up the inner journey towards Nirvana, it is important that we acquire wealth only in consistence with Dharma and Dharma alone should govern the propensity for the satisfaction of wants. Where does the State fit into this context? It is obvious that the State has no jurisdiction over the inner changes leading to self-realisation, Nirvana. But the remaining three, Dharma, Artha and Kama, the thri-vargas, fall within its purview. The responsibility of the king, who symbolised the State, was to propagate the thri-vargas, subject to the overriding requirement that the Arthic and the Kamic activities were always conditioned by Dharma. It is significant that, under Indian polity, sovereignty lay not in the people, but in Dharma. The concern of the executive wing of the State, the king and his ministers, was to ensure that the rule of the sovereign, Dharma, prevailed. Dharma, like truth, is indivisible and all-pervasive. The State enforced the rule of Dharma in all the activities of the people coming within its ambit, in the administration of justice, in the collection and disbursal of revenues, in the defence of the country, and in every other of its functions and responsibilities. A state where the rule of Dharma prevails is a welfare state, the objective of welfare here being the creation, to the extent permissible on the governmental side, of conditions facilitating the attainment of the goal of life by individuals. How far can such a state go in developing its public sector of economic activity? The essence of a welfare state It follows that under the Indian concept of a (welfare) state, each individual should be left free to pursue his lawfully chosen vocation. Free enterprise, subject only to the rule of Dharma, is an essential feature of the economic setup of the (welfare) state. As the injunction applied to the king and the ministers, it follows, too, that the state, consistently with the rule of Dharma, cannot enter into the sphere of economic activities, which is the sacred domain of the private sector, even if the state was capable (which is a matter of serious doubt) of more efficient production than private firms. The rule of Dharma would restrict government activities to public utilities, basic industries (which the private sector is unable to undertake), basic needs of development, industries of strategic importance from the standpoint of defence, and the like. In particular, a policy of indiscriminate nationalisation of private enterprise was contrary to this doctrine. Minimum state, ideal of India This suggests that the Indian concept of a welfare state was a minimum state. It was wholly antagonistic to a garrison police state. The latter rests on violence and Adharma—under it, the individual is coerced into yielding to the will of the state, which, in practice, means the tyranny of an individual or a group of individuals, who are, for the time being, in possession of the machinery of state. The concept of a welfare state today is linked up with the provision for all citizens of 'minimum' standards of consumption. It provides (or aims at providing) minimum standards of food, shelter, education, health, and income (either by way of minimum wages or public assistance for the destitute). The minima are a floor below which no individual would be allowed to fall. In an economy with an expanding national income, the minimum standards would be progressively lifted up. This concept of a welfare state does not necessarily conflict with the Indian concept. It is the responsibility of an enlightened state to provide relief from abject poverty, which causes starvation or such other suffering. Even in the richer economies, there may be people in need of such relief. But how far shall the state go in lifting up the minimum for all? Will it be the responsibility of the state to provide the more unfortunate families of the nuclear age with motor cars, at least scooters, washing machines, refrigerators, telephones, television and radio sets, and the like? Or would we say that to do so would be going too far. I wish to suggest that this difficult problem may not confront the welfare state of the Indian conception. The limiting condition of the rule of Dharma will prevent the state from acquiring such large revenues as vulgar charity of this character may demand. The need for ensuring minimum standards of consumption is great in under-developed economies, like ours, where the level of consumption of even foodgrains by the masses of people is below nutritional standards. In the Indian context of poverty, the urgency to raise the ratio of goods to man needs no stress. But shall we do this at the sacrifice of the dignity and freedom of the individual? What use is that welfare which ignores the true goal of human life and sets aside the elevating rule of Dharma? A welfare state, which aims solely at Artha and Kama, is devoid of true welfare. Our happiness and welfare would be in proportion to our success in recapturing and translating into our daily life and activities the Dharma-pradhan ideal of life. Consistently with that ideal, our conception of a welfare state would be a minimum state. To quote Gandhi: 'That state is perfect and non-violent where the people are governed the least' (Harijan, p 12, 1940). Sovereignty, according to Indian polity, lay not in the people, but in Dharma. It was the responsibility of the king to enforce the rule of Dharma. A state where the rule of Dharma prevailed was a welfare state, the objective of welfare being to assist man in the attainment of the goal of life. The welfare state of the traditional Indian concept was, thus, a minimum state. It was wholly antagonistic to a garrison police state. It did not conflict with the present-day idea of a welfare state guaranteeing minimum standards of consumption. In the excessive importance we are paying to the successful implementation of the Second [Five-Year] Plan, there was inherent danger to this concept of the welfare state, as insistence on the Plan might lead, step by step, to the adoption of totalitarian devices for raising the requisite resources. To prevent this, we have to be constantly on the vigil. This is part of ThePrint's Great Speeches series. It features speeches and debates that shaped modern India.