Pahalgam terror attack: Steps India has taken to batter Pakistan since April 22
PTI photo
NEW DELHI: Brutal killings of 26 civilians by Pakistani terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir's Pahalgam have sharply escalated the tensions between India and Pakistan.
Ex-Pakistan President Zia-ul-Haq's infamous and atrocious call to "bleed India with a thousand cuts" now seems to have boomeranged, with the central government taking big decisions and exploring key ways to punish Islamabad for orchestrating cross-border terrorism.
Pakistan's covert military strategy to weaken India through sustained proxy warfare, especially by supporting insurgencies and terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir, now seems to have taken a massive hit.
Just hours after the bloody attack, PM Modi cut short his Saudi Arabia visit and returned to India before chairing several key meetings with Union home minister Amit Shah, defence minister Rajnath Singh, NSA Ajit Doval and external affairs minister S Jaishankar.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Fastest Selling Plots of Mysore from 40L | 40+ Amenities
PurpleBrick
Learn More
Undo
Just a day after the attack, PM Modi held a high-level Cabinet Committee on Security (CCS) meeting, after which several big decisions were taken.
The government, every day since April 22, has taken measures to push back against terrorism and its backers as India prepares to deliver a decisive blow to Islamabad's nefarious endeavours. In the most recent move, the MHA on Monday ordered the states to conduct civil defence mock drills.
List of govt decisions against Pakistan post Pahalgam attack
Indus Waters Treaty suspended
India suspended the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty, a key water-sharing agreement mediated by the World Bank, which governs the distribution of the Indus River system. This strategic move halted cooperation on river water management, signalling a shift in India's approach to bilateral agreements with Pakistan. The move is seen as a direct diplomatic pressure following the Pahalgam terror attack.
Closure of the Wagah-Attari Border
The Wagah-Attari border crossing, a major point for trade and civilian transit between India and Pakistan, has been closed indefinitely. The ceremonial Beating Retreat parade has also been suspended. The closure is meant to isolate Pakistan further and reassert India's unwillingness to continue routine engagement in the face of terrorism.
Downgrading diplomatic ties
India formally downgraded diplomatic relations with Pakistan, significantly reducing the level of official engagement between the two countries. This includes recalling Indian diplomats, expelling senior Pakistani diplomats, and freezing diplomatic outreach.
Declaring Pakistani military diplomats as persona non grata
In a rare move, India declared several Pakistani military diplomats and intelligence officials persona non grata. They have been accused of engaging in activities incompatible with diplomatic status, including espionage.
Revoking existing visas for Pakistani nationals, including Saarc visas
India has revoked all currently valid visas issued to Pakistani nationals, including those under the Saarc framework, citing national security concerns. The move disrupts cultural exchanges, academic visits, and business travel, and is meant to reduce potential security vulnerabilities by restricting entry of individuals from Pakistan during this heightened period of alert.
Closure of airspace for Pakistani airlines
Indian airspace has been closed to all Pakistani commercial aircraft, forcing them to take longer routes and suffer increased fuel and operational costs. This action disrupts Pakistan's international air connectivity and has both symbolic and economic implications.
Trade ties snapped
The central government has completely severed formal trade relations with Pakistan, halting the import and export of goods. This includes both direct bilateral trade and third-country trade routed through the UAE or Singapore. Informal and cross-border trade via Jammu and Kashmir has also been shut down. The move is expected to economically strain certain sectors in Pakistan while reflecting India's hardened stance against terrorism.
Shipping ties suspended
All maritime shipping routes and logistics operations between India and Pakistan have been suspended. This includes container traffic, cargo ships, and joint maritime arrangements. Ports in Gujarat and Maharashtra that occasionally dealt with Pakistani-origin shipments have been notified. The decision impacts trade, humanitarian shipments, and port revenue but is viewed as a necessary strategic move to isolate Pakistan on multiple economic fronts.
Postal ties suspended
The Centre has ceased all postal services with Pakistan, including letters, parcels, and diplomatic pouches. This affects civilian communication and interrupts routine diplomatic correspondence. The move is aimed at applying pressure by cutting all non-essential contact points and signalling a total breakdown in bilateral trust following the terror attack in Pahalgam.
Crackdown on Pakistani social media and media content
The government has initiated a crackdown on Pakistani-origin digital and broadcast content. This includes restricting Pakistani news channels, removing YouTube videos, suspending social media pages linked to Pakistani propaganda, and warning OTT platforms against hosting such content. The move is seen as an attempt to curb misinformation, incitement, or glorification of terrorism and block narratives that may destabilise internal security or national morale.
Briefing the UNSC Members on Pakistan's role
India has conducted closed-door briefings for members of the United Nations Security Council, excluding China and Pakistan, on Islamabad's support for terrorist networks. The diplomatic effort aims to internationalise the issue and build a consensus on Pakistan's role in cross-border terrorism. India presented evidence gathered from the Pahalgam attack site and intelligence reports to strengthen its case at the global stage.
India builds storage capacity at two hydroelectric facilities
As India-Pakistan tensions escalate, the Narendra Modi government is taking steps to enhance the storage capacity at two hydroelectric facilities in Kashmir's Himalayan region, according to sources familiar with the situation who spoke to Reuters.
This development marks India's first concrete action operating outside the framework of the Indus Waters Treaty, an agreement that has remained intact since 1960, despite three wars and various conflicts between the two nuclear-armed nations.
India demands Asian Development Bank cut funding for Pakistan
India has demanded the Asian Development Bank to reduce funding for Pakistan, as New Delhi continued disciplinary measures against Islamabad. During the 58th Annual Meeting of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) in Milan, finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman urged ADB President Masato Kanda to reduce financial assistance to Pakistan, which was amongst several other topics addressed.
Govt orders civil defence mock drills
The ministry of home affairs has directed several states to conduct civil defence mock drills on May 7. The exercise aims to enhance preparedness in the event of a hostile attack, and will include the following measures: Activation of air raid warning sirens, training civilians, including students, in basic civil defence techniques Implementation of crash blackout protocols, early-stage camouflaging of critical infrastructure and installations, updating and rehearsing evacuation plans.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
33 minutes ago
- The Hindu
India debunks claims of U.S. using Indian airspace for Iran strikes, PIB Fact Check confirms
India on Sunday (June 22, 2025) dismissed as 'fake' claims by certain social media handles that the U.S. fighter jets used Indian airspace to launch strikes against Iran. Also read: Israel-Iran conflict updates The U.S. bombed three nuclear sites in Iran on Sunday (June 22, 2025), with U.S. President Donald Trump warning of additional strikes if Iran retaliates. Several social media accounts have claimed that Indian Airspace was used by the United States to launch aircrafts against Iran during Operation #MidnightHammer#PIBFactCheck ❌ This claim is FAKE ❌Indian Airspace was NOT used by the United States during Operation… — PIB Fact Check (@PIBFactCheck) June 22, 2025 'Several social media accounts have claimed that Indian airspace was used by the United States to launch aircraft against Iran during Operation #MidnightHammer. This claim is fake,' PIB Fact Check said in a post on X. 'Indian Airspace was NOT used by the United States during Operation #MidnightHammer,' said the fact check unit of the Press Information Bureau that functions under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. It said that the Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Dan Caine had explained the route used by U.S. aircraft during a press briefing.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Coding for the end
UK's assisted dying bill is a momentous law. The conversation must start in India Third time lucky. After rejecting versions of the bill in 1997 and 2015, UK lower house voted for a law to allow assisted dying in England and Wales. This means patients terminally ill, as defined in law, and likely to die within six months, can apply for an exit. The legislation will have to be set in motion within four years (2029). If delayed in the Lords – it's highly contested and the lower house win was by just 23 votes – the bill will lapse. It may not be done and dusted yet, but a historic social change has begun. Exhaustive debates and tweaks to the bill included dropping provision of a judge having to sign off on the decision. Importantly, no other person is 'obliged' to take part. Patients will have to administer the drugs, whatever is decided, themselves, so it's a first step to active euthanasia. Reportedly, UK govt estimates there may be 4,000 such patients. To legislate on assisted dying is never a straight road in any country. Fears and concerns are real that vulnerable, disabled and older people risk being coerced to use the law, to reduce the financial and care burden on the family. UK bill's penalty for coercion is a 15-year jail. While such fears have been voiced to reject assisted dying, the Indian reality is that terminally ill people and families are often left to fend for themselves as a result of lack of access to treatment and/or unaffordability of care. At the privileged end of affordability/access, there is little policy or regulations to limit life-sustaining interventions inappropriate at end-of-life stage. The Supreme Court upheld advanced directives, the right to refuse treatment: passive euthanasia. UK's bill is an opportunity to take further the conversation around a 360-degree end-of-life care that includes palliative care and covers assisted dying for the terminally ill. Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email This piece appeared as an editorial opinion in the print edition of The Times of India.
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
India wary about Iran's nuclear project: Voted against in 2005, abstained in 2024
Almost 20 years after India voted against Iran's nuclear programme for the first time, Delhi's careful balancing act — between Israel and the US on one side and Iran on the other side — has come into play. While India has always tried to walk the diplomatic tightrope walk, its discomfort over Iran with a nuclear weapon was apparent then. On September 24, 2005, India voted with 21 other countries on the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) resolution (GOV/2005/77) which found Iran in non-compliance with its safeguards agreement. This was seen as a departure from the past, as India had voted with the US and the western bloc against Iran, which was in its extended neighbourhood and with whom it has a historical and civilisational relationship. This was the time when India had just started negotiating its agreement with the US on its civilian nuclear programme, and Washington was able to lean on Delhi to vote against Tehran. Delhi, which was keen to portray its responsible behaviour as a nuclear power, went along with the idea that voting against Iran's nuclear programme would burnish its reputation. However, the resolution did not refer the matter immediately to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), and India was one of the countries which urged the western bloc of European countries — UK, France and Germany (EU-3) — to keep the issue at the IAEA. According to Indian officials, India voted for the resolution at that time, against the majority of NAM members who abstained, because it felt obligated to do so after having pressured the EU-3 to omit reference to immediate referral to the UNSC. Months later, on February 4, 2006, India again sided with the US when the IAEA Board of Governors voted to refer Iran's non-compliance to the UNSC. 'As a signatory to the NPT, Iran has the legal right to develop peaceful uses of nuclear energy consistent with its international commitments and obligations… (But) it is incumbent upon Iran to exercise these rights in the context of safeguards that it has voluntarily accepted upon its nuclear programme under the IAEA,' then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh told Parliament on February 17, 2006. Over the years, as India negotiated the nuclear deal with the US, Delhi came out of the pressure to vote against Tehran as the issue went to the UNSC. Sources said that once the matter went to the UNSC, India did not have to take any position on Iran's nuclear programme between 2007 and 2024. In between, the US administration under President Barack Obama negotiated the JCPOA (joint comprehensive plan of action) with Iran in 2015 — which was a deal between P-5+1 and Iran. US President Donald Trump walked out of the JCPOA in 2017, and Iran's nuclear programme once again came under scrutiny. India was forced to stop oil imports from Iran, although its Chabahar port project development was going on. While it did not have to take any firm position against Iran's nuclear programme, that changed last year when the US brought in a resolution against Iran. In June 2024, India abstained from a vote at the IAEA regarding Iran. The vote, initiated by the US, aimed to censure Iran for its nuclear programme. While the resolution passed, with 19 out of 35 board members voting to censure Iran, India was among the 16 countries that abstained. This decision reflected India's balancing act between its deep defence and security relationship with Israel and its historical ties with Iran. In September 2024, India again abstained from voting on a resolution at the IAEA Board of Governors that censured Iran for its lack of cooperation with the agency's investigations into its nuclear programme. The resolution, brought by France, the UK, and Germany (E3) along with the US, followed an IAEA report noting Iran's increased uranium enrichment. In June this year too, India abstained on the IAEA Board of Governors' resolution strongly criticising Iran's nuclear programme and declaring it in breach of its 1974 Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement. This time, India's decision to abstain from the vote reflected its balanced stance — recognising Iran's right to pursue a peaceful nuclear energy programme while calling upon Tehran to adhere to its non-proliferation commitments. While the change, from voting against to abstention, marks Delhi's shifting positions as geopolitical alignments changed, India's concern about the Iranian nuclear programme was evident. Shubhajit Roy, Diplomatic Editor at The Indian Express, has been a journalist for more than 25 years now. Roy joined The Indian Express in October 2003 and has been reporting on foreign affairs for more than 17 years now. Based in Delhi, he has also led the National government and political bureau at The Indian Express in Delhi — a team of reporters who cover the national government and politics for the newspaper. He has got the Ramnath Goenka Journalism award for Excellence in Journalism '2016. He got this award for his coverage of the Holey Bakery attack in Dhaka and its aftermath. He also got the IIMCAA Award for the Journalist of the Year, 2022, (Jury's special mention) for his coverage of the fall of Kabul in August 2021 — he was one of the few Indian journalists in Kabul and the only mainstream newspaper to have covered the Taliban's capture of power in mid-August, 2021. ... Read More
