Ceasefire means a tight-rope walk
Dr Jagdish Batra is a senior academic, currently working as Professor of English at O.P. Jindal Global University, India. He has nearly four decades of teaching and research experience. His area of specialization is Indian English Fiction on which he has presented papers at many international conferences in Europe and South East Asia. A Rotary Study Exchange Scholar to USA, Dr Batra has published eight books besides some sixty research papers and a number of general articles/blogs etc. LESS ... MORE
It is the general feeling that the ceasefire announcement made by the government has dampened the spirit, not only of the army men, but also of people at large in the country. It does not fully address the issues which impelled the launch of the Sindoor operation. Midway, the campaign has been forced to stop without fully achieving our objectives, which reminds one of how Nehru did in 1948 when a successful operation was on in Kashmir against the Pakistan intruders camouflaged as tribals.
However, the situation is not that simple and many aspects need attention. So far as mediation is concerned, going to the negotiating table now would be akin to the Tashkent talks mediated by Russia or post-Kargil negotiations mediated by America. So, if talks of mediation are true it will not be the first time that India would agree to such a proposal. But we must remember that in both these situations, India was the loser. It seems our government did not want to offend President Donald Trump who is sought to be on the same page as India in the face of threat from China. But one can't really trust America, which has failed to supply essential arms during previous wars, while Russia has been a consistent ally. Placating Trump may mean creating wedge with Russia whose S400 missile system has been so effective this time in thwarting the volley of drones shot by Pakistan.
Also worrying is Trump's reported claim of American mediation in solving the long-standing Kashmir issue? That will indeed be going back on public proclamations at home and at UN fora refusing third-party mediation on the Kashmir issue. That would also be against the Shimla Agreement between India and Pakistan. Trusting America as a fair arbiter is fraught with risks. Trump's role in trying to mediate in Arab-Israel or Russia-Ukraine wars does not evoke any optimism.
That apart, one feels baffled because the PM had talked of the final settlement (aar-paar ki ladai) and teaching lesson to the terrorists' patrons (aakaas). All defence experts and generals were unanimous in claiming a positive scenario for effecting the break-up of Pakistan and consequently final relief from terrorism for India. Surely, the Balochis and the Pashtuns as also Afghans were waiting for it. Several leaders of the ruling dispensation assured that it was a pause, and not a full stop to the Operation Sindoor, which meant that the operation had been suspended for time being, and may start again. How far this will prove to be true – only time will tell. Indian public at large is confused about the so called distinction between fighting Pakistan and fighting terrorists. It seems more of hair-splitting since the government has always been blaming Pakistan as the progenitor and disseminator of terrorism throughout the world. How can it now separate the two? While effecting the 'pause' in the operation, the government must ponder over the Hamas strategy of war adopted by Pakistan when it sent out barrages of drones across the border – whether to wreck destruction or to monitor army presence in India.
Pakistan's acceptance of ceasefire, if seen through the Hamas lens, means seeking time to replenish military supplies, repairing the defunct air attack shield and airfields, etc. in order to launch fresh offensive later. Experience tells us that Pakistan has never cared for making good its promises, much less observing the ceasefire norms over the last seven decades. The leopard will not change its spots now. There is no doubt that the situation is very complex with the other two neighbours – China and Bangladesh being hostile to India. At best, the government's intention is to present the image of a country that believes in fair dealings, so that the 'pause' will give the world the idea that India has tried its best to thwart a full-fledged war. It is indeed a tight-rope walk and one wishes the country comes out of this predicament victorious.
Facebook Twitter Linkedin Email Disclaimer
Views expressed above are the author's own.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
39 minutes ago
- Mint
The bond market's biggest risk isn't the deficit, economist says. Here's what is.
Bond investors might be worried about the wrong thing. President Donald Trump's massive tax and spending bill has been the latest big headache for bond investors, but TS Lombard economist Dario Perkins says there is a much bigger threat to the market: Chaotic U.S. policymaking. As Trump's spending bill continues to move forward, some economists warn that the proposal's tax cuts might force the government to borrow more money, widening the fiscal deficit and ballooning the country's $37 trillion pile of debt. A greater supply of government debt, in turn, would lower existing bond prices and push up yields. (Yields move in opposite direction of bond prices.) Analysts have even made comparisons to the cautionary tale of British Prime Minister Liz Truss—her mini-budget's proposed unfunded tax cuts in 2022 triggered a sell-off in bonds and shortened her tenure to mere 49 days. But such jitters about fiscal crises are 'unnecessarily alarmist," according to Perkins. To him, the biggest risk is roller-coaster policymaking. 'The big risk is not fiscal deficits but U.S. policy chaos against the backdrop of a world that is already more susceptible to negative supply shocks," he writes. The rapid fluctuations in federal policy have arguably been palpable since the Trump administration placed aggressive tariffs on global trade partners, only to walk back on them days later. The U.S. is now attempting to put together trade agreements with several dozens of countries in a matter of 90 days—they typically take years—all while conducting broad-based deportations. Against this backdrop, there's now a question of U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict. A broader war would threaten to push up inflation and lead to supply-chain disruptions if Iran potentially blocks the Strait of Hormuz—a critical global shipping channel. Higher inflation is the nemesis of the bond market because it chips away at the value of returns. Unpredictable U.S. policies raise a deeper fear: They could undermine the role of U.S. Treasuries as a global risk-free asset, Perkins writes. If bonds become less valuable as a portfolio hedge, they will be less attractive to investors—regardless of the size of the U.S. budget deficit or the balance-sheet policies of central banks, he added. Taken together, these concerns suggest Trump's budget proposal may be lower in the pecking order of threats to the bond world. For now, the bond market seems to be just waiting it out as a quiet spectator. Yields have basically gone nowhere for long-dated Treasuries lately. The 1o-year yield has ranged between 4.518% to 4.359% since May 23, while the 30-year yield has closed between 5.041% and 4.848% over the same period. Write to Karishma Vanjani at
News18
39 minutes ago
- News18
Iran May Have Outmanoeuvred US, Moved 400kg Uranium From Nuclear Site Before Airstrikes
Last Updated: According to an NYT report, senior US officials—including Vice-President JD Vance—have acknowledged that they do not currently know the location of Iran's uranium stockpile In a rapidly escalating nuclear standoff between Iran and Israel, new intelligence reports suggest that Iran may have successfully relocated around 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium before a US military strike hit three of its key nuclear sites. The revelation casts doubt on US President Donald Trump 's assertion that the American-led strikes had 'completely obliterated" Iran's nuclear capabilities. On June 20, US forces, in coordination with Israeli intelligence, launched precision strikes on the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear facilities which have long been at the center of global concern over Iran's nuclear ambitions. President Trump, who returned to office earlier this year, hailed the operation as a major success, telling supporters that 'Iran's nuclear threat has been neutralised". However, Iranian officials pushed back immediately, claiming the damage was minimal. According to Iranian state media and foreign ministry statements, the country's 'core nuclear infrastructure remains intact," and its ability to enrich uranium was not substantially affected. Two Israeli officials seemed to confirm Iran's stand as they told the New York Times that Iran had moved a significant amount of uranium— 400 kilograms, or roughly 880 pounds enriched to 60 per cent purity—and other equipment from the Fordow plant before the US strikes. This is just below the 90 per cent that is usually used in nuclear weapons. According to the report by NYT, senior US officials—including Vice-President JD Vance—have acknowledged that they do not currently know the location of Iran's uranium stockpile. Vance stated that the United States intends to address the issue directly. 'That's one of the things we're going to discuss with the Iranians," he told ABC News, emphasising the need for further diplomatic engagement. Complicating the issue further, at a Sunday press briefing, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine stopped short of endorsing President Trump's sweeping claim that the nuclear sites were entirely destroyed. Instead, they described initial assessments as indicating 'severe damage and destruction" at the three targeted facilities, which were struck by Air Force B-2 bombers and Navy-launched Tomahawk missiles. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has expressed concern over access to the affected sites and has called for transparency from Tehran. Iran, meanwhile, has limited cooperation with international inspectors and accused Western powers of 'nuclear hypocrisy." Iran's enrichment activities, while not openly violating the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), have surged in recent years following the collapse of the 2015 nuclear deal. The stockpile of 60% enriched uranium has now surpassed 140 kilograms, according to the IAEA's last public report—more than enough for multiple bombs, if further refined.
The Hindu
41 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Iran's underground Fordo nuclear enrichment site attacked again as Israeli strikes continue
Iran's underground enrichment site at Fordo was hit again on Monday (June 23, 2025) while Iran fired a salvo of missiles and drones at Israel and warned the United States that its military now has a 'free hand' to attack American targets in the wake of the Trump administration's massive strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. The Fordo facility was one of those hit in Sunday's attack, and it was struck again on Monday, Iranian state television reported. There was no immediate word on damage nor who launched the attack, though Israel said earlier it was conducting airstrikes on Iran. Follow Israel-Iran conflict LIVE updates on June 23 In Vienna, the head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog said he expected there to be heavy damage at the Fordo facility already following the Sunday's U.S. airstrike there with sophisticated bunker-buster bombs. 'Given the explosive payload utilised ... very significant damage ... is expected to have occurred,' said Rafael Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency. With the strikes on Sunday on Iranian nuclear sites, the United States inserted itself into Israel's war, prompting fears of a wider regional conflict. Iran said the U.S. had crossed 'a very big red line' with its risky gambit to strike the three sites with missiles and 30,000-pound bunker-buster bombs. Israel said its defence systems were operating to intercept the latest Iranian threat, which apparently targeted the north and central areas of the country, and told people to head to shelters. Iran described the attack a new wave of its Operation 'True Promise 3,' saying it was targeting the Israeli cities of Haifa and Tel Aviv, according to Iranian state television. Explosions were also heard in Jerusalem. There were no immediate reports of damage. In Iran, witnesses reported Israeli airstrikes hit areas around Iran's capital, Tehran, midday. It wasn't immediately clear what had been targeted. In Vienna, Rafael Mariano Grossi, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said that given the "explosive payload utilised and the extreme vibration sensitive nature of centrifuges, very significant damage is expected to have occurred.' He added that 'at this time, no one, including the IAEA, is in a position to have fully assessed the underground damage at Fordo.' Also Monday, Iranian Gen Abdolrahim Mousavi, the chief of joint staff of armed forces, warned Washington its strikes had given Iranian forces a 'free hand ' to "act against U.S. interests and its Army.' Tens of thousands of American troops are based in the Middle East, many in locations within range of short-range Iranian missiles. The U.S. described its Sunday attack on the Fordo and Natanz enrichment facilities, as well as the Isfahan nuclear sit, as a one-off to take out Iran's nuclear programme, but President Donald Trump has warned of additional strikes if Tehran retaliates. Mr. Mousavi described the American attack as violating Iran's sovereignty and being tantamount to invading the country, the state-run IRNA news agency reported. In the wake of the American attacks on Iran, calls came from across the globe for de-escalation and the return to diplomacy to try and resolve the conflict. On Monday, the European Union's top diplomat said the bloc remained 'very much focused on the diplomatic solution.' 'The concerns of retaliation and this war escalating are huge,' Kaja Kallas said at the start of a foreign ministers' meeting in Brussels where Iran has jumped to the top of the agenda. 'Especially closing of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran is something that would be extremely dangerous and not good for anybody,' Mr. Kallas said, referring to a maritime route crucial for oil transport. After Sunday's attacks, Iranian officials repeated their longtime threats of possibly closing the key shipping lane. Iran, which insists its nuclear programme is for civilian purposes only, previously agreed to limit its uranium enrichment and allow international inspectors access to its nuclear sites under a 2015 deal with the U.S., France, China, Russia, Britain and Germany in exchange for sanctions relief. But after Mr. Trump pulled the U.S. unilaterally out of the deal during his first term, Iran began enriching uranium up to 60% — a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90% — and restricting access to its nuclear facilities. As he arrived in Brussels on Monday for a meeting with his EU counterparts, German Foreign Minister renewed calls for Iran to agree again to direct talks with the United States but says Europe still has a role to play. 'We already made it very clear to the Iranian side that a real precondition for a settlement to the conflict is that Iran be ready to negotiate directly with the U.S.,' he said, while adding that the European group known as the E3 'will contribute what we can.' Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi was meeting on Monday in Moscow with Russian President Vladimir Putin, one of Iran's key allies.
