The Indian Aircraft Pakistan Says It Shot Down

Indian aircraft went down after the country launched attacks against Pakistan this week, in what it said was retaliation for a terrorist attack in Indian-controlled Kashmir that killed scores of people and caused tensions between the two nations to boil over.
The exact number and variety of lost aircraft is not yet clear.
Two or three Indian aircraft went down inside India's border, according to Indian officials, Western diplomats and local media reports. Pakistan, for its part, claims it shot down five planes and at least one drone: three Rafale fighter jets, one MIG-29 fighter aircraft, one Su-30 fighter jet and one Heron drone.
The New York Times was unable to independently verify these claims.
John E. Pike, director of GlobalSecurity.org, a nonprofit research group based in Alexandria, Va., said those five aircraft and the drone could have been downed by surface-to-air or air-to-air missiles. 'Pakistan has both,' he said.
Here is what to know about the aircraft Pakistan's military says it shot down.
Rafale
The Rafale is a twin-engine fighter jet that can take off from an aircraft carrier or a base onshore, according to its French manufacturer, Dassault Aviation.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Wall Street Journal

6 hours ago

• Wall Street Journal

Shifting World Order Threatens to Expand the Nuclear-Arms Club

When it came to nuclear weapons, the U.S. had two top priorities in the 1990s. One was to ensure that newly independent Ukraine handed over its vast arsenal to Russia. The other was to prevent North Korea from obtaining its own nukes. The first effort was a success, but today, many regard Ukraine's disarmament as a strategic blunder, leaving it vulnerable to a Russian invasion that has triggered the bloodiest European war in generations. The second attempt was a failure: Pyongyang deftly exploited American reluctance to use military force and became a nuclear-armed state that can challenge global security.

Yahoo

6 hours ago

• Yahoo

Why India's Budding EV Sector Has Opened Its Doors To China

For decades, China has driven the lion's share of oil demand growth thanks to its remarkable economic boom and large population. However, China is now losing its prominence in global oil markets due to a dramatic slowdown in its economy coupled with the country's ongoing electric vehicle revolution. Last year, nearly half of all new cars sold in China were electric vehicles, including both battery-electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Indeed, China's rapid adoption of EVs, as well as rapid growth of high-speed rail and natural gas trucks, is displacing traditional fossil fuel demand, with the International Energy Agency (IEA) predicting that China's oil demand will peak as early as 2027. Ironically, the country that is taking over China's mantle in world oil markets is also aspiring to follow in its EV footsteps: India. Unlike China, India's EV sector is still at its infancy, with electric vehicles accounting for just 2.5% of all cars sold in the country in 2024. However, India has big EV ambitions, with the Indian government having set a target for EVs to make up 30% of total passenger vehicle sales by 2030. To accomplish this, India's EV sector is forging close ties with Chinese EV manufacturers at a time when Washington has been keeping Chinese EV giants at bay. India is relying on Chinese EV tech to bridge the gap until the domestic sector is ready to compete on the global stage. Industry analysts note that without access to Chinese technologies—including batteries, drivetrain components, and EV software—India would likely face slower product rollouts, limited model variety, and higher costs during its growth phase. This marks a clear pivot from just a few years ago, when India restricted the operations of firms like BYD and banned popular Chinese apps such as TikTok and Shein after deadly clashes at the New Delhi appears to be taking a more calculated stance. In March, the government reduced tariffs on over 35 EV components, many of which are imported from China, making it easier for automakers to source critical parts. A few weeks later, India's Ministry of Heavy Industries unveiled a new EV policy slashing import duties on fully built EVs from 110% to 15%, provided manufacturers invest and set up local production. This dual-pronged approach aims to attract international players while building out domestic supply chains. Experts view these shifts as pragmatic. Leading Indian EV makers—such as Tata Motors, Ola Electric, and Mahindra & Mahindra—continue to depend on Chinese vendors for components like battery cells, power control units, and electric motors, even though assembly is carried out in India. 'The aim is to build a resilient domestic ecosystem, not to isolate it, unlike the more aggressive decoupling seen in the U.S. with China,' said Shubham Munde, senior analyst at intelligence firm Market Research Future. Yet this growing alignment between Indian and Chinese EV sectors is creating both opportunity and competition. MG Motor—a joint venture between India's JSW Group and China's state-owned automaker SAIC—has managed to double its market share over the past year, putting pressure on homegrown giants like Tata Motors. Its model, the MG Windsor, is now India's top-selling electric car, highlighting how joint ventures are gaining traction. At the same time, India's EV landscape remains deeply fragmented. According to Bernstein Research, just four legacy automakers dominate 80% of the electric mobility market, leaving over 150 EV startups struggling to establish a foothold in an increasingly competitive space. Government policy appears to be playing an outsized role in the EV trajectories of different countries. In its 2025 Electric Vehicles Outlook, Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) cut both its near-term and long-term passenger EV adoption outlook in the United States for the first time ever, citing key policy changes including rollback of national fuel-economy targets as well as the removal of supportive elements of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) by the Trump administration. In contrast, S&P Global Mobility has forecast strong growth for India's nascent EV sector, projecting that production of battery-electric passenger vehicles will increase by 140% year-over-year in 2025 to roughly 301,400 units. That would represent about 6% of the estimated 5.16 million passenger vehicles expected to be built in India that year. Still, the road to India's 2030 goal may be steep. According to S&P, India would need to boost EV adoption by approximately 380 basis points annually to reach 30% market share—nearly double the current growth rate of around 200 basis points per year since 2021. Compounding the challenge is the lack of a unified long-term roadmap and the pending expiration of several state-level EV incentive programs. By Alex Kimani for More Top Reads From this article on Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Melden Sie sich an, um Ihr Portfolio aufzurufen. Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten Fehler beim Abrufen der Daten

Fox News

11 hours ago

• Fox News

The new map that could be guiding Trump's Middle East moves

Video President Donald Trump came back into office promising no new wars. So far, he's kept that promise. But he's also left much of Washington — and many of America's allies — confused by a series of rapid, unexpected moves across the Middle East. In just a few months, Trump has reopened backchannels with Iran, then turned around and threatened its regime with collapse. He's kept Israel at arm's length — skipping it on his regional tour — before signaling support once again. He lifted U.S. sanctions on Syria's Islamist leader, a figure long treated as untouchable in Washington. And he made headlines by hosting Pakistan's top general at the White House, even as India publicly objected. For those watching closely, it's been hard to pin down a clear doctrine. Critics see improvisation — sometimes even contradiction. But step back, and a pattern begins to emerge. It's not about ideology, democracy promotion, or traditional alliances. It's about access. Geography. Trade. More specifically, it may be about restarting a long-stalled infrastructure project meant to bypass China — and put the United States back at the center of a strategic economic corridor stretching from India to Europe. The project is called the India–Middle East–Europe Corridor, or IMEC. Most Americans have never heard of it. It was launched in 2023 at the G20 summit in New Delhi, as a joint initiative among the U.S., India, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and the European Union. Its goal? To build a modern infrastructure link connecting South Asia to Europe — without passing through Chinese territory or relying on Chinese capital. IMEC's vision is bold but simple: Indian goods would travel west via rail and ports through the Gulf, across Israel, and on to European markets. Along the way, the corridor would connect not just trade routes, but energy pipelines, digital cables, and logistics hubs. It would be the first serious alternative to China's Belt and Road Initiative — a way for the U.S. and its partners to build influence without boots on the ground. But before construction could begin, war broke out in Gaza. The October 2023 Hamas attacks and Israel's military response sent the region into crisis. Normalization talks between Saudi Arabia and Israel fell apart. The Red Sea became a warzone for shipping. And Gulf capital flows paused. The corridor — and the broader idea of using infrastructure to tie the region together — was quietly shelved. Video That's the backdrop for Trump's current moves. Taken individually, they seem scattered. Taken together, they align with the logic of clearing obstacles to infrastructure. Trump may not be drawing maps in the Situation Room. But his instincts — for leverage, dealmaking and unpredictability — are removing the very roadblocks that halted IMEC in the first place. His approach to Iran is a prime example. In April, backchannels were reopened on the nuclear front. In May, a Yemen truce was brokered — reducing attacks on Gulf shipping. In June, after Israeli strikes inside Iran, Trump escalated rhetorically, calling for Iran's "unconditional surrender." That combination of engagement and pressure may sound erratic. But it mirrors the approach that cleared a diplomatic path with North Korea: soften the edges, then apply public pressure. Meanwhile, Trump's temporary distancing from Israel is harder to miss. He skipped it on his regional tour and avoided aligning with Prime Minister Netanyahu's continued hard-line approach to Gaza. Instead, he praised Qatar — a U.S. military partner and quiet mediator in the Gaza talks — and signaled support for Gulf-led reconstruction plans. The message: if Israel refuses to engage in regional stabilization, it won't control the map. Trump also made the unexpected decision to lift U.S. sanctions on Syria's new leader, President Ahmad al-Sharaa — a figure with a past in Islamist groups, now leading a transitional government backed by the UAE. Critics saw the move as legitimizing extremism. But in practice, it unlocked regional financing and access to transit corridors once blocked by U.S. policy. Even the outreach to Pakistan — which angered India — fits a broader infrastructure lens. Pakistan borders Iran, influences Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, and maintains ties with Gulf militaries. Welcoming Pakistan's military chief was less about loyalty, and more about leverage. In corridor politics, geography often trumps alliances. None of this means Trump has a master plan. There's no confirmed strategy memo that links these moves to IMEC. And the region remains volatile. Iran's internal stability is far from guaranteed. The Gaza conflict could reignite. Saudi and Qatari interests don't always align. But there's a growing logic underneath the diplomacy: de-escalate just enough conflict to make capital flow again — and make corridors investable. That logic may not be ideologically pure. It certainly isn't about spreading democracy. But it reflects a real shift in U.S. foreign policy. Call it infrastructure-first geopolitics — where trade routes, ports and pipelines matter more than treaties and summits. To be clear, the United States isn't the only player thinking this way. China's Belt and Road Initiative has been advancing the same model for over a decade. Turkey, Iran and Russia are also exploring new logistics and energy corridors. But what sets IMEC apart — and what makes Trump's recent moves notable — is that it offers an opening for the U.S. to compete without large-scale military deployments or decades-long aid packages. Even the outreach to Pakistan — which angered India — fits a broader infrastructure lens. Pakistan borders Iran, influences Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, and maintains ties with Gulf militaries. For all his unpredictability, Trump has always had a sense for economic leverage. That may be what we're seeing here: less a doctrine than a direction. Less about grand visions, and more about unlocking chokepoints. There's no guarantee it will work. The region could turn on a dime. And the corridor could remain, as it is now, a partially built concept waiting on political will. But Trump's moves suggest he's trying to build the conditions for it to restart — not by talking about peace, but by making peace a condition for investment. In a region long shaped by wars over ideology and territory, that may be its own kind of strategy. Tanvi Ratna is a policy analyst and engineer with a decade of experience in statecraft at the intersection of geopolitics, economics, and technology. She has worked on Capitol Hill, at EY, at CoinDesk and others, shaping policy across sectors from manufacturing to AI. Follow her takes on statecraft on X and Substack.