The question India needs to answer is not whether to side with Washington or Tehran. That framing is itself a trap. The question is whether India has the political will to build the energy independence, the institutional credibility, and the diplomatic infrastructure that would make such a choice genuinely unnecessary.
Deforestation in Pakistan is a pressing issue with serious implications for wildlife and ecological balance. Habitat loss, human-wildlife conflict, and ecosystem disruption are already evident, and the situation will worsen without decisive action. While initiatives like large-scale tree planting are a step in the right direction, they must be complemented by strong policies, effective enforcement, and community involvement.
South Asian states prioritise partners who can deliver immediately in times of economic and political uncertainty. Despite expanding economic ties with China, they continue to turn to India for vital supplies like diesel, LPG and crude oil. This is not only about proximity but rather reflects a level of trust built through repeated experience. China, in response to the crisis, chose to restrict exports of refined fuels such as gasoline and diesel to protect its domestic market.
COP30, Viksit Bharat, and SDG 13 cannot be separated into silos of policy. They have to be woven into one coherent climate-development narrative. At COP30, India can exercise credible ambition and obtain enabling mechanisms from international partners. At home, Viksit Bharat has to internalise climate—not as a compulsion, but as the basis for India’s success. SDG 13 is the yardstick by which India’s growth needs to be measured to determine if growth is both sustainable and future-proof.
Reportedly, the Kirana Hills—near the fortified underground nuclear storage site at Mushaf-Sargodha—were struck by a BrahMos missile. According to idrw.org, the strike on Rawalpindi’s Noor Khan base sent shockwaves through the Pakistan Army leadership, especially its chief, General Asif Munir. The operation exposed critical vulnerabilities in Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence.
Kashmir is no longer a remote valley; it is the litmus test of global resolve against state-sponsored terror for reasons other than the wellbeing of its people. Pakistan’s duplicity is an open dossier. FATF grey-listing (2018-22) barely dented its war-chest because petrodollars kept the financial arteries open. Arun Shourie labelled this “strategic mendicancy milking Western fears of a failing nuclear state while fertilising jihad". The Pahalgam attack proves the scam endures.
Perhaps, the truth lies elsewhere, in the gaping holes of a failing system, the persistent lapses in security, intelligence and governance. And this, despite allocating billions in public funds, our money, our labour, to national security year after year. And yet, it is ordinary citizens who remain vulnerable, targeted again and again.
India’s Operation Sindoor is not just a military retaliation—it is a signal of strategic transformation. With an emphasis on long-term credible deterrence, operational depth, and multi-domain pressure, New Delhi is redefining the rules of engagement with Pakistan. Islamabad would do well to recalibrate its approach and recognize the new reality: any miscalculated aggression will now face an overwhelming and multi-layered response.
For the Modi government generally and the prime minister particularly, who has mastered the art of messaging and social media optics, deploying the two women is widely seen as a smart symbolism. Their gender and religions, incidental in the context of the armed forces, carried a strong message for Pakistan and the rest of the world.
But this time, the condemnation is unanimous and intense. I cannot recall another instance where all of Kashmir shut down in protest against terrorists who were not only Muslims but also backed by Pakistan, a country that once enjoyed sympathy among a significant section of the population.
If South Asia is to overcome its myriad challenges—from religious extremism to geopolitical rivalries—it must reaffirm its commitment to secularism, inclusion, and regional cooperation. The costs of continuing down the current path are too high—not only in lost opportunities but in human lives.
Terrorism cannot be fought through centralization and alienation. Disempowering local leadership and repeatedly failing in intelligence and security—as seen in Pulwama and now Pahalgam—are grave concerns. Kashmir, as an integral part of India, must be given the dignity of full democratic participation.
The original principles behind May Day—demanding an eight-hour workday, fair wages, and safe working conditions—are still far from being fully realized in Bangladesh. Without addressing these core issues, the country risks falling behind others in achieving inclusive and sustainable economic development.
Twenty-six people died. Civilians. Tourists. Possibly women, children, families. Innocents. Their stories never reached us. Not because of censorship, but because no one cared enough to look for them. In Pakistan, people were too busy winning the meme war to ask who the victims were—or what their lives meant.
A recent article by Pakistani Army veteran Adil Raza offers disturbing insights. He writes that Pakistan, gripped by internal military desperation, has teetered on the edge of conflict not due to provocation but due to the Pakistan Army’s desire to manufacture crises to mask its domestic failures.
The path to sustainable peace will not be easy. There will be setbacks, and there will always be those who seek to derail the peace process. Sometimes, even conflict is framed as a path to larger peace—but such actions must always be the absolute last resort. Nations must ensure that voices of hatred do not drown out those of reason and compassion.
The abrogation of the Indus treaty, on the other hand, can be done in one stroke, followed by a firm refusal to respond to any diplomatic or judicial proceedings launched by Pakistan. This one act will undo an unfair treaty, augment India’s water resources and parch Pakistan.
South Asian countries have reported multiple litigations related to climate change.There are 14 such cases in India, six in Pakistan, four in Nepal and one in Sri Lanka. These include the landmark Asghar Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan case where a farmer sued the Pakistan government for not implementing the National Climate Change Policy of 2012 and the Framework for Implementation of Climate Change Policy (2014-2030).
Prime Minister Narendra Modi has invested personal time and effort to rework India’s ties with every country in the Middle East/West Asia. And the results are showing -- India's relations with the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait and others have improved dramatically. Cooperation on counter terrorism – once an irritant between India and countries in the region – is now remarkably smooth
