dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

Pakistan Minister Warns Of Possible Indian Military Strike In 24-36 Hours

Islamabad says will ‘decisively respond’ to any military action as tensions with New Delhi soar after Kashmir attack. Pakistan’s minister for information and broadcasting says Islamabad has “credible intelligence” that India intends to launch a military strike within the next 24 to 36 hours, as tensions between the two countries escalate following a deadly attack in Indian-administered Kashmir. In a social media post early on Wednesday, Attaullah Tarar accused India of using last week’s attack in Pahalgam, which killed 26 tourists, “as a false pretext” to potentially strike Pakistan. The minister did not provide any concrete information to back up his claim, and the Indian government did not immediately comment publicly on the allegations. “Any act of aggression will be met with a decisive response. India will be fully responsible for any serious consequences in the region,” Tarar said in the post on X. Pakistani Minister of Defence Khawaja Muhammad Asif also told the Reuters news agency on Monday that a military incursion by India was “imminent”. Islamabad is on high alert but will only use its nuclear weapons if “there is a direct threat to our existence”, Asif said. India’s Ministry of External Affairs did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Reuters news agency on the latest remarks from Tarar. Tensions between the two countries have been rising after India said there were Pakistani elements linked to the attack on April 22 in the mountain resort of Pahalgam. It was the deadliest attack on tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir in more than two decades, and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has promised to pursue the attackers. A statement issued in the name of The Resistance Front (TRF), which is believed to be an offshoot of the Pakistani-based Lashkar-e-Taiba, claimed responsibility for the attack. But Islamabad has denied any role in what happened and called for a neutral investigation. After the attack, the neighbours unleashed a raft of diplomatic measures against each other, including visa revocations and the closure of Pakistani airspace to Indian airlines. India also suspended its participation in the Indus Waters Treaty, which regulates water-sharing from the Indus River and its tributaries between the two countries. The move spurred protests in Pakistan, and the Pakistani government has said it is preparing legal action over New Delhi’s decision. Fire also has been exchanged along the Line of Control (LoC), the 740km (460-mile) de-facto border separating Indian- and Pakistani-controlled areas of Kashmir, prompting international calls to de-escalate tensions. On Tuesday, the United States urged the two countries to work towards a “responsible solution”. “We are reaching out to both parties, and telling … them to not escalate the situation,” a Department of State spokesperson told reporters, quoting a statement by Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The spokesperson added that Rubio would speak to the foreign ministers of India and Pakistan on Tuesday or Wednesday and encouraged other foreign ministers to do the same. The United Nations also said Secretary-General Antonio Guterres spoke with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Indian Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar and “underscored the need to avoid a confrontation that could result in tragic consequences”. Follow Al Jazeera English:...

dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

Canada Election Results: Who Are The Key Winners And Losers?

Carney is set to form government and cabinet as his Liberal Party wins elections defined by threats from US President Trump. Canada’s governing Liberal Party led by Prime Minister Mark Carney has won the national elections for a fourth term in a remarkable comeback prompted in part by unprecedented attacks by United States President Donald Trump. The Liberals beat Pierre Poilievre’s main opposition Conservative Party on Monday after millions of people voted in snap elections dominated by the big question: Which candidate can better handle Trump, who has slapped tariffs and threatened to annex Canada? Here is a closer look at the results of Canada’s federal elections and what comes next. Soon after 22:00 EDT on Tuesday (02:00 GMT on Wednesday), national broadcaster CBC projected that the Liberal Party was headed to win an adequate number of seats in the House of Commons to form a government. Voting was held for the 343-member House of Commons – the lower house of parliament. A party has to win 172 seats (also called federal ridings) to form a government. It is too soon to say whether the Liberals will cross the majority mark. These are the seat projections for the main parties in Canada, according to CBC: In the 2025 election, the number of seats went up to 343, from 338. Trump’s threats of tariffs and annexation were a key issue in this election, experts said. Arguing that Canada had not done its part in preventing irregular migration and drug trafficking to the US, Trump imposed a 25 percent tariff on products from Canada and a 10 percent tariff on Canadian energy. The US president also threatened to annex Canada. “I think Canada would be much better off being a 51st state,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News in February. “The most important factor in Canadian politics right now doesn’t live in Canada – it’s Donald Trump,” Daniel Beland, a professor at McGill University in Montreal and director of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada, told Al Jazeera in February. Other issues included the affordability of groceries and housing. The Canadian cost of living crisis intensified over former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s tenure due to inflation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Trudeau was prime minister since 2015 and stepped down on March 9 this year after facing mounting pressure for months to resign. In June 2022, the inflation rate was 8.1 percent more than the previous year, the largest yearly change since 1983, according to Statistics Canada. Some Canadians blamed Trudeau for a spike in housing prices due to his pro-immigration agenda. Last year, Poilievre made comments attacking the “massive uncontrolled population growth that put strain on our housing market, our healthcare and our job market” under Trudeau. Inflation has since gone down and is currently at 2.3 percent. However, prices remain much higher than they were in 2020. While Poilievre’s Conservatives enjoyed had a lead throughout 2024, the Liberals made an unexpected jump in the opinion polls starting February this year, thanks to Trump’s diatribe against Canada. “In Canadian polling history, at least in this century, it is the first time I’ve ever seen this. To come back from a 25-point deficit is very unheard of, especially for a government that’s been in power for almost a decade,” Philippe J Fournier, analyst and creator of electoral projection model and website 338Canada, told Al Jazeera in March. At the time, Fournier said the growing popularity of the Liberals could be explained by Trudeau’s decision to step down, Trump’s threats and Canadians’ “discomfort” with Poilievre. “Poilievre is using the same style and the same language and the same tactics as Trump,” Fournier said, explaining that Trump’s threats to Canada swayed swing voters away from the Conservative leader. Carney promised to scrap some of Trudeau’s unpopular policies, including a carbon pricing programme, as Canadians faced a cost-of-living crisis. On the campaign trail, Carney promised to handle the crisis, counter the tariffs, protect workers and take on Trump head-on. “I am ready and I have managed crises over the years … We will fight back with counter-tariffs and we will protect our workers,” he said during the English language debate on April 18. “We can give ourselves far more than Donald Trump can ever take away.” Trump was the “elephant in the room” and Canadians needed a new candidate to deal with the US president, Bob Richardson, a Canadian public affairs analyst at Hammersmith Consulting, told Al Jazeera. “We need an adult in the room. We need somebody with experience. We need somebody with economic experience, which [Carney] has a tonne of, having been governor of the Bank of Canada and the governor of the Bank of England… He’s more of somebody who can deal with the situation that Canada has to face over the next two or three years,” Richardson said. Tari Ajadi, an assistant professor at the department of political science, McGill University, told Al Jazeera that Carney “came across as competent and qualified enough to lead Canada in this uncertain time. Despite being a rookie politician, he was able to run a well-managed campaign.” He explained that another chief factor in the Liberal win was the collapse of the NDP. “A significant number of those votes went to the Liberal Party, ultimately powering them to a win.” The Conservative leader has been projected to lose his seat in Carleton, Ontario, to Liberal candidate Bruce Fanjoy. Poilievre was first elected there in 2004. The NDP is so far projected to win 7 seats, giving it 6.3 percent of the vote share. This means it falls short of the 12 seats that a party needs to maintain official party status, which is needed for parliamentary privileges such as research funding. Jagmeet Singh, 46, announced he is stepping down as the leader of the NDP on Monday. He acknowledged that his party did not perform as well as he expected it to. Singh also did not win his riding. He conceded defeat in his constituency of Burnaby Central in British Columbia. “We’re only defeated when we believe those that tell us that we can never dream of a better Canada, a fairer Canada, a more compassionate Canada,” said Singh. “These results were quite surprising and point to the competing priorities of Canadians this election: A significant faction of Canadians wanted change, but also were terrified of the threats coming from the United States,” Ajadi from McGill University said. “This led to a coalescing of votes on the centre and on the left at the expense of the NDP and Greens,” he added. The election, Ajadi said, saw the strengthening of the Conservative Party on the right, with the party vote share being the highest it has been since 1998. He said these outcomes imply a “shy Conservative” vote that empowered the Conservatives to a significant seat count, but did not get them enough seats to win the parliamentary minority. Carney declared victory in a speech during a rally in Ottawa, the capital of Canada. He pledged to put up a strong front in the face of Trump’s threats. “We have built one nation in harsh conditions despite a sometimes-hostile neighbour. Yes, they have form on this, the Americans,” he said. His speech also mentioned improving housing and energy. “We are masters in our own home. We will build millions of housing units. We will become an energy superpower. We will provide good careers in skilled trades and one economy,” the Canadian leader said, adding “this is Canada, and we decide what happens here.” Conceding defeat, Poilievre said: “I would like to congratulate Prime Minister Carney on leading this minority government. “My fellow Conservatives, we have much to celebrate tonight. We’ve gained well over 20 seats. We got the highest share of vote our party has received since 1988,” he said at his election night headquarters in Ottawa. Poilievre pledged to work with Liberals in countering Trump’s tariff and annexation threats. “Conservatives will work with the prime minister and all parties with the common goal of defending Canada’s interests and getting a new trade deal that puts these tariffs behind us while protecting our sovereignty,” he said. After leading the Liberals to victory, Carney will remain in the job as prime minister and form a new government and cabinet. He was sworn in as prime minister after Trudeau stepped down from his position on March 9. If the Liberals win a majority, Carney would assemble a cabinet and work on a budget plan before the House reconvenes on May 26. If the Liberals fall short of the majority, they would have to work with another party or more to pass legislation in parliament and survive no-confidence votes. In the past, the NDP emerged as the Liberals’ natural partner. The Conservatives are set to form the official opposition in parliament. Ajadi from McGill University said Carney would need to reach out to other party leaders to strike some kind of deal, since the next government would likely be a minority one. “A loss of confidence vote in the House of Commons would prompt another election,” Ajadi said. “He can govern without a partner, but it means that the government is always at risk of losing the confidence of the House, which would not be sustainable given the broader geopolitical climate we are in.” Follow Al Jazeera English:...

dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

About 600 North Korean Soldiers Killed In War In Ukraine, Lawmakers Say

South Korean lawmakers provide update on estimated casualties following briefing by country’s intelligence agency. About 600 North Korean soldiers have been killed fighting in Russia’s war in Ukraine, South Korean lawmakers have said, citing intelligence officials. Speaking after a closed-door briefing by the National Intelligence Service (NIS) on Wednesday, Lee Seong-kweun and Kim Byung-kee told reporters that an estimated 4,700 North Koreans had been killed or injured so far in the war. Lee and Kim, who co-chair the legislature’s intelligence committee, made their comments two days after Pyongyang confirmed for the first time that it had sent troops to Russia to support Moscow’s war. In a report by the official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on Monday, North Korean leader Kim Jong Un was quoted as saying he had ordered the deployment of troops to “annihilate and wipe out the Ukrainian neo-Nazi occupiers and liberate the Kursk area in cooperation with the Russian armed forces”. The latest casualty figures mark a significant jump from the NIS’s briefing to lawmakers in January, when the spy agency reportedly said that about 300 North Korean troops had been killed in the conflict. In their briefing to reporters, Lee and Kim, members of the conservative People Power Party and liberal Democratic Party, respectively, said that the NIS estimates that Pyongyang has deployed about 15,000 soldiers in total. The lawmakers also said that Pyongyang appears to have received technical assistance on spy satellites in return for its assistance, as well as drones, electronic warfare equipment and SA-22 surface-to-air missiles. “After six months of participation in the war, the North Korean military has become less inept, and its combat capability has significantly improved as it becomes accustomed to using new weapons such as drones,” Lee told reporters. Follow Al Jazeera English:...

dataDp/1032.jpeg

Worldnews

Kashmir Attack: Why Pakistans Threat To Suspend Simla Agreement Matters

Analysts believe a Pakistani pullout from the Simla Agreement could dismantle key diplomatic safeguards with India. Islamabad, Pakistan – Tensions between India and Pakistan have soared since the April 22 attack on tourists in the scenic resort town of Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir, in which at least 26 people were killed. Both countries have announced a series of tit-for-tat measures, raising fears of a wider confrontation. After a cabinet meeting led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, India on Wednesday announced the suspension of the six-decade-old Indus Waters Treaty (IWT), a critical agreement that governs the use of the Indus River system, vital to both nations. It also announced the closure of its border with Pakistan, trade suspension, revocation of visas, and a reduction in Pakistani diplomats in India. In response, Pakistan’s National Security Committee (NSC), its top civil-military decision-making body, announced similar measures, including border and airspace closures, suspension of trade, and, significantly, a threat to suspend its participation in all bilateral agreements with India, including the Simla Agreement. Signed in 1972, the Simla Agreement forms the bedrock of India-Pakistan relations, governing the Line of Control (LoC) and outlining commitments to resolve disputes peacefully. Pakistan’s threat to suspend the agreement marks a potentially serious escalation. But what exactly is the Simla Agreement, and what are the implications if Pakistan pulls out of it? Seven months after the 1971 war, which India won and which led to the creation of Bangladesh, Pakistani President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi met in Shimla (sometimes also spelt as Simla), the hilly capital of the Indian state of Himachal Pradesh, to normalise relations. Key points of the agreement [PDF], signed on July 2, 1972, included the peaceful settlement of disputes and resolving issues, including Kashmir, bilaterally. It also urged respect for territorial sovereignty, integrity, political independence and noninterference in internal affairs. One of the most important outcomes was the renaming of the Ceasefire Line, the working border between the two countries, to the Line of Control (LoC), with both sides agreeing not to change it unilaterally. Following the 1971 war, the agreement also led to the release of more than 90,000 Pakistani prisoners of war India was holding. “Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation, and both shall prevent the organisation, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance of peaceful and harmonious relations,” the agreement stated. Ahmer Bilal Soofi, a leading international law expert and former legal adviser to the Pakistan government, described the Simla Agreement as an interim but crucial framework between the two countries. “Suspending the agreement would require a meticulous internal assessment” by Pakistan to ensure that it serves the country’s interests in retaliating against India, Soofi told Al Jazeera. “Any decision must involve extreme due diligence.” Another international law expert, Muhammad Mushtaq Ahmad of Shifa Tameer-e-Millat University, explained that India has long interpreted the Simla Agreement as superseding United Nations Security Council (UNSC) resolutions. “India’s position is that the agreement made the Kashmir issue a purely bilateral matter, removing any need for international mediation,” Ahmad said. The Himalayan territory has been a flashpoint between the two countries since they gained independence from British rule in 1947, with each controlling parts of Kashmir but claiming it in full. Since independence, the nuclear-armed neighbours have fought four wars, three of them over Kashmir. Pakistan, on the other hand, maintains that the Simla Agreement reaffirmed UNSC resolutions advocating a diplomatic and political solution. After the Modi government revoked Indian-administered Kashmir’s semi-autonomous status in 2019, Pakistan accused New Delhi of violating the Simla Agreement. Islamabad could cite that to justify the suspension of its participation in the agreement, Ahmad said. Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties – a pact Pakistan is signatory to, but India is not – a material breach allows a country to denounce a treaty, he added. But Indian defence analyst Ajai Shukla says if either or both countries walk out of the Simla Agreement, it would effectively represent an “open season” on the LoC. “It could lead to both sides changing the ground position of the LoC, and they will be incentivised to use arms as there won’t be any treaty that will impose peace, which is currently in place,” the New Delhi-based analyst told Al Jazeera. Despite the Simla Agreement, India and Pakistan have engaged in conflicts, including their four-decade-long joust for control of the Siachen Glacier — the world’s highest battleground — and the 1999 Kargil War. Ahmad, the academic, said the LoC was never able to establish lasting peace. Pakistani constitutional expert Rida Hosain argued that India had historically “misused” the Simla Agreement to its advantage. “At the heart of Simla [Agreement] is peaceful coexistence. But India’s recent war-mongering rhetoric and blame for attacks without evidence suggest otherwise,” Hosain said, referring to India’s allegation that Pakistan was responsible for the Pahalgam attack. Pakistan has rejected the accusation and demanded that India present evidence to support its claim. Islamabad has also called for a “neutral investigation” in to the Kashmir attack. Shukla, a former Indian Army officer, however, said a pullout by Pakistan from the Simla Agreement would not automatically amount to a declaration of war. Still, it would bring the neighbours closer to a potential military conflict. “One does not automatically lead to another, but it does mean that both sides will no longer have guardrails of an international treaty that withholds them from engaging in armed hostilities,” he said. Unlike its immediate implementation of other retaliatory measures, Pakistan has only threatened to walk out of the Simla Agreement. According to Soofi, Pakistan’s rationale stems from a desire to return to multilateralism. “India has used Simla to argue that Kashmir is a purely bilateral issue. Suspending it allows Pakistan to revert to UN Security Council mechanisms to internationalise the Kashmir dispute,” Soofi said. Shukla said suspending the agreement could provide international cover for both sides to pursue their interests on the LoC in a manner not possible while adhering to the pact. “Pakistan always sort of held to the notion that treaties like the Simla Agreement have tied its hands from pursuing its interests in places like Siachen, which Pakistan says is an example of India violating the agreement,” he said. India successfully captured the strategically located Siachen Glacier in 1984 in a military operation that Pakistan insists violated the Simla Agreement. Meanwhile, India also feels hobbled by the agreement, Shukla said. New Delhi has long insisted that Pakistan-administered Kashmir belongs to India, and under Modi, the domestic rhetoric to militarily take back that territory has grown. “In essence, both sides feel the agreement is not safeguarding their interests,” said Shukla. Ahmad suggests that India’s suspension of the IWT could already constitute an act of aggression under international law, justifying self-defence measures by Pakistan. Under the IWT, India gets the waters of the Ravi, Beas and Sutlej rivers, all part of the Indus Basin. On the other hand, Pakistan is entitled to most of the water from the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab rivers. “The water treaty underpins the lives of nearly 250 million Pakistanis. Its suspension can be seen as a hostile act,” Ahmad said. The threat to pull out of the Simla Agreement, Ahmad said, was a “smart decision by the government to remind India, to issue them a warning of sorts”. Follow Al Jazeera English:...