SRINAGAR: One video showed a young Kashmiri man strapped to a patrolling Indian army jeep as a human shield against stone-throwing protesters. Others showed soldiers beating local men with sticks as other troops stood by with guns drawn.
As Shabir Ahmed watched the crude clips, captured on cellphone cameras and uploaded to Facebook, he felt terrified. They reminded him of his own 2001 detention by Indian army soldiers who suspected him of being a rebel sympathizer; he said they subjected him to beatings, waterboarding and drinking water mixed with chili powder.
“For two nights I couldn’t sleep. I was not shocked but exhausted” after watching the recent videos, said 38-year-old Ahmed. “I have suffered a great deal in torture by soldiers. Suddenly, I felt as if demons reopened my old wounds and started haunting me.”
Rights groups have long accused Indian forces of using systematic abuse and unjustified arrests in Indian-controlled Kashmir. The Indian government has acknowledged the problem exists, but denies it is part of a wide strategy to intimidate residents.
Kashmiris have been uploading videos and photos of alleged abuse for some years, but several recently posted clips, captured in the days surrounding a violence-plagued local election April 9, have proven to be especially powerful and have helped to intensify anti-India protests.
“Welcome to the world of social media,” said Siddiq Wahid, historian and former vice chancellor of a Kashmir university. “You don’t need verification and you don’t need proof. The optics are so clear.”
One video shows a stone-throwing teenage boy being shot by a soldier from a few meters (feet) away. Another shows soldiers making a group of young men, held inside an armored vehicle, shout profanities against Pakistan while a soldier kicks and slaps them with a stick. The video pans to a young boy’s bleeding face as he cries. Yet another clip shows three soldiers holding a teenage boy down with their boots and beating him on his back.
The video that drew the most outrage was of young shawl weaver Farooq Ahmed Dar tied to the bonnet of an army jeep as it patrolled villages on voting day. A soldier can be heard saying in Hindi over a loudspeaker, “Stone throwers will meet a similar fate,” as residents look on aghast.
“When they were driving me around, they were saying, ‘We will shoot (you),’ and were throwing stones at my head,” Dar told The Associated Press. “I was told not to talk. In one of the villages, an elderly man begged for my release but they didn’t listen to him.”
Police have since registered a criminal case against unnamed Indian soldiers in that case, for the first time citing a video as evidence. In addition, the army’s “own internal inquiry has been initiated into the jeep video,” according to spokesman Col. Rajesh Kalia.
But India’s topmost law officer, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, lauded soldiers for managing to defuse a “nasty situation” by containing the protests and saving the polls.
“Why so much noise?” he asked about the complaints. “Military operations cannot be subject of such discussions on social media,” Rohtagi told the Hindustan Times newspaper.
Students across Kashmir have been rallying this month at anti-India demonstrations, facing off against heavily armed riot police and paramilitary soldiers.
“Most students like me use social media, and some among us use stones to protest against India. Our brothers (militants) use guns for the same purpose,” said Aslam, a 22-year-old science major at the University of Kashmir who gave only his first name out of fear for police reprisals.
Viral videos showing police officers beating civilians or soldiers forcing children to do push-ups in public have “not only outraged the residents here, but also strengthened their belief that the remedy lies in relentlessly seeking justice to end these foul practices,” said Khurram Parvez of the Jammu-Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society.
The rights group has conducted decades of research and estimates that at least 200,000 people have been tortured during Kashmir’s decades-long separatist conflict fueled by anti-India sentiment among a mostly Muslim population and a deployment of hundreds of thousands of troops.
Kashmir’s troubles began in 1947, with the first days of Indian and Pakistani independence, as the two countries both claimed the region in its entirety. They have since fought two of three wars over their rival claims, each administering a part of the territory divided by a heavily militarized line of control.
On the Indian side, most public protest was peaceful until 1989, when armed rebels rose up demanding the region’s independence or merger with Pakistan. Nearly 70,000 people have been killed in that uprising and the ensuing military crackdown.
Among the angriest now are Kashmiris under 35, who have grown up in a politically radicalized society amid the brutal armed conflict and high unemployment. They are also among the most tech-savvy and engaged in social media, and make up two-thirds of the territory’s population of nearly 13 million.
Anti-India rebels have also adopted social media. One charismatic rebel commander, Burhan Wani, became a household name thanks to his rousing Facebook posts. His killing last year by Indian forces sparked demonstrations and street clashes across Kashmir.
Meanwhile, pro-India activists appear to have countered with their own videos, including two recently circulated showing militants forcing people to chant anti-India slogans at gunpoint.
Authorities have charged three men with attacking an Indian paramilitary soldier after they were allegedly seen in a video heckling the man.
The Indian chapter of Amnesty International has condemned videos from both sides for inciting anger and violence, and urged an investigation.
Indian police and paramilitary officials accuse agitators of using social media to instigate violence.
“There is misuse of social media by the people who are inimical to the peace,” said the region’s police director-general, S.P. Vaid. He refused to comment on media reports that the government was considering a ban on social media sites like Facebook and popular online chat application WhatsApp.
Kashmiris accuse India of doing too little to combat abuses. Military courts-martial have convicted 164 soldiers since 1990, punishing them with jail or dismissal from military service, according to an army officer who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak with media. He said 96 percent of the more than 1,000 complaints received since 1990 were found to be false and fabricated.
The state government itself cannot pursue abuse cases involving soldiers without permission from New Delhi, which has never been granted despite state requests to prosecute more than 50 cases in the last two decades of alleged murder, rape and other abuse.
In the past, Indian authorities have dismissed videos and photos showing alleged abuse as propaganda stunts aimed at destabilizing the India-based administration. Some in Kashmir believe they were actually leaked by military authorities themselves to intimidate locals.
One observer, New York-based Kashmiri scholar Mohamad Junaid, posited that the “distribution of these videos is also about a fragile masculinity reasserting itself” over a population that has once again begun to aggressively challenge Indian rule.
He and other experts warned that India’s heavy-handed rule and inability to placate local protesters were pushing the region toward a dangerous impasse.
“The decision in New Delhi seems to be to push Kashmir and Kashmiris to the wall, said Wahid, the historian. “It’s only to be expected the resentment is going to reach new heights.”
In Kashmir, brutality of videos deepen anger against India
In Kashmir, brutality of videos deepen anger against India

How Trump backed away from promising to end the Russia-Ukraine war in 24 hours

- He has changed his tone since becoming president again.
- Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday suggested the U.S. might soon back away from negotiations altogether without more progress.
DUBAI: During his campaign, Donald Trump said repeatedly that he would be able to end the war between Russia and Ukraine “in 24 hours” upon taking office. He has changed his tone since becoming president again.
As various US emissaries have held talks looking for an end to the war, both Trump and his top officials have become more reserved about the prospects of a peace deal. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Friday suggested the US might soon back away from negotiations altogether without more progress, adding a comment that sounded like a repudiation of the president’s old comments.
“No one’s saying this can be done in 12 hours,” he told reporters.
The promises made by presidential candidates are often felled by the realities of governing. But Trump’s shift is noteworthy given his prior term as president and his long histories with both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
The White House on Friday did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment on Trump’s evolving deadline comments.
Here’s a look at Trump’s evolution on the way he talks about the Russia-Ukraine war:
‘A very easy negotiation’
MARCH 2023: “There’s a very easy negotiation to take place. But I don’t want to tell you what it is because then I can’t use that negotiation; it’ll never work,” Trump told Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity, claiming that he could “solve” the war “in 24 hours” if he were back in the White House.
“But it’s a very easy negotiation to take place. I will have it solved within one day, a peace between them,” Trump said of the war, which at that point had been ongoing for more than a year since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.
MAY 2023: “They’re dying, Russians and Ukrainians. I want them to stop dying. And I’ll have that done — I’ll have that done in 24 hours,” Trump said during a town hall on CNN.
JULY 2024: When asked to respond to Trump’s one-day claim, Russia’s United Nations Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia told reporters that “the Ukrainian crisis cannot be solved in one day.” Afterward, Trump campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said that “a top priority in his second term will be to quickly negotiate an end to the Russia-Ukraine war.”
AUGUST 2024: “Before I even arrive at the Oval Office, shortly after I win the presidency, I will have the horrible war between Russia and Ukraine settled,” Trump told a National Guard Conference. “I’ll get it settled very fast. I don’t want you guys going over there. I don’t want you going over there.”
After Trump wins in November
DEC. 16, 2024: “I’m going to try,” Trump said during a news conference at his Mar-a-Lago club, asked if he thought he could still make a deal with Putin and Zelensky to end the war.
JAN. 8, 2025: In a Fox News Channel interview, retired Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg — now serving as Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine and Russia — proposed a 100-day deadline to end the war. Friday marked 100 days since that interview. The 100th day of Trump’s presidency is April 30.
Trump becomes president and starts negotiations
JAN. 31: Trump says his new administration has already had “very serious” discussions with Russia and says he and Putin could soon take “significant” action toward ending the grinding conflict.
“We will be speaking, and I think will perhaps do something that’ll be significant,” Trump said in an exchange with reporters in the Oval Office. “We want to end that war. That war would have not started if I was president.”
FEB. 12: Trump and Putin speak for more than an hour and Trump speaks afterward with Zelensky. Trump says afterward, “I think we’re on the way to getting peace.”
FEB. 19: Trump posts on his Truth Social site that Zelensky is serving as a “dictator without elections.” He adds that “we are successfully negotiating an end to the War with Russia, something all admit only ‘TRUMP,’ and the Trump Administration, can do.”
FEB. 28: Trump and Zelensky have a contentious Oval Office meeting. Trump berates Zelensky for being “disrespectful,” then abruptly calls off the signing of a minerals deal that Trump said would have moved Ukraine closer to ending the war.
Declaring himself “in the middle” and not on the side of either Ukraine or Russia in the conflict, Trump went on to deride Zelensky’s “hatred” for Putin as a roadblock to peace.
“You see the hatred he’s got for Putin,” Trump said. “That’s very tough for me to make a deal with that kind of hate.”
The Ukrainian leader was asked to leave the White House by top Trump advisers shortly after Trump shouted at him. Trump later told reporters that he wanted an “immediate ceasefire” between Russia and Ukraine but expressed doubt that Zelensky was ready to make peace.
MARCH 3: Trump temporarily pauses military aid to Ukraine to pressure Zelensky to seek peace.
Trump claims his 24-hour promise was ‘sarcastic’
MARCH 14: Trump says he was “being a little bit sarcastic” when he repeatedly claimed as a candidate that he would have the Russia-Ukraine war solved within 24 hours.
“Well, I was being a little bit sarcastic when I said that,” Trump says in a clip released from an interview for the “Full Measure” television program. “What I really mean is I’d like to get it settled and, I’ll, I think, I think I’ll be successful.”
MARCH 18-19: Trump speaks with both Zelensky and Putin on successive days.
In a March 18 call, Putin told Trump that he would agree not to target Ukraine’s energy infrastructure but refused to back a full 30-day ceasefire that Trump had proposed. Afterward, Trump on social media heralded that move, which he said came “with an understanding that we will be working quickly to have a Complete Ceasefire and, ultimately, an END to this very horrible War between Russia and Ukraine.”
In their own call a day later, Trump suggested that Zelensky should consider giving the US ownership of Ukraine’s power plants to ensure their long-term security. Trump told Zelensky that the UScould be “very helpful in running those plants with its electricity and utility expertise,” according to a White House statement from Secretary of State Marco Rubio and national security adviser Mike Waltz.
APRIL 14: Trump says “everybody” is to blame: Zelensky, Putin and Biden.
“That’s a war that should have never been allowed to start and Biden could have stopped it and Zelensky could have stopped it and Putin should have never started it,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office.
Talk of moving on
APRIL 18: Rubio says that the US may “move on” from trying to secure a Russia-Ukraine peace deal if there is no progress in the coming days.
He spoke in Paris after landmark talks among US, Ukrainian and European officials produced outlines for steps toward peace and appeared to make some long-awaited progress. A new meeting is expected next week in London, and Rubio suggested it could be decisive in determining whether the Trump administration continues its involvement.
“We are now reaching a point where we need to decide whether this is even possible or not,” Rubio told reporters. “Because if it’s not, then I think we’re just going to move on. It’s not our war. We have other priorities to focus on.”
He said the US administration wants to decide “in a matter of days.”
Later that day, Trump told reporters at the White House that he agreed with Rubio that a Ukraine peace deal must be done “quickly.”
“I have no specific number of days but quickly. We want to get it done,” he said.
Saying “Marco is right” that the dynamic of the negotiations must change, Trump stopped short of saying he’s ready to walk away from peace negotiations.
“Well, I don’t want to say that,” Trump said. “But we want to see it end.”
Pakistan admits ‘outstanding issues’ discussed with Bangladesh amid reports of Dhaka seeking 1971 apology

- Media reports claim Bangladesh sought apology from Pakistan for alleged 1971 war massacre in talks held this week
- Pakistan foreign office says both sides stated their respective positions in “environment of mutual understanding, respect”
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s foreign office spokesperson recently acknowledged that some “outstanding issues” between Islamabad and Dhaka were discussed this week amid reports of Bangladesh seeking an apology from Pakistan over alleged war crimes committed in 1971.
Bangladesh and Pakistan were two parts of the same country from 1947 till 1971 till the former seceded after a bloody war. Bangladesh says about three million people were killed and thousands of women were raped during the war by Pakistani soldiers, allegations that Islamabad rejects.
Pakistan and Bangladesh started their first Foreign Office Consultations (FOC) in 15 years in Dhaka on Thursday, signaling a thaw in relations long strained by historical grievances and regional alignments. Responding to a question about Dhaka seeking an apology from Pakistan for the alleged massacre in 1971 during the recent talks, Pakistan’s foreign office spokesperson Shafqat Ali Khan said a “torrent of fake news or sensational news” was trying to undermine ties between the two nations.
“Some outstanding issues were indeed discussed during the consultations,” Khan said during the weekly press briefing on Friday.
“However, both sides stated their respective positions on them in an environment of mutual understanding and respect.”
He said the discussions were held in a “cordial and constructive” manner, saying that talks between the two sides being held after a gap of 15 years was a testimony to the existing goodwill and cordiality between Pakistan and Bangladesh.
The latest meetings between Pakistani and Bangladeshi officials come amid significant political shifts in Bangladesh following the ouster of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wajid in a popular student uprising last year.
Hasina’s government was hostile toward Pakistan but closely allied with India, where she remains exiled. While her removal from office was followed by the cooling of relations between Dhaka and New Delhi, exchanges with Islamabad have started to grow.
Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar is scheduled to visit Bangladesh at the end of the month, the first such visit by a Pakistani foreign minister since 2012.
At Art Dubai, Pakistani artists find the space missing at home

- The Middle East’s leading art fair draws galleries and collectors from around the world
- Pakistani artists say global interest is rising in their work, bringing international recognition
KARACHI: Pakistani artists have been receiving increasing international recognition, but many still grapple with limited opportunities and visibility at home, a participant at a major Gulf art fair said this week.
Her comments coincided with Art Dubai 2025, the Middle East’s leading contemporary art fair, where 10 Pakistani artists are exhibiting their work this year.
The event, running since 2007, draws galleries and collectors from across the globe and has become a vital platform for people with creative abilities in places like Pakistan.
“It’s wonderful that we as artists who have been invisible because of the greater struggles of [our] country are visible through this platform in the Gulf,” said Faiza Butt, a London-based Pakistani artist currently attending the fair, told Arab News over the phone.

“It’s really a matter of pride that despite all the odds, Pakistani artists continue to appear, and work and make themselves visible, especially female artists.”
Butt maintained Pakistani artists are shaped by the country’s complex realities, adding that is what gives their work its depth.
“Our social and political struggles really feed the artists’ imagination,” she said. “Art doesn’t come from a happy place. So one of the reasons our artists are so strong is because our country has gone through a great deal of strife.”
She also credited the country’s mature art education institutions, such as the National College of Arts in Lahore and the Indus Valley School of Arts in Karachi, for nurturing generations of artists despite systemic challenges.

Karachi-based visual artist Sana Arjumand, who is also exhibiting at the fair, echoed similar views.
“There is now more and more interest coming into Pakistani art because we are really making very good art,” she said.
“Because of so many different experiences here [in Pakistan], we have that informed kind of making of art. It’s more vibrant and alive. It stands out as well — that is why more and more interest is coming here.”
Arjumand, who studied painting at NCA, said her early work focused on self-reflection but has since evolved to include themes of Sufism, mysticism and human interconnectedness with nature.
Her new work, presented at the fair, explores the idea that human behavior mirrors elements in the natural world.
“It’s for everyone,” she said. “It has a storyline that anybody can relate to.”
A total of ten Pakistani artists, including one posthumously, are featured in the fair’s Contemporary Art section. Among them is the late Sadequain, whose pioneering calligraphy and figurative works helped define Pakistan’s post-Partition art movement and continue to influence generations of artists.

Also exhibiting are Rasheed Araeen, a Karachi-born conceptualist known internationally for his contributions to British minimalist and postcolonial art, and Imran Qureshi, whose fusion of classical Mughal miniature techniques with contemporary themes has earned him acclaim worldwide.
Other featured names include Anwar Saeed, celebrated for his explorations of identity and sexuality, and Shezad Dawood, a London-based multidisciplinary artist with Pakistani and Indian heritage.
Butt is being represented by Grosvenor Gallery in London, which is exhibiting her work alongside that of Anwar Saeed under a shared curatorial concept focused on representations of the male form.
“The female figure is represented enough in the arts,” said Butt. “Anwar and I both discuss the male form but with our own unique politics based on our unique ethnography. But we are both Pakistanis, and there are overlaps in our concerns.”
She will also deliver a talk on behalf of Saeed, reflecting on his practice and political engagement through art.
Despite global attention, Butt stressed that Pakistan lacks the institutional and financial infrastructure to support a thriving art scene.
“Art is a very priced project, and Pakistan cannot afford having art fairs or a very established art market,” she said. “Pakistani artists get absorbed by galleries from other countries.”
She described Art Dubai as a great opportunity for artists in her country.
“Dubai is a very stable financial hub of the Gulf region,” she continued. “It has welcomed a great deal of migration from India and Pakistan. You get a diverse audience. It’s a beautiful coming together, in a positive way, of ideas, culture and exchange of thought.”
Trump goes to war with the Fed in move feared to destabilize US financial markets

- Trump says he wants rate cuts now to help stimulate economic growth and has threatened to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell if he does not comply
- Powell has said he has no plans to step down early, adding that he considers the bank’s independence over monetary policy to be a “matter of law”
WASHINGTON: Donald Trump’s simmering discontent with the US Federal Reserve boiled over this week, with the president threatening to take the unprecedented step of ousting the head of the fiercely independent central bank.
Trump has repeatedly said he wants rate cuts now to help stimulate economic growth as he rolls out his tariff plans, and has threatened to fire Fed Chair Jerome Powell if he does not comply, putting the bank and the White House on a collision course that analysts warn could destabilize US financial markets.
“If I want him out, he’ll be out of there real fast, believe me,” Trump said Thursday, referring to Powell, whose second four-year stint as Fed chair ends in May 2026.
Powell has said he has no plans to step down early, adding this week that he considers the bank’s independence over monetary policy to be a “matter of law.”
“Clearly, the fact that the Fed chairman feels that he has to address it means that they are serious,” KPMG chief economist Diane Swonk told AFP, referring to the White House.
Stephanie Roth, chief economist at Wolfe Research, said she thinks “they will come into conflict,” but does not think “that the Fed is going to succumb to the political pressure.”
Most economists agree that the administration’s tariff plans — which include a 10 percent “baseline” rate on imports from most countries — will put upward pressure on prices and cool economic growth, at least in the short term.
That would keep inflation well away from the Fed’s long-term target of two percent, and likely prevent policymakers from cutting rates in the next few months.
“They’re not going to react because Trump posted that they should be cutting,” Roth said in an interview, adding that doing so would be “a recipe for a disaster” for the US economy.
Many legal scholars say the US president does not have the power to fire the Fed chair or any of his colleagues on the bank’s 19-person rate-setting committee for any reason but cause.
The Fed system, created more than a century ago, is also designed to insulate the US central bank from political interference.
“Independence is absolutely critical for the Fed,” said Roth. “Countries that do not have independent central banks have currencies that are notably weaker and interest rates that are notably higher.”
Moody’s Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi told AFP that “we’ve had strong evidence that impairing central bank independence is a really bad idea.”
One serious threat to the Fed’s independence comes from an ongoing case in which the Trump administration has indicated it will seek to challenge a 1935 Supreme Court decision denying the US president the right to fire the heads of independent government agencies.
The case could have serious ramifications for the Fed, given its status as an independent agency whose leadership believes they cannot currently be fired by the president for any reason but cause.
But even if the Trump administration succeeds in court, it may soon run into the ultimate guardrail of Fed independence: The bond markets.
During the recent market turbulence unleashed by Trump’s tariff plans, US government bond yields surged and the dollar fell, signaling that investors may not see the United States as the safe haven investment it once was.
Faced with the sharp rise in US Treasury yields, the Trump administration paused its plans for higher tariffs against dozens of countries, a move that helped calm the financial markets.
If investors believed the Fed’s independence to tackle inflation was compromised, that would likely push up the yields on long-dated government bonds on the assumption that long-term inflation would be higher, and put pressure on the administration.
“You can’t control the bond market. And that’s the moral of the story,” said Swonk.
“And that’s why you want an independent Fed.”
Pakistan foreign minister due in Kabul as deportations rise

- Pakistan has launched strict campaign to evict over 800,000 Afghan Citizen Card holders by end of April
- Ishaq Dar will hold meetings with senior Afghan Taliban officials, including Prime Minister Hasan Akhund
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s foreign minister was due to visit Afghanistan on Saturday after his country expelled more than 85,000 Afghans, mostly children, in just over two weeks.
Islamabad has launched a strict campaign to evict by the end of April more than 800,000 Afghans who have had their residence permits canceled — including some who were born in Pakistan or lived there for decades.
Convoys of Afghan families have been heading to border towns each day fearing the “humiliation” of raids, arrests or being separated from family members.
Pakistan’s foreign office said its top diplomat Ishaq Dar will hold meetings with senior Afghan Taliban officials, including Prime Minister Hasan Akhund during a day-long visit.
“There will not be any sort of leniency and extension in the deadline,” Pakistan’s deputy interior minister Talal Chaudhry told a news conference on Friday.
“When you arrive without any documents, it only deepens the uncertainty of whether you’re involved in narcotics trafficking, supporting terrorism, or committing other crimes,” he added.
Chaudhry has previously accused Afghans of being “terrorists and criminals,” but analysts say it is a politically motivated strategy to put pressure on Afghanistan’s Taliban government over escalating security concerns.
He said on Friday that nearly 85,000 Afghans have crossed into Afghanistan since the start of April, the majority of them undocumented.
The United Nations’ refugee agency said on Friday more than half of them were children — entering a country where girls are banned from secondary school and university and women are barred from many sectors of work.
The United Nations says nearly three million Afghans have taken shelter in Pakistan after fleeing successive conflicts.
Pakistan was one of just three countries that recognized the Taliban’s first government in the 1990s and was accused of covertly supporting their insurgency against NATO forces.
But their relationship has soured as attacks in Pakistan’s border regions have soared.
Last year was the deadliest in Pakistan for a decade with Islamabad accusing Kabul of allowing militants to take refuge in Afghanistan, from where they plan attacks.
The Taliban government denies the charge.
In the first phase of deportations in 2023, hundreds of thousands of undocumented Afghans were forced across the border in the space of a few weeks.
In the second phase announced in March, the Pakistan government canceled the residence permits of more than 800,000 Afghans, warning those in Pakistan awaiting relocation to other countries to leave by the end of April.
More than 1.3 million who hold Proof of Registration cards issued by the UN refugee agency have been told to leave Islamabad and the neighboring city of Rawalpindi.