NEW DELHI: Prime Minister Narendra Modi has given India’s military “operational freedom” to respond to a deadly attack in Kashmir last week, a senior government source told AFP Tuesday, after New Delhi blamed it on arch-rival Pakistan.
A week after the deadliest attack on civilians in the contested region in years, Modi on Tuesday held a closed-door meeting with army and security chiefs, during which he told the armed forces that they had the “complete operational freedom to decide on the mode, targets and timing of our response to the terror attack,” said the government source, who was not authorized to speak to the media.
The government released video images of a stern-faced Modi meeting with army chiefs, as well as Defense Minister Rajnath Singh.
Also on Tuesday, India’s army said it had repeatedly traded gunfire with Pakistani troops across the Line of Control (LoC), the de facto Kashmir border, a heavily fortified zone of high-altitude Himalayan outposts.
Pakistan’s military did not confirm the shooting, but state radio in Islamabad reported on Tuesday it had shot down an Indian drone, calling it a violation of its airspace.
It did not say when the incident happened, and there was no comment from New Delhi.
India said the “Pakistan Army resorted to unprovoked small arms firing across the Line of Control” overnight Monday to Tuesday, the fifth night in a row that fire was exchanged there.
The Indian army said its troops had “responded in a measured and effective manner to the provocation.” There were no reports of casualties.
Relations between the nuclear-armed neighbors have plummeted after India accused Pakistan of backing an attack in Indian-administered Kashmir on April 22 in which 26 men were killed.
Islamabad has rejected the charge and both countries have since exchanged gunfire in Kashmir and diplomatic barbs, as well as expelled citizens and ordered the main land border crossing shut.
Last week, Modi vowed to pursue those who carried out the attack in the tourist hotspot of Pahalgam in Indian-administered Kashmir, and those who had supported it.
“I say to the whole world: India will identify, track and punish every terrorist and their backer,” he said on Thursday.
“We will pursue them to the ends of the Earth.”
The bellicose statements have prompted worries of a rapid spiral into military action, with several nations, including neighboring China, calling for restraint and dialogue.
UN chief Antonio Guterres held calls Tuesday with Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar in which he “offered his Good Offices to support de-escalation,” his spokesman said.
Sharif’s office later said he had urged Guterres to “counsel India” to exercise restraint, while pledging to defend Pakistan’s “sovereignty and territorial integrity with full force in case of any misadventure by India.”
Muslim-majority Kashmir has been divided between India and Pakistan since their independence from British rule in 1947. Both claim the territory in full.
Rebels in the Indian-run area have waged an insurgency since 1989, seeking independence or a merger with Pakistan.
Indian police have issued wanted posters for three men accused of carrying out the Kashmir attack — two Pakistanis and an Indian — who they say are members of the Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba group, a UN-designated terrorist organization.
They have announced a two million rupee ($23,500) bounty for information leading to each man’s arrest and carried out sweeping detentions seeking anyone suspected of links to the alleged killers.
The worst attack in recent years in Indian-run Kashmir was at Pulwama in 2019, when an insurgent rammed a car packed with explosives into a security forces convoy, killing 40 and wounding 35.
Indian fighter jets carried out air strikes on Pakistani territory 12 days later.
Iran has already offered to mediate and Saudi Arabia has said Riyadh was trying to “prevent an escalation.”
US President Donald Trump downplayed tensions, saying on Friday the dispute will get “figured out, one way or another.”

NEW YORK CITY: In his four decades in the humanitarian field, Filippo Grandi, the UN high commissioner for refugees, says he has never seen the situation so dire for displaced people owing to the current environment of aid cuts and political neglect.

Speaking to Arab News in New York City, Grandi painted a grim picture of the state of the global displacement response in the middle of a rash of conflicts and the failure of the very systems designed to protect the world’s most vulnerable.

“You have a perfect storm between more wars, more crises, violations of international law, an international system that is more and more fragmented,” Grandi said. “Institutions are not really functioning anymore. And at the same time, you have cuts in the aid system.

“Something has got to give. Either we diminish the number of crises or we must be consistent in putting in adequate resources. Otherwise this crisis will become even bigger.”

His comments follow the US government’s decision to scrap USAID — once the world’s largest humanitarian donor — which was soon followed by similar moves by other major donors including the UK and Germany.

This at a time when simultaneous conflicts in Gaza, Sudan, Ukraine, and elsewhere have stretched existing aid provisions to the very limit, depriving millions of displaced people of essential assistance, and in some cases fueling onward migration.

Grandi said world leaders generally understand the scale of the crisis, but many, especially in the Global North, remain focused on domestic issues.

“The response I get is always: ‘We understand, but we need to deal with our own problems first,’” he said. “But the global humanitarian pot that is boiling is going to become a domestic issue unless leaders pay attention to that in the most urgent manner.”

As a result of these aid budget cuts, the UN refugee agency, UNHCR, could be forced to reduce up to a third of its operations, even as crises multiply.

Addressing the UN Security Council on Monday, Grandi said funding cuts “may conclude with the retrenchment of my organization to up to one-third of its capacity.”

The US has traditionally been UNHCR’s top donor, making up more than 40 percent of total contributions received, amounting to approximately $2 billion per year, he said.

But for 2025, UNHCR has so far received about $350 million from Washington and is discussing with the administration the remainder of the funds.

“I cannot emphasize more how dramatic the situation is in this very moment,” Grandi told the Security Council. “If this trend continues, we will not be able to do more with less. But as I have said many times, we will do less with less. We are already doing less with less.”

UNHCR employs more than 18,000 staff in 136 countries, with approximately 90 percent of those employees working in the field, according to its website.

Commenting on the impact of the cuts, Grandi told Arab News: “Cutting aid is going to cause more suffering for people. Less food, fewer medicines, less shelter and water, more people will die and suffer. And, may I say, more people will also move, and move on.”

Grandi recently visited Chad, where he met Sudanese women who had fled atrocities in Darfur’s Al-Fasher and the Zamzam camp, where they had been subjected to “violence, intimidation, and rape.”

“We tend to see Sudan’s war as a conflict between two major forces, the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces. But on the ground, it’s far more fragmented. The lower down you go in the chain of command, the more lawless and brutal it becomes.”

Despite the horrors visited upon Sudan since the conflict began in April 2023, humanitarian agencies are now being forced to scale back operations owing to the loss of funding from major state donors.

“We’re cutting 20 to 30 percent of our programs there. So are others,” Grandi said. “Do you think people will just wait for aid that never arrives? They move on.”

For instance, there are now an estimated 250,000 Sudanese in Libya — a popular jumping-off point for migrants and refugees from across Africa and the Middle East seeking safety and opportunity in Europe.

In Libya, many risk extortion, exploitation, or murder by traffickers, militias, and corrupt officials. Those who do manage to secure a place on a small boat across the Mediterranean risk drowning at sea.

“We need to be very clear, and I’m not trying to scare anybody,” Grandi said. “The decrease of aid will have an impact on population movements. And I think this is extremely dangerous.”

Grandi believes aid cuts are partly due to shifting global priorities. “The world is distracted — by defense, trade, and politics,” he said. “I’m not saying these issues don’t matter. But ignoring the humanitarian crisis is a huge mistake.”

While Europe remains a major donor, its contributions are a fraction of the amount the US has donated.

Moreover, its neglect of the issue could have significant domestic security repercussions.

“Aid is essential for Europe,” he said. “Think of Africa, the Sahel, Sudan, Yemen, Gaza, Syria, Ukraine. Europe is surrounded by a belt of crisis. If those crises are left unattended, these will affect European security too.”

Aid from the Gulf states, meanwhile, has been “consistently” generous, but more targeted, Grandi said.

“Gulf donors tend to fund specific projects or crises for a specific period of time,” he said. However, “their support is less institutional and more ad hoc,” making it difficult for aid agencies to plan ahead.

Grandi urged Gulf countries to do more by supporting multilateral efforts, especially now that the US and European states have created a vacuum.

“There’s a strong humanitarian spirit in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, the Emirates,” he said. “I appeal to their governments, foundations, and charities to overcome their hesitations and support agencies like ours. Together, we can be strong.

“I described the belt of crisis surrounding Europe, but if you look at the geography on the other side, those belts of crises are also very much adjacent to the Gulf. And this is why, politically, Gulf countries are very active in trying to solve some of those crises.”

He noted positive engagement from Gulf countries in Syria, where more than a million people have returned after more than a decade of displacement. “That’s a strong signal,” Grandi said. But he cautioned that Syria remains fragile and that returnees would need ongoing support.

“Supporting them means humanitarian aid, rebuilding communities, and early recovery — fixing water and electricity systems, creating jobs,” he said.

“Early recovery takes a little bit more political risk. I think it’s important to take that risk. If we don’t take that risk now, the project of rebuilding Syria will be nipped in the bud.”

With global displacement now at record highs, Grandi underlined the importance of sustainable, long-term solutions.

“There are so many conflicts emerging, and none of the old conflicts get resolved,” he said. “Every conflict generates refugees. Assistance quickly dries up … so we need a more sustainable way.”

States and institutions should move beyond short-term aid and instead focus on integrating refugees into host countries’ education, health, and employment systems, he said.

This requires support by international donors, particularly development actors like the World Bank and Gulf funding institutions, to strengthen the systems of often resource-poor host countries.

The goal is to shift from emergency responses to development-oriented approaches that promote self-reliance, social cohesion, and shared benefits for refugees and their host communities.

“Sustainable solutions mean inclusion,” he said. “That’s better for refugees, better for host communities, and ultimately better for global stability.”

But, with mounting hostility toward migrants in many societies, such a reimagining of the aid system may be difficult to realize in practice.

Besides the loss of desperately needed funding, Grandi also said there had been a significant erosion of international humanitarian law, which had offered protections, or at least guardrails, since the end of the Second World War.

“The laws of war were created decades ago as a result of witnessing the horrible destruction and loss of human lives that wars cause,” Grandi said.

“Have the laws of war always been observed? Clearly not. But surely in the past, there was at least a sense of shame. That seems to have gone.”

From Gaza and Ukraine to Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Grandi said today’s conflicts are marked by “impunity” and a “lack of accountability,” with civilian infrastructure, including hospitals and schools, deliberately targeted.

“If war becomes an instrument of total destruction for civilians, it’s not just dangerous for those caught in conflict. It threatens humanity as a whole,” he said.

Many of these violations are broadcast in real time, further fueling the perception that the international system is broken. Meanwhile, the very institutions designed to prevent such offences appear redundant.

For instance, the UN Security Council has held more than 40 meetings on Gaza alone, without taking any meaningful action, hampered by vetoes and political gridlock.

While Grandi stopped short of declaring the international system dead, he acknowledged that it is deeply dysfunctional.

“It has been weakened considerably,” he said. “But if we say it’s dead, we risk going into a world war. That’s the consequence. I’m not exaggerating.”

He called for urgent reform to global institutions, including the UN Security Council, and for a renewed commitment to multilateralism.

“The system is very sick,” Grandi said. “The current freeze in funding or defunding of humanitarian organizations makes it even more weak. But we still have the tools, if we choose to work together, to rebuild and improve it.”