For someone who started a war with Iran with destructive international consequences, who calls the Iranians scum and a cancer and wants to bomb them back to the Stone Age, supported Israel in its destruction of Gaza, still participates in a proxy war on Russia, kidnapped the serving head of state of a sovereign country and grabbed its oil, wants Greenland, the territory of an ally etc, to claim he is the most eligible candidate ever for receiving the Nobel Peace Prize is a parody. He implicitly endorses Pakistan’s threat to use nuclear weapons against India by repeating Shehbaz Sharif’s claim Trump saved 30 to 50 million lives in Pakistan’s conflict with India. This means Pakistan was ready to use nuclear weapons, had worked out targets in India and estimated the casualties. Sharif has now officially in a message to Trump on the 250th anniversary of the US applauded him for saving hundreds of millions of lives. The figure has ballooned. India has a No First Use doctrine which Pakistan rejects despite India proposing an agreement on this. India would not have used nuclear weapons first. Instead of deploring Pakistan’s nuclear threat inherent in Sharif’s statements, Trump is legitimising it politically. No concern about millions of Indian lives lost because of Pakistan’s nuclear madness. Instead, Trump capitalises on Sharif’s pandering to his vanity to lay claim to the Nobel Peace Prize.

What about sheltering Osama bin Laden, supporting the Taliban, Pakistani links with 9/11, nurturing jihadi groups like LeT and JeM , series of terrorist attacks against India including the Mumbai massacre and the latest Pahalgam mayhem? What about using force against Baluchis who are demanding their rights? What about the use of armed forces including the air force in North and South Waziristan against the civilian population resulting in massive internal displacement of the civilian population? And what about using force now against those protesting against Islamabad in Pakistan Occupied J&K? If Pakistan is fighting terrorists all over the country as the Pakistani PM admits, the question arises why Pakistani society is breeding terrorists on this scale?

China puts up its own spectacles, bigger than anyone else, be it in the military or cultural domains. Xi is unlikely to be impressed with the show Trump put up. Especially after failing in the war on Iran. He may construe it the aerial show as a defensive message. China will not yield from its core positions but has the margin to make some concessions to the US in a win-win context that China favours rhetorically. The presence of the big Silicon Valley stars at the banquet should recall their lining up behind Trump when he sat down for talks with Xi Jinping in Beijing six months ago.

Diplomacy is not free from hypocrisy but for EU to claim “the shared commitment to democracy, the rule of law, human rights and civic space” with Pakistan where Field Marshal Asim Munir has effectively taken over power in the country, the opposition leader Imran Khan is rotting in jail, the human rights of Balochis and Pathan groups in Pashtunkhwa are being trampled upon and where minorities have to cope with blasphemy laws and there is sectarian killing is going too far in diplomatic niceties.

It is a Ukranian war and a European one. The core issue involved is that of European security. Russia has one vision of European security and Ukraine/ NATO/ EU have another vision. The war has become a global threat not because of anything the rest of the world has done. The principal responsibility for ending it lies with the Europeans/ NATO. India has been expressing the concerns of the global south and has strongly advocated a return to dialogue and diplomacy. It is doing what it can to find common ground between the two sides but its role has limitations. The EU/ NATO strategy of raising the costs for Russia economically and militarily is fraught with great danger.

The US had lately distanced itself from any active interventionist role in India- Pakistan affairs. It cooperated to put major Pakistani terrorist organisations on the UN list. It recognised our right to respond to Pulwama. Trump offered mediation between Pakistan and India to Imran Khan during his first term. Things have changed drastically after Operation Sindoor. It is true there always have been pro- Pakistan lobbies in the US establishment and Trump is not alone. But Trump’s repeated claims even in his UNGA address that he was responsible to the India- Pakistan ceasefire and quoted Pak PM to say he saved 30 million lives, and his lionising of Asim Munir stand out.

He is saying essentially that the international order must be aligned with US national interest.

He is again pressing for sanctions on India without naming it , among others. We are not wrong in keeping Ukraine engaged and looking to the future. Also to avoid a controversy with Europe if we cold shouldered Zelensky as we want a smooth ratification by member states of the FTA with India. But Zelensky doesn’t need our time. He wants a wider war and doesn’t care for India’s national interest.

India has been downgraded. China has replaced India as relationship that will define the 21 st century. A G 2 scenario being projected. But then, US geopolitical and foreign policy perspectives can change raising issues of trust. US described the India relationship as a defining one in the 21st century when it was wooing India. Now it is wooing China. India would want a strong relationship with the US but it has other ties it must continue to cultivate in order to redefine the governance of the international system.

Not a careful choice of words. He is internationalising the India- Pakistan conflict by listing it along with the Sudan, DRC- Rwanda and Iran conflicts. He is implying that a better functioning international system should deal with the India- Pakistan conflict. Implicitly he is backing Trump’s mediation desire. This is against India’s well established policy decision to oppose any third party or UN intervention in the India-Pakistan differences. The only exception is focusing on all platforms Pakistan’s long standing use of terrorism against India as state policy. Terrorism is recognised as an international problem even by the UN which lists international terrorists and terrorist organisations and so we are on solid ground.

Sandhu has served in the US many times and has no doubt valuable experience of the US, particularly of the Trump administration. But to say he understands the Trump administration more than anyone else may be a verbal flourish but what about Jaishankar with his vast experience of US as a diplomat and more so now at policy making level as External Affairs Minister. @amitabhmattoo

This is not an accurate framing of the issue. The legislation specifically targets India and four other countries. Special transitional discriminatory carve outs have made in the legislation for Europe and others. Ironically, Europe is buying significant amounts of diesel from India. Data shows that Indian refineries supplied roughly 60% of the diesel and gasoil transiting the Bab-el-Mandeb strait toward Europe. One can understand that this is an awkward issue for the German ambassador to India to address. The EU has sanctioned select Indian companies for violating EU sanctions on Russia. India is being very unfairly targeted on the Russian oil issue. This has no legal basis in international law. This is simply power play. India, a huge energy importer, has responsibility for the welfare of its 1.4 billion people.

A reference to Kashmir in his UNGA is totally uncalled for. His Islamist leanings and Islamic ties with Pakistan explain this repeated provocation. Turkey’s treatment of Kurds, occupation of northern Cyprus, illegal intervention in Syria etc are issues on which we can retaliate but we are withholding our hand.

India is in touch with Russia and Ukraine. Messages are being conveyed to see if some way out through dialogue can be explored. India and the global south is paying a heavy price as a result of this conflict. But this is not India’s war. It is Europe’s war, NATO’s war. Their objective has been announced- Russia’s strategic defeat. US under Trump has become ambivalent about this conflict and has engaged Putin. Europe is not on the same wave length as the Trump administration. Europe is arming itself and seeks a solution through expanded sanctions, arming Ukraine and continuing the proxy war. India is ready to be helpful but the core responsibility for ending the conflict and a return to dialogue and diplomacy lies on Europe’s shoulders.

Ukraine may have its case against Russia but Zelensky is a demagogue who is bent on prolonging the conflict with all its damaging repercussions for India and the global south. His targeting of India by his self- serving narrative is unacceptable. India has more responsibility to ensure the welfare of its people than to pander to what Zelensky expects of India. It is not our war. We are its indirect victims.

“Russia is basing its economy on India” and “ sometimes Turkey and China”. How can he make this ridiculous assertion? China is by far Russia’s biggest trade partner, including in energy. Turkey is very critical as a country for Russia. Russia and Turkey are connected by major trans-Black Sea natural gas pipelines, namely TurkStreamand Blue Stream, which deliver Russian gas to Turkey and onward to Southern and Eastern Europe. For Russia, Turkey is a conduit for evading western sanctions. The irony is that in August this year Turkey bought record volumes of diesel from India. Zelensky is targeting us openly. We are more kind to him than he deserves.

Quite a confession about Pakistan pullulating with terrorists to the point that they could have sowed mayhem in New York, London and the Far East! Admits Pakistan has harboured terrorists under state protection. Now claims Pakistan has done service to the US and UK by reining in these terrorists. These terrorists have been sowing mayhem in India, as recently as in Pahalgam. No mention of India in this peroration, quite obviously because Pakistan continues to reject India’s demand to formally abjure terrorism against India, act against LeT and JeM credibly so that doors to a dialogue can be opened. Pakistan will not do this as its terrorist weapon is linked to its politics on Kashmir where it has sought to foment instability.

Ex-FS @KanwalSibal shares that FS Jaishankar did ring up the Pak Amb Abdul Basit twice, before Ind carried out surgical strikes, to present DNA evidence relating to the Uri terrorist attack hoping that Pak would agree to play the joint investigation game but it refused (2016):

Pakistan's position has been territorial acquisition by military occupation of the erstwhile Indian Princely State of Jammu and Kashmir, which acceded to India according to UK law, not according to the Partition Plan that applied to British India in 1947.