Category World News

General Anil Chauhan, India’s chief of defence staff, has admitted that an unspecified number of fighter jets were shot down during its conflict with Pakistan last month.

The acknowledgement of aerial losses by the country’s highest ranking general comes weeks after the two South Asian neighbours were engaged in their heaviest fighting in decades, which involved fighter jets and cruise missiles.

Indian officials had previously refused to confirm or deny Pakistani claims of downing Indian jets. The conflict was triggered after gunmen killed 26 tourists in India-administered Kashmir’s Pahalgam town on April 22.

India’s first official admission of a loss of fighter jets came during Chauhan’s interviews on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue security forum in Singapore.

What was the conflict between India and Pakistan?

India carried out strikes on what it called “terror infrastructure” in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir on May 7 in retaliation for the Pahalgam attack. India blamed armed groups backed by Pakistan for the April 22 attack.

An armed group called The Resistance Front (TRF) claimed responsibility for the Pahalgam killings. India accused the TRF of being an offshoot of the Pakistan-based armed group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT). Pakistan denied involvement, condemning the Pahalgam attack and calling for a neutral investigation.

India claimed to have targeted at least six cities in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir on the first day of the conflict. Pakistan initially asserted that it had downed six Indian fighter jets in retaliation. But a senior Pakistan official told Al Jazeera five Indian aircraft were lost in the aerial battle.

India did not confirm or deny the Pakistani claims. “Losses are a part of combat,” Air Marshal AK Bharti, India’s director general of air operations, said at a news conference on May 11.

The Indian embassy in China called reports of the downing of jets “disinformation”.

After that, tit-for-tat cross-border attacks across the Line of Control (LoC), the de facto border between India- and Pakistan-administered Kashmir, rattled the region, renewing fears of a nuclear war.

On May 10, United States President Donald Trump announced that the two countries had reached a ceasefire, potentially averting a “nuclear disaster”. India and Pakistan have given competing claims on casualties in the fighting, but more than 70 people were killed on both sides.

Both India and Pakistan claim Kashmir in full but administer only parts of the Muslim-majority Himalayan territory.

Here is what Chauhan said in recent interviews with the Reuters news agency and Bloomberg TV:

On the downing of Indian fighter jets

Chauhan admitted that India suffered air losses on the first day of fighting without giving details.

In an interview with Reuters, he said: “What was important is why did these losses occur and what we’ll do after that.”

The Indian general said that after the losses, the Indian army “rectified tactics” and then went back on May 7, 8 and 10 “in large numbers to hit airbases deep inside Pakistan, penetrated all their air defences with impunity, carried out precision strikes”. He added that the Indian air force “flew all types of aircraft with all types of ordnances” on May 10.

Islamabad acknowledged that its airbases suffered some minimal losses but denied that it lost any planes.

When a Bloomberg reporter asked Chauhan about Pakistan’s claims that six Indian jets were downed, Chauhan responded that this information was incorrect.

He went on to say: “What is important is … not the jets being downed but why they were downed.” Some media outlets inferred that his statement appeared to imply that a number of jets were lost in the aerial battle.

The general did not provide details about the number of jets downed or specifics about what these rectified tactics were.

The Pakistani military said India did not fly its fighter jets in the conflict again after suffering the air losses.

On the risks of nuclear war

Media reports suggested that some attacks were near Pakistan’s nuclear sites but the nuclear infrastructure itself was not a target.

“Most of the strikes were delivered with pinpoint accuracy, some even to a metre [3.3ft] to whatever was our selected mean point of impact,” Chauhan said in the interview with Reuters.

Chauhan had previously provided assurances that India was not considering using nuclear weapons during the conflict. The chairman of Pakistan’s joint chiefs of staff, General Sahir Shamshad Mirza, has done the same for his country.

“I think there’s a lot of space before that nuclear threshold is crossed, a lot of signalling before that. I think nothing like that happened. There’s a lot of space for conventional operations which has been created, and this will be the new norm,” Chauhan said.

The Indian general added that on both sides, the most “rational people are in uniform” during conflict because they understand the consequences of “this kind of conflict”.

“I found both sides displaying a lot of rationality in their thoughts as well as actions. So why should we assume that in the nuclear domain there will be irrationality on someone else’s part?”

On Chinese role

The Indian chief of defence staff said that while Pakistan enjoys a close alliance with China, there was no sign that Beijing helped Islamabad during the conflict.

China sits on India’s northern and eastern borders and controls a barely inhabited northeastern zone in Kashmir called Aksai Chin.

“We didn’t find any unusual activity in the operational or tactical depth of our northern borders, and things were generally all right,” Chauhan said.

When Chauhan was asked whether China provided Pakistan with intelligence information such as satellite imagery, the Indian general responded by saying that such information is commercially available and Pakistan could have obtained it from China or other sources.

However, Chauhan said “almost 80 percent of the equipment” in Pakistan has been procured from China in the past few years.

From 2020 to 2025, China supplied 81 percent of Pakistan’s arms imports, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

Chinese jets got a boost after media reports said Pakistan used Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighter jets in the air battle. The Chinese government did not officially confirm that the J-10C jets were used to down Indian jets, but China Central Television, a state broadcaster, posted on social media on May 17 that the jets achieved actual combat results for the first time.

What’s next

Chauhan said that while hostilities have ceased, India would “respond precisely and decisively should there be any further terror attacks emanating from Pakistan”. He added that this will be a new normal for India.

“So that has its own dynamics as far [as] the armed forces are concerned. It will require us to be prepared 24/7.”

The president of the main opposition Indian National Congress party said Chauhan’s admission warrants a review of India’s defence preparedness.

“There are some very important questions which need to be asked. These can only be asked if a Special Session of the Parliament is immediately convened,” Mallikarjun Kharge wrote in an X post on Saturday.

Referring to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, he added: “The Modi Govt has misled the nation. The fog of war is now clearing.”

“We salute [the Indian military’s] resolute courage and bravery,” Kharge said. “However, a comprehensive strategic review is the need of the hour.”

Hamas claims that the recent ceasefire agreement reached by American special envoy Steve Witkoff differs from the one they had previously agreed to.

Even though the organization offered “no guarantees to end the war,” according to Naim, a senior Hamas official, Basem Naim, said on Saturday that the organization “reacted positively” to Witkoff’s most recent proposal.

More than 54, 000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel since October 2023, and Gaza, where 2.3 million people live, have been subjected to starvation and a famine-like situation, has been the subject of its total aid blockade since March.

Israeli aid has flown into Gaza, which humanitarian organizations have described as a “drop in an ocean,” under the influence of international pressure.

What information about the ceasefire proposal is essential?

The proposal for a ceasefire was rejected by Hamas?

No, according to the group.

It claims to have provided a positive response but also included some crucial provisions.

What constitutes Hamas’s proposal’s main points?

A few of them exist.

Hamas has reacted to the most recent US-proposed ceasefire by demanding a way to end the conflict before starting it over from scratch, as it did in March.

Additionally, they demanded that Israeli forces completely leave the Gaza Strip and that aid and assistance be flown back to the besieged area.

What are the main contrasts between the two proposals that Witkoff presented to Hamas?

A 60-day pause in hostilities was suggested by Witkoff. After that, Israel and Hamas would come to terms with extending the pause.

The issue with this is that Israel unilaterally stopped providing aid to Gaza and began bombing it the last time it occurred. Hamas has attempted to negotiate the release date of the captives, with 10 of them still alive and 18 of the dead’s bodies, to prevent a situation like this. Within a week of the 60-day pause, Wittkoff’s suggestion was to have the information released.

Hamas has called for stabbing the captives’ release throughout the pause because it fears that Israel will resume its bombing campaign upon their return.

In an effort to derail talks and prolong the war, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu added provisions in what critics say were an attempt to derail negotiations and prolong the war, it has called for a list of negotiation topics.

Hamas also reinserted a provision from the May 25 agreement that Israel had withdrawn, according to the website Drop Site News.

Hamas would have the authority to “an independent technocratic committee” over Gaza’s administration.

What do the US think about Hamas’ additions?

Witkoff criticized Hamas’ response as “totally unacceptable” and claimed that it “only leads us backward.”

He wrote on X, formerly Twitter, that “Hamas should accept the framework proposal we put forward as the basis for proximity discussions that can begin immediately this week.”

“That is the only way to conclude a 60-day ceasefire agreement,” according to the statement from the statement. “We can engage in serious negotiations in good faith at the proximity talks to try to reach a permanent ceasefire.”

The United States’ proposal was proposed by Hamas, which I received. It only leads us in the wrong direction and is completely unacceptable.

We can begin our proximity talks right away this week, and Hamas should accept the framework proposal we have put forward.

That is the only…

Donald Trump, the president of the United States, previously claimed that negotiations were close to a resolution.

What is the statement of Israel?

The terms appear to be in agreement between the US and Israel.

Israel claims that Israel’s officials approved of the US’s request for a 60-day ceasefire.

Israel “backed and supported” the new proposal, according to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.

Netanyahu criticized Hamas’ response, parroting Witkoff, and blaming the Palestinian organization for rejecting the proposal.

“Hamas’s response is unacceptable and sets the scene back,” Witkoff said. Netanyahu stated that Israel will continue to work to free up our hostages and stop Hamas.

Why is Hamas holding out if the US and Israel concur?

Hamas is skeptical of previous instances in which Israel unilaterally revokes a ceasefire. When Netanyahu decided to restart the war by preventing all aid from entering Gaza in March.

The Doha Institute for Graduate Studies associate professor Tamer Qarmout described the Hamas-Israel negotiations as being conducted in “no good faith whatsoever.”

Hamas’ capitulation and surrender, as they say, and their disappearance from the scene are their main priorities, Qarmout told Al Jazeera.

“Hamas is attempting to reduce the horrors of the war, to allow some humanitarian aid to enter, and to look for a dignified exit,” said Hamas. Nobody wants to see themselves giving in this manner in Hamas.

What’s going on now?

Israel is still attacking Gaza in the interim.

Palestinians who had gathered at aid distribution centers run by a US-backed organization, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, were shot on Sunday by Israeli forces in southern and central Gaza. In Rafah and another area close to the Netzarim Corridor, at least 31 people died.

Meanwhile, residential areas in Gaza continue to be bombarded relentlessly.

It almost always froze in solitude. In order to stay warm, prisoners would wrap themselves in sheets and extra clothing and travel back and forth. I could actually smell my own breath on some days.

Some inmates would rip up their blankets, stuff them into their toilets, and begin flushing, causing the unit to flood. I endured silence.

The unit’s top prisoners started to “flood” together one night. The cells there were flooded by the contaminated water that poured down from the upper floor to the lower level. Water poured into my cell until I was on my knees. The toilets started flooding later, including mine, adding to the mess as the pipes became clogged, adding to the mess. I jumped onto my bed because I was terrified, but the grimy water rose until it reached the edge of my mattress.

No one arrived while I yelled for the police to assist. My cell was hygienic, but the water started to recede after a while and eventually stopped rising. An officer approached about an hour later, and I pleaded with him to unlock the door.

He gave a grin. I’m not opening any doors because it’s my third shift, which meant the unit had to remain locked up.

“Bro, this is bad in here. I begged, “Please let me at least get the water out.”

He said, “You’ll be fine,” and then left.

The floor was covered in faeces all over. In a cage, I felt like an animal.

“Please no, not again,” the message.

My trial began in December 2004 and lasted until I was found guilty in April 2005. Up until August 2005, I was kept in isolation. It had been solitary confinement for two years.

I was immediately assigned to a general population unit at NJSP. I could now visit the mess hall to eat three meals per day, attend religious services, and work in the kitchen, laundry, or other areas of the prison. Regular visitors could be made to the yard and the gym.

I discovered that getting in trouble is the only way to end up isolated. I therefore made it my priority to avoid any.

But 17 years later, I was locked up because I had an unrestricted USB wire. For infractions involving prison, I was transferred to a “temporary” holding cell. In addition to the above, the tiers placed prisoners in AdSeg. This location was loud-ear-shatteringly loud, unlike the county jail lockup.

Some of the prisoners were yelling at one another. The police were being cursing and yelling at the inmates as well. Then there were the door bangers, like donkeys, kicking the metal doors into their cells. A zoo was nearby.

Evidently, the previous owner had been disturbed. The mattress was torn apart. Decomposing food was present. In the stainless-steel toilet sat a dried pile of faeces.

I wasn’t a brand-newcomer at the time, though. I spent nearly 20 years in one of the country’s most notorious prisons as a middle-aged man.

I summoned my strength and pleaded with the unit officer for some cleaning supplies, including a “night bag” of soap, toothpaste, toothbrush, clothing, toilet paper, a spoon, a cup, bed linens, and a blanket.

What do you desire? I was asked by a young officer who was overworked and disheveled.

I referred to the toilet’s faeces. He merely waved and instructed me to clean the sink with the sink’s water.

What should I use to clean that? I pressed on, agitated.

He said, “Use your hands,” and he left.

For me to hold onto my growing anger took decades of patience and self-control.

I paced for the following two days.

As she boarded a vessel to attempt to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza, activist Greta Thunberg claims that being silent is riskier than sailing to Gaza. The Gaza Freedom Flotilla had to abandon its final attempt on May 2 due to bombing.