Category World News

The fight over the budget has now moved to the US House of Representatives, a day after the Senate cleared a stopgap funding measure to end the longest government shutdown in the country’s history, as House Democratic leaders are encouraging members to vote against the bill.

The Republican-led measure was passed in the Senate on Tuesday with the support of eight senators from the Democratic caucus who broke ranks with the party. The stopgap package, which will keep the government running until January 30, did not include funding for healthcare subsidies – which is at the heart of the political impasse that has gripped the US since October 1.

Top Democrats, including Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, are seeking an amendment to the bill to extend healthcare subsidies under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which benefits some 24 million Americans.

“We’re not going to support a partisan Republican spending bill that continues to gut the healthcare of the American people,” Jeffries said in a news release issued by his team on Tuesday evening.

If the Republican-controlled House passes the bill on Wednesday, it will go to President Donald Trump to be signed into law.

So what are the Democrats proposing, and will the House pass the bill ending 42 days of shutdown?

What are Democrats demanding?

Jeffries and other Democratic lawmakers unveiled a proposed amendment to the bill that would call for a three-year extension of subsidies to the ACA, which is due to expire at the end of the year, to make health insurance coverage more affordable.

“We’re going to continue the fight to extend the Affordable Care Act tax credits. And if it doesn’t happen this week, next week, this month, next month, then it’s the fault of Donald Trump, House and Senate Republicans who continue to make life more expensive for the American people,” Jeffries said on Tuesday night.

The ACA was first launched in 2010, informally known as ObamaCare, under then-President Barack Obama. While the act affected all aspects of the healthcare system, the main change was the introduction of a regulated health insurance marketplace for those who are uninsured to access health insurance.

In 2021, then-President Joe Biden expanded the tax credits under the American Rescue Plan Act, an economic stimulus package, which made healthcare coverage more affordable for families and those with higher incomes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In 2022, the tax credits were extended under the Inflation Reduction Act under the Biden administration. It is those subsidies that will expire at the end of the year unless the Republicans agree to the Democrats’ demands.

However, on Wednesday morning, the Republican-majority House Rules Committee voted to reject an amendment to the bill that would later be voted on to extend enhanced healthcare subsidies for three years.

And Trump has shown no signs of giving concessions on the issue. Last week, he proposed to send ACA subsidies directly into people’s bank accounts.

“I am recommending to Senate Republicans that the Hundreds of Billions of Dollars currently being sent to money sucking Insurance Companies in order to save the bad Healthcare provided by ObamaCare, BE SENT DIRECTLY TO THE PEOPLE SO THAT THEY CAN PURCHASE THEIR OWN, MUCH BETTER, HEALTHCARE, and have money left over,” he posted on his Truth Social platform.

In July, Trump and Congress cut Medicaid funding by $930bn over the next decade as part of his “Big Beautiful Bill”. Medicaid is the biggest government-run health programme and provides care to low-income people.

How might the collapse of the subsidy impact individuals?

According to the healthcare research nonprofit, KFF, if ACA subsidies are not extended, people who are enrolled in the subsidised programme are estimated to pay “more than double”.

Annual premium payments for ACA enrollees would rise from $888 in 2025 to $1,904 in 2026.

Christine Meehan, a 51-year-old hair stylist from Pennsylvania who depends on the marketplace health insurance, told The Associated Press that her $160 monthly plan will increase by about $100 next year.

How has the fallout of the Senate vote played out?

Eight senators, seven Democrats, one independent, defected to vote for the funding bill, which does not include healthcare subsidies. Republicans say the issue will be decided in another vote in December.

The passage of the bill required Democratic support, as Republicans were seven short of the 60 votes required for the legislation to pass. Democratic Senators Dick Durbin, John Fetterman, Catherine Cortez Masto, Maggie Hassan, Tim Kaine, Jackie Rosen, and Jeanne Shaheen voted along with independent Senator Angus King of Maine.

Now, the progressive wing of the Democratic Party is calling for the Senate Democratic leader, Chuck Schumer, to step aside after blaming him for allowing the Democrats to cross-vote.

“He’s the leader of the Senate. This deal would never have happened if he had not blessed it. Don’t take my word for it. Take the word of other senators who are saying that they kept Senator Schumer in the loop the whole time,” Democratic Representative Ro Khanna told CBS News.

“Schumer is no longer effective and should be replaced,” Khanna wrote on X on Monday, joining several Democratic leaders from the progressive and left wing of the party.

Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren said on Tuesday that “The American people asked us over and over to fight for healthcare and to lower our costs overall”.

“Obviously, that broke apart at the end. Our job is to deliver for the American people. We need to do that more effectively,” Warren added, declining to say whether she had confidence in Schumer.

So far, a handful of senators have called on Schumer to resign for allowing the bill to pass on his watch.

What was agreed in the funding deal?

In the compromise legislation passed on Tuesday, it was agreed that all federal workers, who had been working unpaid, would be paid during the shutdown. According to the Bipartisan Policy Centre, a US nonprofit, at least 670,000 federal employees have been furloughed, while about 730,000 are working without pay.

Funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Programme (SNAP), which provides food aid for about 42 million Americans, will be extended until next September, according to the bill.

For air controllers, who are classified as essential workers and did not receive their pay, facing staffing issues that led to 10 percent of flights being cancelled, Transport Secretary Sean Duffy said workers will receive 70 percent of their back pay within 24 to 48 hours.

The remaining 30 percent will arrive about a week later, he added on Tuesday.

What happens next?

With the Republicans holding a slight majority in the House of Representatives, the bill is likely to pass during Wednesday’s vote, which will take place as early as 4pm in Washington, DC (21:00 GMT).

In the 435-member House, Republicans control 219 seats and Democrats, 214. To pass a bill, a simple majority is needed, which in this case would be 218 votes.

Democrats are expected to vote against the bill nonetheless.

Before the vote, Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson called on Democrats to “think carefully”.

“My urgent plea of all my colleagues in the House – that means every Democrat in the House – is to think carefully, pray and finally do the right thing,” Johnson told reporters.

But Democrat House Minority Whip Katherine Clark recommended that her colleagues vote ‘no’ to the bill, according to The Hill, a news outlet.

“This does not have to happen to the American people. This is a choice,” Clark told the Rules Committee.

“Democrats have been presenting off-ramps all year. We’ve been giving you a chance to reverse course day after day,” Clarke added.

Israeli forces on Wednesday demolished more Palestinian homes and livestock shelters in the occupied West Bank’s Masafer Yatta, the collection of communities featured in the Oscar-winning “No Other Land.” Residents could do nothing but look on as armed military and police stood guard.

For months, Israel has threatened another military escalation against Lebanon, claiming it would be a punishment for the Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) not moving quickly enough to disarm Hezbollah.

But analysts told Al Jazeera that Lebanon’s government and army have undertaken to disarm the group, which has fought Israel several times since the 1980s, most recently from September to November 2024.

While there is more to be done on the Lebanese side, it requires international support and a key missing ingredient: Israel’s cooperation.

“There are daily violations of the ceasefire by Israel in Lebanon, and it would be unfair at this stage to pin the blame on the Lebanese government,” Lebanese political analyst Karim Emile Bitar told Al Jazeera.

“The Lebanese government went above and beyond what was required … and took a historic decision to ask the Lebanese Army to disarm Hezbollah,” he said.

The Israelis have not held up their side of the bargain, Bitar said, as was made clear during US special envoy Tom Barrack’s visit to Israel.

“Barrack clearly acknowledged that he could not get … [Israeli Prime Minister] Netanyahu to acknowledge that Lebanon had started implementing this ambitious and long-awaited initiative, and he was unable to extract any concessions that Israel would withdraw from the five [Lebanese] hilltops it continues to occupy.”

A long controversy

Hezbollah, a Lebanese group that formed during the Lebanese civil war (1975 – 1990) to oppose Israeli occupation, has been the strongest political and military actor in Lebanon in the post-civil war period.

But Hezbollah’s weapons have long been controversial in Lebanon, with many critics welcoming the government decision in August to bring them under state control, made despite Israel’s ongoing attacks and ceasefire violations.

Israel killed more than 4,000 people in its war on Lebanon, mostly civilians, and displaced more than a million people. It razed dozens of villages to the ground and invaded, and still refuses to withdraw from at least five points on Lebanese territory.

The ostensible ceasefire that was reached on November 27, 2024, has not stopped Israel from striking Lebanon almost daily, killing more than 100 civilians and preventing thousands of displaced people from returning to their villages in the south.

Shepherds and farmers have been killed while tending to their animals and land, while efforts at reconstruction have also come under Israeli attack. Hezbollah has only responded to Israeli attacks once.

The group and its supporters and allies – including cabinet ministers – responded angrily to the government.

“There is no state or government in the world that confronts the resistance in its own territory while the enemy is still there occupying the land and carrying out aggressions against Lebanon daily,” Hezbollah Political Council Deputy Chief Mahmoud Komati told Al Jazeera Mubasher in August.

In the past, Hezbollah could have collapsed a government for such a decision, but it does not have the same political sway it held before last year’s war.

It is weakened after Israel’s war on Lebanon killed a swath of its leadership, destroyed much of its military infrastructure, and cut off its smuggling routes from Iran, the group’s main benefactor. The fall of its key ally, Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, in December added to its woes.

‘Israel hellbent on attacking Lebanon’

Israel’s attacks continue despite the LAF’s disarmament efforts. In fact, during a cabinet meeting on November 6, LAF Commander Rodolph Haykal proposed suspending disarmament efforts if the attacks continue, citing how badly they disrupt the army’s efforts.

“Israeli maximalism today provides fodder to the arguments of Hezbollah hardliners who argue that whatever concessions Lebanon makes, Israel is hellbent on continuing its attacks on Lebanon because it has territorial ambitions,” Bitar said, adding that international actors like France, the Vatican – with the Pope visiting Lebanon soon, and Saudi Arabia could apply needed pressure on Israel.

The government will need “more international support and far more structural power to make disarmament work,” Karim Safieddine, a Lebanese political writer and doctoral student in sociology at Pittsburgh University, told Al Jazeera.

“The domestic arena is a bit paralysed,” he added.

In a televised speech on November 11, Hezbollah leader Naim Qassem said the Lebanese government was giving in to pressure from the Israelis and the US without any concessions in return.

“Today, the matter is no longer merely about weapons; it has become a pretext for targeting capabilities and funds, and afterwards, they will claim the problem lies in the very existence of the Resistance – such pretexts will never end,” Qassem said in his speech.

He added that Israel’s northern settlements along the Lebanese border are not under threat from Hezbollah. Thousands of Israelis were evacuated from their homes in the north due to Hezbollah attacks, but those attacks stopped with the ceasefire last November.

Will there be war?

Reports in Israeli and Lebanese media suggest Israel may launch a wider war, similar to last year’s. US envoy Barrack has also warned Lebanon that Israel may choose to attack if Hezbollah does not disarm.

But analysts are sceptical, saying a variety of issues, including a lack of attainable goals and military fatigue from the prolonged war on Gaza, may deter such a war, even if Netanyahu wants one.

“There are no more real targets; they’ve hit the ones they have,” Lebanese political analyst Rabih Dandachli told Al Jazeera.

“They hit the entire leadership, they stopped the main smuggling, they’re working on [Hezbollah’s] financing with the Americans, so if there is war, it is costly and useless.”

Qassem Kassir, a Lebanese political analyst believed to be close to Hezbollah, said, “Israel is exploiting the issue of disarmament to justify aggression.”

When asked if Hezbollah may respond to Israeli attacks, Kassir said: “Anything is possible. Sheikh Naim Qassem says … everything has its limits in the face of Israeli aggression.”

However, there are also domestic political considerations in Israel that could dictate whether another war is on the cards, analysts said.

Bitar pointed out that attacking Iran’s allies in the region, including Hezbollah, is politically popular in Israel and that legislative elections are approaching in 2026.

Tehran, Iran – Authorities are scrambling to provide drinking water across Iran, particularly in the capital, Tehran, as Iranians grapple with the effects of multiple ongoing crises.

If there is no rain by next month, water will have to be rationed in Tehran; in fact, the city of 10 million may even have to be evacuated, President Masoud Pezeshkian said in a speech on Friday.

While experts say evacuating the city is a last resort that will likely not come to pass, the president’s stark warning is indicative of the mammoth burden facing the country of more than 90 million, its ailing economy reeling under sanctions.

Dry spells everywhere

Iran is now grappling with its sixth consecutive year of drought, while heatwaves pushed temperatures above 50 degrees Celsius (122 degrees Fahrenheit) during the summer.

The past water year, ending in late September 2025, was one of the driest on record, with the current year shaping up to be worse, with Iran receiving only 2.3mm (0.09 inches) of precipitation by early November, down by 81 percent compared with the historical average of the same period, the Meteorological Organization said.

A whopping 19 dams – up from nine three weeks ago – are on the verge of drying out, filled to less than 5 percent capacity. Dozens of others are not faring much better, according to data from the Water Resources Management Company.

Most of the five major dams feeding Tehran from nearby mountain ranges, the Lar, Latyan, Karaj (Amir Kabir), Taleqan and Mamloo Dams, are at extremely low capacity, with an average of about 10 percent capacity.

A swimmer went viral last week with a video from the Karaj reservoir, showing that the water level was so low that he could walk in parts of it.

No improvement in sight

All eyes are on the skies as authorities are left with very limited options.

Farshid Vahedifard, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Tufts University, said the situation will deteriorate unless the country receives substantial rain and snowfall in critical regions.

“Otherwise, the human toll, both economic and social, will be severe,” he told Al Jazeera.

“Water scarcity is already fueling local tensions and protests, which could escalate into broader social conflict, especially as major economic hardships [rising inflation, unemployment, housing issues, and the high cost of living] further erode people’s capacity to cope.”

Energy Minister Abbas Aliabadi told reporters on Saturday that the state will imminently start rationing water, even fully shutting it off at night across the country if necessary.

Even before the announcement, people online and some media reported that water stopped at night in Tehran. Millions suffered the effects of unannounced water cut-offs during the summer, as well.

Aliabadi blamed some of the strain on infrastructure damage from the 12-day war with Israel in June and said high-consuming urban users will be penalised. He urged people to buy water storage tanks.

Authorities have long put the onus on people, urging them to consume less. But even if Iranians reduce usage by 20 percent, as authorities demand, household consumption is believed to be less than 8 percent of all use, nearly all the rest going to agriculture.

Local newspapers this week offered a mix of criticism and despair.

The moderate Etemad newspaper said “unqualified” managers in key positions are a root cause of the issue, while reformist daily Shargh wrote that the environment is being “sacrificed for the sake of politics”.

Radical reform implausible

Iran is far from the only country in the region, or the world, feeling the ramifications of a warming climate. But it is doing worse than most big countries in the region.

Kaveh Madani, director of the UN University Institute for Water, Environment and Health and a former deputy head of Iran’s Department of Environment, said that despite Iran not being a water-rich nation, a mix of bad management, lack of foresight and overreliance on technology created a perception of water availability.

“For example, Tehran is a dry place, but you keep bringing water to it, building dams, thinking you can always supply more water to it,” Madani said, adding that, as a result, Iran is now “water bankrupt” – among other things.

“We are not only seeing water bankruptcy … but also energy bankruptcy, natural gas bankruptcy … All of these are signals that tell us how limited resource growth is.

“But I think with the first rain or flood, people could forget about the situation,” he told Al Jazeera.

The first time Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei publicly called on Iranians to consume less water was almost 15 years ago.

But things have gotten chronically worse since, and no government, reformist, moderate or hardline, has managed to ward off water insecurity as Iran pursued development with little regard to sustainability.

Six years of drought can paralyse any nation, but this does not justify the current lack of water resilience, Madani said, adding that Iran could use this period of focus on water to implement meaningful change, which would require long-term policies that do not yield results in the short run.

“So it requires a real patriot to be willing to be crucified by the general public but bring a collective win for Iranians in the long term. I don’t think that person currently exists, and the things we see in Iran don’t make a radical reform plausible.”

Self-sufficiency, at what cost?

Iranian law stipulates that 85 percent of domestic food be produced locally, Morad Kaviani, professor of geography and hydropolitics at Iran’s Kharazmi University, told state television last week.

However, he added, Iran does not have the water and soil capacities, and nearly 30 percent of agricultural produce is wasted due to a lack of infrastructure, outdated irrigation practices and misguided crop selection.

Modernisation and rapid industrial growth were straining water resources before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and the agricultural self-sufficiency policy that came after made things worse.

More than 90 percent of Iran’s water supply is devoted to agriculture, which only accounted for about 12 percent of Iran’s GDP and about 14 percent of employment in the Iranian calendar year that ended in March 2025, according to the Statistical Center of Iran.

But people working in the relatively small sector are also suffering as water sources rapidly dry up.

Post-revolution governments, often through the construction arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), built hundreds of dams and wells, over-interfering with rivers, while many reservoirs sat partially empty.

Authorities have been tapping groundwater reserves at unchecked rates, too, leading to widespread land sinking and ecosystem collapse in areas like Isfahan in central Iran and Sistan and Baluchestan to the southeast.

Tehran and many other cities have outgrown their supplies, forcing reliance on water transfers from distant aquifers via outdated infrastructure.

Iran is also unable to attract foreign investment to save its ailing infrastructure due to the devastating sanctions for years that have been in place for years.

Under the sanctions, Iran cannot diversify modes of employment in rural areas where most people engage in water-intensive agriculture, forcing continued water allocation to agriculture out of fear that threatening those farm jobs could cause protests and even create a national security risk, the UN university’s Madani said.

Decades of mismanagement

About a third of all water in Iran is wasted or spent without yielding returns, state media cited the Water and Wastewater Company of Iran as saying in late September.

That includes about 15 percent in physical losses, and more than 16 percent classified as illegal consumption, free public use, and meter error.

Vahedifard, the professor, pointed out that the government has launched short-term measures such as desalination and inter-basin transfers, but the water system is already in “an almost unrecoverable state” after decades of mismanagement and ignored warnings by experts.

“Planning must now focus on managing the reality of scarcity … shifting from supply-oriented engineering to resilience-based management, centred on groundwater recharge and aquifer restoration,” Vahedifard said, adding that Iran also needs infrastructure investment, transparent data sharing, integrated water–energy–agriculture planning, and genuine community participation.

He said different communities across Iran face different risk thresholds based on socioeconomic and environmental conditions, and there are deep disparities between urban and rural areas and central and peripheral provinces in terms of being prioritised in national water and infrastructure policies.

A day after a bomb blast in Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad, and two days after a similar explosion in India’s capital, New Delhi, tensions in South Asia have heightened. A blame game has intensified between the neighbours who are still reeling from a brief but intense conflict just six months ago.

Here is more about what happened in Islamabad and Delhi, and what Pakistani and Indian officials are saying about the attacks.

What happened in Delhi?

At 6:52pm (13:22 GMT) on Monday, a powerful explosion tore through Delhi, in a densely populated area near the Red Fort Metro Station. At least 13 people were killed and more than 20 people were wounded.

“A slow-moving vehicle stopped at a red light. An explosion happened in that vehicle, and due to the explosion, nearby vehicles were also damaged,” Delhi Police Commissioner Satish Golcha told reporters.

Who has India blamed for it?

While India has not officially blamed anyone, Delhi Police have invoked India’s primary “counterterrorism” law, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, or UAPA, of 1967.

Police detained the original owner of the vehicle in which the explosion took place. The owner was identified as Mohammad Salman in the city of Gurugram in Haryana state on Delhi’s outskirts. Salman had purchased the vehicle in 2013.

Investigators revealed that Salman sold the vehicle to a man in New Delhi, who later resold it. The man who Salman sold the vehicle to has also been arrested. Despite the sales, the car remained registered in Salman’s name and bore a Haryana number plate, according to local media reports.

During a scheduled trip to the Bhutanese capital Thimpu, India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi said: “Today, I have come to Bhutan with a very heavy heart. The horrific incident that happened in Delhi last evening has deeply disturbed everyone.”

Modi added: “Our agencies will get to the very bottom of this conspiracy. The conspirators behind this will not be spared. All those responsible will be brought to justice.”

Indian Defence Minister Rajnath Singh also said that investigative agencies are conducting a “swift and thorough” inquiry into the blast.

But despite these statements, Indian leaders and security officials have so far not formally named any individual or group as responsible for the explosion.

How has Pakistan responded to India?

New Delhi has also, so far, not accused Pakistan of being behind the attack.

But Pakistani officials have said that they expect India to blame Pakistan for the attack in Delhi.

While speaking to local media, Pakistani Defence Minister Khawaja Asif said, referring to the attack in Delhi: “I won’t be surprised if in the next few hours or tomorrow India blames us for this.”

What happened in Islamabad?

Less than 24 hours after the attack in Delhi, around 12:30pm (07:30 GMT) on Tuesday, an explosion took place at the entrance of the District Judicial Complex on Srinagar Highway in Islamabad.

Pakistani Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi said to reporters that a “suicide bomber” detonated explosives near a police vehicle outside the gates of the court.

Naqvi added that the perpetrator tried to “enter the court premises but, failing to do so, targeted a police vehicle.”

The minister said that at least 12 people were killed in the attack in Islamabad and more than 30 were wounded, with at least five in critical condition.

The Jamaa-ul-Ahrar, which is a splinter faction of the Pakistan Taliban (Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan or TTP) armed group, has claimed responsibility for the attack. But the TTP, which ideologically aligns with the Afghan Taliban, has denied its involvement in the attack.

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari said that he “strongly condemned the suicide blast”.

Who has Pakistan blamed for it?

Pakistani PM Shehbaz Sharif has blamed “Indian proxies” for the attack on Islamabad, without providing evidence.

In a statement, Sharif said: “Terrorist attacks on unarmed citizens of Pakistan by India’s terrorist proxies are condemnable.”

A day before the Islamabad attack, a car packed with explosives crashed into the campus entrance in district capital Wana. Security forces report that at least 300 cadets have been rescued, and operations to free the rest are still under way. Sharif has also blamed India for this attack.

“Both attacks are the worst examples of Indian state terrorism in the region. It is time for the world to condemn such nefarious conspiracies of India,” Sharif said.

Pakistani Defence Minister Khawaja Asif claimed that the attack in Islamabad was planned from Afghanistan, at India’s behest. Relations between Pakistan and Taliban-ruled Afghanistan have been deteriorating for years, hitting a new peak of tension in October following a series of border clashes.

During the clashes, which began in early October, 50 civilians were killed and 447 were injured on the Afghan side of the border, according to the United Nations. At least five people were killed in the Afghan capital, Kabul.

Peace talks between Pakistan and Afghanistan, mediated by Qatar and Turkiye in Istanbul, collapsed on November 7.

At the same time, the relations between India and the Taliban are thawing. Afghanistan’s Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi visited India in early October, marking the first visit by a top Taliban leader since the group returned to power in 2021.

Earlier this week, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced that Turkiye’s foreign and defence ministers, along with its intelligence chief, will visit Pakistan to discuss Islamabad’s stalled peace talks with Afghanistan.

In a social media post on Tuesday after the suicide attack, Asif had written that Pakistan was “in a state of war”.

How has India responded?

On Tuesday, Randhir Jaiswal, the spokesperson for the Indian Ministry of External Affairs, deemed Pakistan’s allegations that India was behind the attack in Islamabad “baseless and unfounded”.

While responding to media queries, Jaiswal said: “India unequivocally rejects the baseless and unfounded allegations being made by an obviously delirious Pakistani leadership.”

Jaiswal accused Pakistani officials of trying to distract attention from the controversial 27th Amendment to the Constitution of Pakistan that the Sharif government is trying to push through parliament. Opposition parties, activists and sitting judges have criticised the amendment as further consolidating the authority of the country’s already powerful military leadership, and of undermining the Supreme Court by setting up a parallel Federal Constitutional Court. If this amendment becomes law, it would essentially protect the highest-ranking military leaders from criminal prosecution while restructuring the military’s chain of command.

“It is a predictable tactic by Pakistan to concoct false narratives against India in order to deflect the attention of its own public from the ongoing military-inspired constitutional subversion and power grab unfolding within the country,” Jaiswal said.

On Monday, Pakistan’s Senate approved the 27th Amendment. To become law, the amendment needs to secure a two-thirds majority in the National Assembly, the lower house of parliament. The debate around the amendment is ongoing in the National Assembly as of Wednesday.

“The international community is well aware of the reality and will not be misled by Pakistan’s desperate diversionary ploys,” Jaiswal said.

Why have India and Pakistan responded the way they did?

India has exercised more caution compared to Pakistan while ascribing blame, and experts attribute this caution to lessons learned during the conflict in May.

On April 22, armed attackers killed 26 people in Pahalgam, in Indian-administered Kashmir. The attack was claimed by the Resistance Front (TRF), which India alleges is linked to Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) — a claim Islamabad denies.

After this incident, India scaled back diplomatic ties and suspended the Indus Waters Treaty. On May 7, India struck nine sites in Pakistan and Pakistan-administered Kashmir with missiles, which Islamabad said killed dozens of civilians. Over the following three days, the countries engaged in a heated aerial war, using drones and missiles to target each other’s military bases.

A ceasefire was eventually brokered on May 10.

Michael Kugelman, a South Asia analyst, told Al Jazeera that it was “not a surprise that Pakistan has blamed India for these attacks”.

“We’ve seen a pattern in recent years of Pakistan categorically accusing India of sponsoring anti-Pakistan groups, as well as most terrorist attacks inside Pakistan,” Kugelman said. India denies any links with attacks inside Pakistan.

But, Kugelman said, India’s response to the Delhi blast had been complicated by its reaction to the April killings.

“After the India-Pakistan conflict ended in May, Prime Minister Modi essentially announced a new doctrine in which he said that any terrorist attack on Indian soil will be viewed as an act of war, and that the terrorists would not be distinguished from their sponsors,” Kugelman said.

He explained that if India publicly accuses Pakistan right away, under its post-conflict doctrine, it would be compelled to respond forcefully.

New Delhi’s aggressive response in May — without furnishing any proof of Pakistan’s involvement in the Pahalgam attack — “made it difficult for India to sustain support from the international community throughout the conflict, particularly as it continued to wage its strikes in Pakistan,” Kugelman said.

The analyst said he did not expect India to rush to blame Pakistan for the attack unless it finds “smoking gun proof” to publicise.

What do these attacks mean for the region?

Kugelman said that the blasts in Delhi and Islamabad are rare occurrences in these capitals, and they underscore the broad security risks confronting South Asia across a wide stretch of territory.

“There are implications from these attacks for both India and Pakistan, but also Afghanistan, in the sense that Pakistan has blamed Taliban-sponsored militants for the attacks on its soil. Meanwhile, the Taliban have strengthened ties with India.

“You’re looking at a situation that really underscores just how strained the region is now, not just in terms of India-Pakistan relations.”

What’s next?

Kugelman said that what comes next will depend on a variety of factors.

“The immediate factor is what response might there be from each country.”

He predicted that Pakistan is likely to respond against Afghanistan, given Islamabad’s belief that the Taliban is backing militants striking from Afghan soil.

“Talks with the Taliban have not succeeded, and with this attack in Islamabad, I would argue that psychologically it’s very damaging for the civilian and military leadership in Pakistan because Islamabad is a relatively peaceful and safe capital city, highly secure,” Kugelman said.

“These types of blasts are very unusual, so it’s traumatic, it’s embarrassing, and it’s also an intelligence failure.”