Current Events :
Lt Gen Pushpendra Singh assumes charge as the Western Command General Officer Commanding-in-Chief at Chandimandir on Wednesday.
Lieutenant General Pushpendra Singh assumed charge as the Western Command General Officer Commanding-in-Chief at Chandimandir on Wednesday. He succeeds Lt Gen Manoj Kumar Katiyar, who superannuated a day earlier.
Prior to this, Lt Gen Singh, a Special Forces officer, was serving as the Vice-Chief of Army Staff at Army Headquarters. On assuming command, he reaffirmed his commitment to sustaining high operational readiness, fostering innovation and ensuring the welfare and morale of all ranks.
Commissioned into the 4th Battalion of the Parachute Regiment (Special Forces) in December 1987 Lt Gen Singh is an alumnus of the Indian Military Academy, Dehradun, and the Lucknow University.
With a career spanning nearly four decades, he has commanded formations in high-altitude and sensitive operational sectors along both the northern and the western borders.
His operational experience includes participation in Operation Pawan, as well as multiple tenures in counter-insurgency operations along the Line of Control (LoC) and the International Border.
In recognition of his distinguished service and gallantry, Lt Gen Singh has been awarded the Ati Vishisht Seva Medal and the Sena Medal twice.
External Affairs Ministry spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal. File photo
India on Thursday strongly condemned the recent deadly attacks on United Nations peacekeepers in southern Lebanon, calling for strict accountability and reiterating that the safety and inviolability of UN missions must be upheld under international law.Responding to queries, Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said India had already issued a statement denouncing the incidents involving the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), where three peacekeepers were killed and injured in successive attacks.
“We have around 600 Indian troops serving in UNIFIL. Our peacekeeping operations go back several decades, and India remains one of the largest troop-contributing countries to UN missions. The contribution of our peacekeepers has been widely recognised in maintaining global peace and security,” Jaiswal said.
He added that India “strongly condemns the recent attacks” and paid homage to the “brave blue helmet soldiers” who lost their lives in the line of duty.
The remarks come in the backdrop of a sharp escalation along the Israel-Lebanon frontier, where the UN has confirmed multiple fatal incidents involving its personnel.
According to UNIFIL, two peacekeepers were killed and others injured on March 30 when an explosion of unknown origin destroyed their vehicle near Bani Hayyan in southern Lebanon. The incident followed another deadly blast a day earlier, marking the second fatal attack within 24 hours.
The UN has termed the attacks “unacceptable”, with spokesperson Stephane Dujarric stating that investigations were underway and stressing the need for full accountability.
Indonesia also condemned the incident, calling any harm to peacekeepers unacceptable, while reiterating its criticism of Israeli actions in southern Lebanon. The Israel Defence Forces said it was aware of the reports and that the incidents were under review to determine whether they resulted from the actions of Hezbollah or its own operations.
India, aligning its position with established UN norms, invoked United Nations Security Council Resolution 2589, which underscores the responsibility of states to ensure accountability for crimes against peacekeepers. “As one of the largest and longest-serving contributors to UN peacekeeping, we seek accountability for crimes against peacekeepers,” Jaiswal said.
At the UN Security Council, Under-Secretary-General Jean-Pierre Lacroix described the developments as “abhorrent”, noting that three peacekeepers had been killed within a span of 24 hours. Initial findings indicate that one of the incidents involved a roadside explosion targeting a UNIFIL convoy, while another was caused by a projectile strike on a UN base.
Oil tankers and cargo ships line up in the Strait of Hormuz as seen from Mina Al Fajer, United Arab Emirates, on March 11, 2026. AP/PTI file
Dubai: Iran on Thursday claimed its drafting a proposal with Oman to ‘monitor’ Strait of Hormuz. The comments by Kazem Gharibabadi, an Iranian diplomat, quoted by the state-run IRNA news agency, described the proposal as “intended to facilitate and ensure safe passage and provide better services to ships passing through this route.”
Iran’s attacks on shipping in the region, as well as reportedly demanding as much as USD 2 million for passage through the narrow mouth of the Persian Gulf, have created a stranglehold on the route.
It is unclear what the proposal would mean. Oman did not immediately acknowledge it. The strait runs through Iranian and Omani territorial waters but is considered an international waterway that should freely allow ships to pass.
“Naturally, when we face an act of aggression, navigation encounters serious problems, and this is the result of the aggressive act,” Gharibabadi said. “We are currently at war and cannot expect pre-war rules to govern wartime conditions.” Agencies
April 3, 2026 9:00 am
US President Donald Trump warned on Thursday about striking and destroying bridges and electric power plants in Iran in his latest threat to hit the country’s infrastructure. The US military “hasn’t even started destroying what’s left in Iran. Bridges next, then Electric Power Plants,” Trump wrote on social media.
April 3, 2026 8:24 am
Iranian attacks on about two dozen commercial ships, and the threat of more, have halted nearly all traffic in the waterway that connects the Persian Gulf to the open ocean. Since March 1, traffic through the strait has dropped 94 per cent over the same period last year, according to the Lloyds List Intelligence shipping data firm. Two ships are confirmed to have paid a fee, the firm said, while others were allowed through based on agreements with their home governments.
April 3, 2026 8:24 am
There was little sign Friday of the war in the Middle East winding down as Israel said it faced incoming fire from Iran, Kuwait and Bahrain reported being under attack, and Iran said eight people were killed while celebrating the close of Persian new year near a major bridge hit by a US strike. Iran decried the strike on the bridge, which also injured 95 people celebrating Nature Day, when Iranians gather for picnics and other celebrations outdoors on the last day of Nowruz, the Persian new year. “Striking civilian infrastructure only conveys the defeat and moral collapse of an enemy in disarray,” Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote Thursday in a post on X.
Export of defence equipment, items and systems touched an all-time high of Rs 38,424 crore in the financial year 2025-26, amounting to a rise of Rs 14,802 crore (62.66 per cent), over the previous fiscal’s exports of Rs 23,622 crore.
Defence public-sector undertakings (DPSUs) and the private sector have contributed 54.84 per cent and 45.16 per cent, respectively, to the exports, the Ministry of Defence said on Thursday.
The growth in defence exports has happened even as India continues to be the world’s second-largest importer of weapons. It accounted for 8.3 per cent of global arms sales for a five-year block (2021-2025), according a report titled, Trends in International Arms Transfers, 2025, released last month by international think-tank, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
On Thursday, Defence Minister Rajnath Singh lauded the export performance and added that India was marching ahead towards becoming a global manufacturing hub for defence equipment.
Defence PSUs’ exports surged by 151 percent in comparison to the previous year, while private firms also recorded an increase of 14 percent. In terms of value of contribution, the private sector accounted for Rs 17,353 crore worth of defence exports, while DPSUs contributed Rs 21,071 crore. Their respective figures in the previous financial year stood at Rs 15,233 crore and Rs 8,389 crore.
The figure indicates an increase by around three times in the last five years. The Ministry of Defence said, “The rise in exports highlights the increasing global acceptance of Indian-made defence products and the sector’s growing integration into the international supply chains.”
India is exporting defence equipment to more than 80 countries as of FY2025-26, while the number of Indian exporters has reached 145.
Three AH-64E Apache Attack Helicopters from the United States have arrived at Hindon Airport for the Indian Army, marking a significant milestone in enhancing India’s military capabilities amid ongoing hostilities with Pakistan and China. This delivery of the advanced helicopters is part of an $800 million agreement signed in February 2020, under which India is set to receive a total of six Apaches. The helicopters, known for their combat efficiency and versatility, are equipped with sophisticated weaponry including Hellfire missiles and a 30 mm chain gun, allowing them to perform effectively in various combat scenarios. The Indian Army Aviation Corps is poised to deploy these helicopters at the Western front, with the establishment of the 451 Aviation Squadron in Jodhpur in March 2024 specifically for this purpose. The induction of the Apache helicopters will not only bolster the operational capabilities of the Indian Army but also strengthen the defense posture of India in a rapidly evolving security environment. The successful delivery and integration of these state-of-the-art platforms signify a critical step in India’s military modernization and strategic readiness, leveraging lessons learned from the Indian Air Force’s experiences with the Apache fleet.
Ad
To strengthen citizen-centric governance, the UT Administration has notified time-bound delivery of 90 more services across various departments under the Punjab Right to Service Act as extended to the Union Territory. The services include 35 of the Estate Office, 24 of the Registering & Licensing Authority (RLA), eight of the Directorate of School Education, seven of the Directorate of Higher Education; six each of the Directorate of Ayurveda, Yoga & Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha & Homeopathy and Chandigarh Child & Women Development Corporation Limited; and two each of the Tourism Department and Chandigarh Transport Undertaking. The notification lays out the
Advertisement
timelines, designated officers, first and second appellate authorities to ensure a quicker and more accountable public service delivery. The stipulated time limit fixed for delivery of services will start from the date of submission of application, along with the entire requisite documents complete in all respects. Each department head or the designated officer will serve as the nodal authority responsible for ensuring compliance with the Act.
According to the notification, the Estate Office will now give an NOC for sale/gift/ transfer of lease rights (uncontested) within 50 days; change of ownership/lease-hold rights on the basis of sale deed/gift deed/ transfer of lease rights (uncontested) in 30 days; transfer on any basis e.g. intestate death/registered/unregistered Will/court decree/family settlement, etc where issuance of public notice is required (uncontested) within 40 days. Change of ownership on any basis, e.g. intestate death registered/un-registered Will/court decree/family settlement etc on application after public notice (uncontested) will be carried out within 20 days.
Similarly, the Estate Office will issue No Dues Certificate (NDC) after depositing the dues, if any, within 15 days, conversion of property from leasehold to freehold within 35 days, change of partners in partnership firm after public notice within 20 days and conversion of property from shop-cum-flat (SCF) to shop-cum-office (SCO) within 30 days.
The Tourism Department has fixed seven-day deadline for giving permission for movie shooting and booking of the guest house.
Learner licence within one-day
The Registering & Licensing Authority (RLA) will now issue learner licence within one-day. The RLA has a timeline of 10 days for issuance of new driving licence, addition of another class of vehicle, renewal, issuance of a duplicate licence, change of address on the driving licence etc.
Similarly, the Chandigarh Transport Undertaking (CTU) has fixed a deadline of three days for bus passes issued at the ISBT-17 for sub-urban routes and five days for bus passes issued at Sampark Centres for other routes.
According to the notification, the Directorate of Higher Education will issue bona fide and character certificate within seven days. Similarly, Directorate of School Education will issue school leaving certificate within 10 days and duplicate certificate in 20 days.
Earlier, the administration had notified time-bound delivery of 182 services in December last year and 32 services in September. According to officials, more than 700 services of various departments have been brought under the Right to Service Act so far in the city.
The key question about Iran’s energy-export terminal on Kharg Island is not whether the United States can seize or disable it. Of course it can. The real issue is what happens afterwards, when the conditional logic that the US has applied to its alliances begins to shape allied behaviour in turn. When allies’ behaviour can no longer be assumed, American power becomes more constrained. The key variable is no longer what the US can do, but what costs others will be willing to bear. American primacy rested on a simple bargain — pay more, decide more, and allies follow. That bargain is broken.
Such is the problem now confronting US President Donald Trump’s administration. Kharg Island looks like the kind of target the world’s strongest military should be able to turn into leverage with relative ease. But difficult trade-offs would soon follow. Seizing and holding it would impose a sustained burden that allies would be expected to help carry, whereas destroying it would deliver a sharper, escalatory blow whose costs would be immediate, unevenly distributed, and concentrated among the partners most vulnerable to energy shocks. Both options rely on allied participation in different forms, and neither can be taken for granted.
Obviously, any serious disruption would cascade through global energy markets, tightening supply, driving up prices, and increasing shipping and insurance risks. But much of that sensitivity reflects the vulnerability of the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint for a significant share of global oil flows, where even limited disruption can affect supply expectations far beyond any single facility.
Kharg Island, by contrast, handles roughly 90% of Iran’s own oil exports (more than one million barrels per day), concentrating a significant share of supply at a single, exposed point. That concentration makes the island immediately visible to markets, which have already responded to the risk of escalation despite the continued flow of exports. War-risk premiums are increasing for tankers moving through the Gulf, raising the cost of transit even without sustained physical damage. Insurers are restricting or withdrawing coverage, and some shipments are being delayed or diverted, tightening effective supply at the margin and adding upward pressure on prices even before any sustained supply loss.
In the event of a disruption at Kharg Island, these effects would not be confined to Iran. They would be felt acutely in economies that depend on imported energy, most of which are already struggling to manage inflation and weak growth, with limited political room to absorb further shocks. Recent tanker data show how quickly these pressures fragment, with rates splitting sharply across allied routes by early March, revealing a fundamental asymmetry in how the shock is transmitted. For governments in Europe and across Asia, higher energy costs translate directly into domestic pressure, because they affect industrial competitiveness, household budgets, and political stability.
In earlier periods, those costs might have been willingly absorbed within the US alliance network. Though they would not have been evenly distributed, they would have been accepted as part of a shared strategic effort. Not anymore. What has changed is not simply the distribution of costs, but expectations about who will bear them, and uncertainty about whether they will be shared at all.
For years now, the US has treated alliances less as durable commitments than as arrangements to be publicly questioned and renegotiated. There have been repeated disputes over burden sharing within NATO, with US officials openly questioning Article 5 (mutual defence) commitments and publicly disparaging allied governments. As a result, security guarantees have become contingent commitments.
This change has prompted allies to hedge their bets by not automatically aligning themselves with the US during crises. The cumulative effect has been a shift in how allies think about what they can rely on in crises. Arrangements that were once organised around standing commitments are increasingly taking the form of situational coalitions. While selective autonomy on the part of US allies can work in some cases, if it becomes the default, coordination will splinter, producing uneven responses from one crisis to the next.
That is what we are now seeing. The shift to greater conditionality is shaping how all governments respond to geopolitical developments, with some US allies already limiting their involvement as the risks of escalation grow. In reducing their exposure, they weaken the expectation of coordinated allied action.
By concentrating both the potential benefits and the costs of action, Kharg Island brings this dynamic into sharper focus. Seizing it would increase pressure on Iran, but it would also redistribute strain across the coalition needed to sustain that pressure. The same move that generates leverage introduces risk, and that risk is distributed across the partners expected to bear it.
More broadly, moving from a system of assumed alignment to one that must be negotiated raises the political cost of collective action and weakens its strategic effect. Conditional alliances will not end all cooperation, but they make it more difficult to translate alignment into power on a predictable basis.
That is why Kharg Island — the “forbidden island” — matters. It is important not because it lies beyond American reach, but because it is tempting the US to pursue a course of action with consequences others may not be willing to shoulder. The US military can seize the island, but it cannot compel others to share in whatever outcome follows. The old message was clear: contribute more or the security guarantee weakens. The new one is just as stark: without agreement on the mission, allied support weakens.
The writer is Professor of Political Science at the University of Toronto
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2026.
www.project-syndicate.org
TWO contrasting messages were sent on April 1 by the principal protagonists of the ongoing war in West Asia. One was a much-anticipated speech by US President Donald Trump, while the other was a “Letter to American People” by Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian.
In a made-for-television address, Trump eventually had nothing new to say as he rehashed his social media posts and media comments. There was no mention of unblocking the Strait of Hormuz, under the chokehold of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGC-N), nor of inserting US ground troops, massed in their thousands across the region, into Iran.
The strait, through which one-third of global energy flows, remains under the IRGC’s control. Financial and commodity indices, monitored closely by Trump, are steadily trending upwards, while countries from Australia to Egypt are facing fuel shortages and shutdowns. The entire global economy is on edge, with the International Monetary Fund (IMF) predicting a recession. Till date, Trump has been cleverly manipulating markets, aligning his comments to shape them. No longer, it seems. Stock markets are now moving more in line with battlefield developments rather than Trump’s comments.
Pezeshkian’s letter — penned in English, not Farsi — was circulated widely on social media. Given the country’s official stance of hostility towards the US, this is an unusual, perhaps even brave, message. Both sides have previously exchanged letters at the highest levels, but such a public outreach by a sitting Iranian President has no historical precedent. After all, the two countries broke off diplomatic ties in 1979 following the kidnapping of US diplomats stationed in Tehran. Pezeshkian is now seeking to set the record straight on Iran-US relations, that these were “not originally hostile”, and goes on to lay the blame for the current conflict entirely on the US and Israel.
Pezeshkian’s plea is mature and subtly goes beyond a US audience. He addresses the world by saying that attacking Iran’s vital infrastructure constitutes a war crime, that these “generate instability, increase human and economic costs, and perpetuate cycles of tension, planting seeds of resentment that will endure for years”. Chronologically, it needs to be noted, Iran’s strikes on infrastructure in the region, as opposed to military targets, were usually reactive and not proactive.
In his address, Trump doubled down on a globally unpopular war. He appeared reasonable while simultaneously renewing his trademark threats, declaring, “We are going to hit them (Iran) extremely hard over the next two to three weeks. We are going to bring them back to the stone ages where they belong. In the meantime, discussions are ongoing… We have all the cards; they have none.”
An unfazed Iran, confident that it currently holds the upper hand, taunted US troops to “come closer”. One Iranian analyst succinctly noted that an aerial assault from 36,000 feet is vastly different from “manly” combat at six feet.
Trump’s address is also replete with contradictions. He claims completion of “core strategic objectives”, but elsewhere in the same address, he says that “we will continue until our core objectives are fully achieved”. This contradiction is deliberate, not random.
It is directed at a target audience of critical importance to him, electorally and financially. The former is an increasingly nervous MAGA base, which he has assuaged by saying “we are winning, bigly”. The latter is a band-aid, a placebo, to the six Persian Gulf countries witnessing, in real time, the devastation of the entire foundations on which their economies were built.
The US President’s coarse and insulting language towards Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the Kuwaitis simplifies complex issues to a populist base unconcerned with niceties.
Trump is essentially signalling a further escalation, which could last several more weeks. In recent days, the US and Israel have sharply expanded their bombing campaign, going beyond military targets to strike at the very heart of Iran’s society and industrial base. They have bombed two of Iran’s steel plants, a pharmaceutical factory, civilian installations, gymnasiums and residential areas. The Mobarakeh steel plant in Isfahan is, in fact, the largest in West Asia. As one analyst describes it, “Steel sits at the core of infrastructure, construction and industrial circulation. Damage it, and the effects cascade far beyond one sector”.
The US President is not merely wreaking havoc but is seeking to shape a post-war Iran, ensuring that its economic recovery and reconstruction will be long and painful. As such, his rhetoric needs to be taken with deadly seriousness. Clearly, “regime change” is no longer on the US-Israel agenda, but wishing to send Iran back to the “Stone Age” is playing itself out before the entire world. This is an assault on a people who just two months ago were, quite ironically, assured by Trump that “help is on its way”.
Trump is also casually papering over a military quagmire into which he has drawn the entire US CENTCOM (Central Command), and, for us in India, the US PACOM (Pacific Command), a theatre of vital importance. US military assets are being relocated from East Asia to replenish the losses in West Asia. Till date, the Iranians have destroyed half a dozen THAAD radar systems, decapitated the US’s most complex radar array at the Al-Udaid base in Qatar and with pinpoint precision destroyed E3 Sentry surveillance aircraft, KC 135 air refuelling tankers and other surveillance aircraft. This is just a small inventory of what the Iranians have managed to destroy, apart from the devastating damage inflicted on US bases.
Meanwhile, ongoing mediation talks, being brokered by Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, don’t appear to be making much headway. So also is the Pakistan-China “5-point initiative”. The latter is heavy on optics and light on substance, a classic diplomatic feint, which will please none and achieve nothing.
The reality is that the US and Iran are locked in maximalist positions. Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi made this abundantly clear, saying that Iran has neither been consulted nor is it in any way engaged in the mediation. Araghchi also says these are not negotiations but merely an exchange of messages.
He rejected any claims of a ceasefire, saying that Iran seeks a complete and perpetual cessation of all hostilities and compensation for damages. The danger, as always with the Iranians, is their tendency to overplay their hand and not know when to fold their cards.
