Middle East
Does India take advantage of current rising tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan?
At the height of the current tensions between the Afghan Taliban and Pakistan, India condemned Pakistan’s airstrikes in Paktika province in eastern Afghanistan with a delay of two weeks. India is the second country that has officially reacted to these attacks.
In a statement, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of India supported the position of the Taliban and condemned the killing of civilians in Pakistan’s attacks. Delhi made no mention of Pakistan’s claim that it had struck four hideouts of the Pakistani Taliban (TTP), a group that has become a security problem for the Pakistani military. Delhi ironically said that “Islamabad always blames its neighbors.”
Pakistan traditionally holds India and Afghanistan responsible for internal insurgencies and attacks by terrorist and separatist groups on its soil. Recently, Pakistani officials accused the Afghan Taliban of colluding with India to destabilize Pakistan.
Trust-building
India’s new stance can be described as a clever political game or even political opportunism. India, which has always considered the Taliban as Pakistan’s proxy force in the region and was one of the main supporters of the former Afghan government, now plans to use the tension between the Afghan Taliban and Pakistan to get closer to the Taliban.
Over the past three years, New Delhi has tried to reduce its longstanding mistrust with the Taliban. Expelling the ambassador and diplomats of the previous government from Delhi, handing over the Afghan embassy and consulates in India to the Taliban, cutting ties with former allies such as the leaders of the resistance front, and stopping the issuance of visas to former officials have been part of this trust building and rapprochement.
Revival of lost influence
Afghanistan has always been important for Delhi due to its geographical proximity to Pakistan. Pakistan says that Delhi’s purpose in getting closer to Afghanistan was to destabilize the tense areas in Pakistan, especially in Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
India has traditionally supported Afghan governments against Pakistan. Due to the dispute with Pakistan over the “Durand Line”, Afghanistan has had enough incentive to get closer to India. India has also provided various economic, technical and diplomatic assistance to Afghanistan to strengthen this relationship.
With the return of the Taliban, India was forced to close its embassy and consulates in Kabul, Balkh, Herat, Nangarhar and Kandahar provinces. Following this, India severed all ties – even people-to-people links – with Afghanistan.
Thousands of Afghan students were prevented from continuing their studies in Indian universities due to lack of visas. After the political collapse in Afghanistan, many believed that the history of India’s influence in Afghanistan was also over.
But the Taliban, unlike the previous period, is trying to establish relations with all countries in the region and is not dependent on a particular country, and took steps to strengthen relations with India.
Yaqoob Mujahid, the Minister of Defense of the Taliban, in an unprecedented statement said that the Taliban is ready to send its forces to India for training. India also responded to the goodwill of the Taliban by sending its diplomats to Kabul.
Recently, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi discussed with Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian about expanding relations with Afghanistan through Chabahar port. The government of Iran said that “the talk about Afghanistan was made because of the interest of the Indian side.”
India is seriously trying to reduce the Taliban’s dependence on Pakistan and strengthen its relations through Chabahar.
Approaching the enemy border
The importance of India’s efforts to improve relations with the Taliban and open a foothold in Afghanistan should be seen from the eyes of Pakistan. Islamabad has consistently complained about India’s diplomatic presence in Afghanistan, especially in its border areas.
Pakistan considers India a vital threat and does not accept the country’s proximity to its borders. In the previous government of Afghanistan, relations between Kabul and Islamabad were cold.
Pakistani officials had repeatedly expressed concern about the activities of Indian consulates in Jalalabad and Kandahar in meetings with Afghan leaders. Even some Pakistani leaders had made cooperation in securing peace and stability in Afghanistan conditional on reducing relations with India and closing the country’s embassies in the mentioned cities.
Analysts are unanimous on the point that Pakistan considers Afghanistan as a barrier or an area free of Indian influence. This country has continuously supported the paramilitary groups and the subversive central government in order to establish a pro-Pakistan government.
India sees an opportunity to expand its influence in Afghanistan in the worsening relations between Islamabad and the Taliban. However, it is not clear how far this tension will make the Afghan Taliban rely on Delhi.
What is certain is that Pakistan finds the closeness of the Taliban and India intolerable, just as it was angry about the close relations of the former Afghan government with New Delhi.
Of course, we should not ignore the fact that the Afghan Taliban is as much a double-edged sword for Delhi as it is for Pakistan. Because the Afghan Taliban has not cut off its relations with militant and terrorist groups.
Strengthening the Afghan Taliban also means strengthening Pakistani militant Islamist groups, which Delhi considers a tool in the hands of Pakistan and a threat to its national security.
Rising unrest in Pakistan by TTP, a close ally of the Afghani Taliban has benefited India
In recent decades, part of India’s strategy in Afghanistan has been to weaken Pakistan. Supporting separatist groups and creating unrest in Pakistan is an important part of this policy.
Rising unrest in Pakistan by the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), a close ally of the Afghan Taliban, has benefited India. From 2020 until now, the level of insecurity in Pakistan has increased steadily and 2024 was the most unstable year in Pakistan in a decade.
Pakistan believes that the insecurity and violence in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is organized from the soil of Afghanistan and that the Afghan Taliban have collaborated with India.
Understanding the depth of these tensions, India has taken steps to intensify the differences between the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban by supporting the Taliban. India seeks to increase the dependence of the Afghan Taliban on New Delhi in order to exploit these relations in the long run to weaken Pakistan.
The statement of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of India can probably increase Islamabad’s skepticism towards the Taliban. To solve the problem of militants, Pakistan has increased military and political pressure on the Taliban. However, this pressure will make the Afghan Taliban more inclined towards Delhi.
Despite the absence of three years in the diplomatic arena of Afghanistan, India has been able to advance its goals. Pakistan has suffered the most from the recent developments in Afghanistan. The increase in insecurity in Pakistan is largely related to the events after the fall of the republican system in Afghanistan.
Middle East
Qatar and UAE LNG tankers go dark in Strait of Hormuz to evade security risks
Qatar and United Arab Emirates liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers are turning off their transponders in the Strait of Hormuz, shifting their logistical strategies in response to ongoing military conflict in the Middle East and the closure of the strategic waterway.
According to a Bloomberg report citing industry sources and vessel-tracking data, as time and patience run thin for both nations, tankers have begun operating under radio silence to conceal their movements and secure their LNG shipments.
The report noted that neither Qatar nor Abu Dhabi, the federal emirate of the UAE, is subject to international sanctions. Despite this, state-owned QatarEnergy and Abu Dhabi National Oil Co. (ADNOC) are employing these “going dark” tactics to minimize security risks for their vessels and crews transiting the Strait of Hormuz.
Vessel-tracking data revealed that in May, at least four Qatari LNG vessels and four tankers linked to Abu Dhabi-based ADNOC transited the Strait of Hormuz without transmitting tracking signals. Sources speaking to Bloomberg stated that Qatari authorities requested captains of state-owned and chartered tankers to turn off their Automatic Identification System (AIS) transponders when navigating around the Ras Laffan port—the world’s largest LNG export terminal—as well as when transiting or exiting the Persian Gulf.
The implemented security measures extend beyond turning off transponders. Sources reported that vessels have been instructed to transit the gulf in pairs to enhance security, and tanker captains who refused to comply with the “shadow” navigation protocols have been replaced.
Industry sources speaking to Bloomberg warned that the increase in covert transits undermines the fundamental rules of international maritime trade and transforms these shipping routes into high-risk areas.
They emphasized that until recently, every cargo in the LNG sector could be tracked in real time, but these newly adopted tactics have eliminated that transparency.
Saul Kavonic, a senior energy analyst at energy consultancy MST Marquee, commented on the situation, saying: “It is entirely natural for Persian Gulf LNG producers to try to avoid Iranian attacks and consequently adopt shadow fleet methods. This could persist as long as Iran continues to control and threaten transits through the Strait of Hormuz. This practice may continue for a long time even after a peace agreement is signed.”
Following the start of US and Israeli attacks on Iran, the Tehran government closed the Strait of Hormuz, a choke point for approximately 20% of global oil shipments and 30% of global liquefied natural gas.
After negotiations in Islamabad failed, US President Donald Trump announced on April 13 that he would impose a blockade on Iranian ports. In late May, he announced that the blockade was lifted as part of the planned peace treaty process with Tehran.
Middle East
Israeli defense exports hit record $19.2 billion fueled by regional conflicts
The Israeli Ministry of Defense has announced that international demand for military systems manufactured in the country and deployed in regional conflicts has reached unprecedented levels.
In an official statement, the ministry declared that exports of military equipment and weaponry have hit an all-time high for the fifth consecutive year.
According to the disclosed data, export volume reached $19.2 billion in 2025, representing an approximate 30% increase compared to the previous year. The figures demonstrate that the country’s defense exports have doubled over the past five years and quadrupled over the past decade.
Data shared by the ministry indicates that missile, rocket, and air defense systems secured the largest share of military sales contracts signed throughout 2025.
Sales in this sector accounted for 29% of the total trade volume. The ministry noted that the vast majority of these agreements fell into the category of “mega-contracts”—each valued at a minimum of $100 million—and that these large-scale deals constituted 53% of the total export volume.
The Ministry of Defense directly attributed this export growth to ongoing regional military operations.
The statement argued that global demand was driven by results achieved on the ground and the “combat-proven” performance of Israeli-made systems across all fronts, including the “Rising Lion” operation launched against Iran in June 2025.
Since October 7, 2023, Israel has conducted simultaneous military operations across multiple fronts in Gaza, Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran.
The military equipment and ammunition described as “combat-tested” in the ministry’s report continue to be deployed in active conflict zones, most notably in Lebanon.
Among the defense firms highlighted during this period is the Israel-based company Xtend, which has drawn attention for its unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).
Systems developed by the company have reportedly been utilized in operations in Gaza and for targeted assassinations. International reports revealed that an Xtend UAV was used to locate Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, who was killed in October 2024.
Earlier in the year, Eric Trump, son of US President Donald Trump, announced that he would make significant investments in Xtend’s technology and support the company’s merger with the Florida-based JFB Construction Holdings.
Meanwhile, airstrikes and bombings conducted by the Israeli military continue to drive up civilian casualties in Gaza and Lebanon. In Lebanon alone, attacks over the past few months have claimed more than 3,400 lives. Thousands of deaths have also been reported in US-backed military operations carried out in Iran.
Studies published in the medical journal The Lancet project that the total death toll in Gaza, when including both direct and indirect fatalities, could reach hundreds of thousands.
During this period, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), which has supported Israel’s operations, emerged as one of the largest buyers of Israeli-origin weapons.
The Gulf nation is reported to have procured billions of dollars in military equipment from Israel over the past five years. According to US sources, the Abu Dhabi and Tel Aviv administrations have established a joint fund to develop and procure new weapons systems.
On the other hand, as Tel Aviv continues to market its air defense systems globally, military tensions along the Lebanese border persist.
Hizbullah kamikaze drones have reportedly targeted Iron Dome batteries positioned at Israeli locations near the Lebanese border. The Israeli military has reportedly faced difficulties intercepting these attacks, with dozens of Israeli soldiers killed in Hizbullah strikes launched since March 2.
Middle East
Report challenges official assessments of damage from Iranian attacks on US military assets
BBC Verify, the verification unit of the BBC, published a detailed investigation on June 1 based on satellite imagery and video analysis that found Iranian retaliatory strikes had successfully hit and damaged at least 20 US military facilities across the Middle East since the start of the war launched against Iran by the United States and Israel.
The findings suggest that the scale and accuracy of Iran’s retaliatory attacks were significantly greater than previously acknowledged by US officials. Some independent analysts estimate that the number of affected bases may be as high as 28.
The military facilities targeted were reportedly spread across eight Gulf countries: Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Qatar, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan, Bahrain and Oman.
Material losses in the region are said to include three THAAD missile defense batteries, each valued at approximately $1 billion and regarded as a cornerstone of the regional defense network.
Expert assessments also identified at least 42 aircraft that were destroyed or severely damaged, including F-35 fighter jets, MQ-9 Reaper drones and an E-3 Sentry airborne early warning and surveillance aircraft valued at $700 million.
According to military analysts, Iran achieved these results by altering its tactics. Rather than relying on large-scale, high-volume barrages, Tehran reportedly shifted to using smaller, more precise salvos concentrated on high-value infrastructure targets.
The shift in strategy was said to have exploited what was described as a degree of complacency within the US military during the early stages of the conflict.
US military commanders reportedly failed to relocate aircraft and other military assets at strategic installations such as Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia despite previous attacks on those facilities, a factor that is said to have increased losses. Commenting on the strikes, Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei declared that the Middle East was no longer a “safe place” for US bases.
The White House had previously claimed that Iran’s military capabilities had been almost entirely eliminated.
However, the Pentagon’s latest estimates place the cost of the war at $29 billion.
A substantial portion of that expenditure is reportedly being directed toward repairing heavily damaged military equipment and replenishing significantly depleted munitions stockpiles. Former military officials have warned that damaged air defense systems in the region “cannot be replaced quickly or easily.”
The heavy consumption of interceptor missiles during the conflict has also left other US facilities across the Gulf increasingly vulnerable to future Iranian precision-guided missile attacks, according to the assessments cited.
The Washington administration is also reported to have sought restrictions on satellite imagery providers in an effort to conceal the extent of the damage and limit criticism.
However, the “smoking craters” and flattened aircraft hangars featured in the BBC report appear to contradict official US assertions, illustrating what the report described as the true scale of the destruction on the ground.
Iran also announced that it struck a US air base in Kuwait with missiles and drones on Sunday night in retaliation for attacks by US forces on Iranian military targets over the weekend, which Tehran said constituted a violation of the ceasefire.
-
Asia2 weeks agoIran conflict accelerates yuan adoption and record CIPS volumes in global oil trade
-
Asia2 weeks agoXi and Putin deepen partnership with call for ‘multipolar world’
-
Europe2 weeks agoFive EU states push gradual single market access for Western Balkans
-
Middle East1 week agoLeaked documents show IRGC routed Chinese military equipment through UAE
-
Europe1 week agoFrench justice minister calls for three-year halt to legal immigration
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoNATO weighs Hormuz security mission if Iran blockade remains in place by July
-
Middle East1 week agoIran says Hormuz transit will remain free but ships must cover operational costs
-
Europe2 weeks agoGermany initiates diplomatic contact with France’s National Rally ahead of presidential election
