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
Iran to receive hundreds of Chinese shoulder-fired missiles within weeks, sources say
Iran is expected to receive its first shipment of 400 Chinese-made shoulder-fired air defense missile systems within weeks as it seeks to rebuild its air defenses amid an ongoing war with the US.
Three sources with knowledge of the agreement disclosed the information to Reuters.
Valued at between $60 million and $70 million, the purchase represents one of Tehran’s largest known efforts to bolster its short-range air defense capabilities since the outbreak of hostilities with the US and Israel.
According to the sources, the contract covers between 300 and 400 man-portable air defense systems, or MANPADS, including Chinese-made QW-12 and FN-16 missiles.
The deal was signed with Hong Kong-based Zhongqing Baoshang International Investment, which reportedly acted as an intermediary between the Iranian side and the Chinese supplier.
Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not yet responded to a request for comment from Reuters regarding the information provided by the sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter.
China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued the following statement:
“The relevant reports are completely baseless. China has consistently played a role in promoting peace and bringing an end to the conflict.”
Beijing-based Zhong Qing Bao Shang Group, the parent company of Zhongqing Baoshang International Investment, did not immediately respond to a request for comment sent on Tuesday.
Iran needs to rearm following months of conflict during which the US and Israel struck facilities tied to its missile, drone, and air defense programs. Tehran responded to those attacks with salvos of ballistic missiles and drones.
The fighting demonstrated the difficulty of defending static military and strategic installations against advanced fighter jets and precision-guided munitions.
Washington abruptly halted its two-week bombing campaign on Saturday. However, US President Donald Trump said attacks would resume if negotiations aimed at ending the five-month war—which has theoretically been under a ceasefire since April—fail.
The delivery of hundreds of MANPADS systems would significantly expand Iran’s inventory of short-range air defense weapons.
However, the sources cautioned that while the agreement has been signed, the delivery schedule, quantities, and other operational details remain subject to change.
Under the plan agreed upon by the parties, initial deliveries will be transported by air from the western Chinese city of Urumqi before being routed through Pakistan to Iran. The sources did not clarify whether transport following the transit through Pakistan would occur by air or land.
The Pakistani military’s public relations wing, ISPR, said in a statement:
“Allegations that Pakistan is playing a role in the supply of air defense weapons from China to Iran are completely fabricated and contrary to fact.”
Two Western intelligence sources and an Iranian official said Tehran is also exploring the option of using overland routes to transport Chinese-made military equipment and dual-use components more covertly, reducing the risk of shipments being intercepted.
The procurement process underscores how the Islamic Republic of Iran continues to rely on a combination of domestic arms production and foreign suppliers, despite years of sanctions and defense import restrictions.
Reuters previously reported, citing individuals familiar with the discussions, that Iran was close to concluding a separate deal to purchase anti-ship cruise missiles from China. Reuters was unable to confirm whether that agreement was finalized.
Middle East
Saudi crude exports from Yanbu plunge 40% as Yemeni strikes force reliance on costlier routes
Crude oil shipments from Saudi Arabia’s Yanbu Port on the Red Sea coast have dropped by 40% over the past few days.
According to data published on July 26 by maritime intelligence firm Vortexa, the Riyadh administration has begun utilizing the SUMED pipeline in Egypt and alternative transit routes in an effort to bypass the naval blockade declared by forces aligned with Sanaa.
The sharp decline in shipment volumes follows retaliatory operations and the enforcement of a maritime blockade against Saudi Arabia by the Yemeni Armed Forces, operating under the Ansarallah movement.
Riyadh has maintained military strikes and blockade measures against Yemen for nearly 12 years.
A Sunday report by maritime intelligence firm Windward, drawing on Vortexa data, noted that Saudi Arabia has established a new logistical framework to maintain its export flows. “Saudi Arabia has created an alternative export route functioning via the SUMED pipeline and the Cape of Good Hope,” the report stated. The agency reported that this shift has driven up transportation costs by approximately $9 per barrel.
The market analysis report provided the following assessment regarding the operational mechanics of the transition:
“Saudi crude shipments have not stopped; they have been split into two distinct routes. Tankers berthing at Yanbu Port are now operating with their AIS signals completely turned off. Vessels are concealing their locations to avoid inclusion on Ansarallah’s target list. Saudi Arabia has established an alternative export route operating via the SUMED pipeline and the Cape of Good Hope. Although this route increases costs and transit times, it demonstrates that the market is capable of adapting to changing conditions.”
Saudi Arabia previously activated a similar alternative route via Yanbu during the initial phase of the US-Israel war, following Iran’s first blockade measures directed at the Strait of Hormuz.
At the time of the Windward report’s release, satellite imagery published by SoarAtlas revealed the ongoing situation at Saudi Aramco’s Jizan Oil Refinery. Massive fires triggered by attacks carried out by the Yemeni Armed Forces were shown to be persisting at the $12 billion facility. Images captured on Saturday documented dense black smoke continuing to billow from a giant oil storage tank at the site.
The Yemeni Armed Forces publicly announced their latest military operations against Saudi Arabia on July 25. They stated that the strikes were executed in response to the Saudi-led coalition resuming aerial bombardments against the Yemeni port city of Hodeidah.
An official statement issued by the Yemeni military under the Ansarallah-led administration provided the following details:
“In response to this overt and criminal aggression, the Yemeni Armed Forces carried out two specialized military operations. In the first operation, sensitive Saudi Aramco facilities in Jizan were targeted with dozens of ballistic missiles and drones. In the second operation, sensitive Saudi Aramco facilities in Yanbu were struck using ballistic and cruise missiles alongside unmanned aerial vehicles.”
Spokespersons for the Yemeni military emphasized that the strikes were “precise” and “direct,” while residents in the city of Yanbu were reported to have heard explosions over the weekend. In the early hours of Saturday, Saudi airstrikes had targeted fuel storage facilities and telecommunications infrastructure in Hodeidah.
Mahdi al-Mashat, President of the Ansarallah Supreme Political Council, issued a warning to the Saudi Arabian leadership in a statement on July 27. “We say to the Saudi enemy that those offering you false hopes will be of no avail. Anything short of an end to the aggression and the complete lifting of the blockade is mere fantasy,” al-Mashat said.
In line with their naval blockade decision, the Yemeni Armed Forces have also targeted two Saudi oil tankers with missiles in recent days. The Sanaa administration officially initiated its maritime restrictions on July 20 under the stated principle of “a blockade for a blockade.”
This latest phase of heightened tension began in early July when Saudi Arabia launched an airstrike targeting Sanaa International Airport for the first time after a prolonged hiatus. Yemeni forces responded by striking Abha Airport in Saudi Arabia with missiles and drones. The attack marked the Yemeni military’s first direct retaliatory strike inside Saudi territory since 2021.
The Saudi-led coalition initially intervened in Yemen in 2015 after Ansarallah took control of the capital, Sanaa, and ousted the Riyadh-backed government. The United Arab Emirates joined as a principal coalition partner, while the UK, the US, and Israel provided logistical support.
During peace negotiations conducted between Saudi Arabia and Yemen in 2023, the parties came close to a final agreement before talks stalled. Nevertheless, those contacts effectively served to freeze large-scale combat operations for an extended period.
The air and sea blockade enforced by Saudi Arabia for over a decade has deepened the humanitarian crisis, particularly due to commercial flight restrictions imposed on Sanaa International Airport. These measures have prevented critically ill and injured civilians from traveling abroad for medical treatment, while the coalition’s military intervention has driven widespread famine and resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. Prior to Riyadh’s latest airstrikes, Yemeni forces had been conducting a general mobilization aimed at expelling coalition elements from the country.
Middle East
Pentagon faces severe budget crunch as Middle East operational costs drain key military funds
The US Department of Defense is facing a severe budgetary shortfall driven by the escalation of the war with Iran, according to current and former American officials cited by The Washington Post.
Officials noted that funding for several critical areas could be completely exhausted in the coming weeks. Budgets allocated for this year’s operations of the Navy and Air Force, which have deployed warships and aviation assets to the Middle East, are projected to run out by the end of July.
To cover the funding deficit expected before the start of fiscal year 2027 on October 1, the Pentagon is internally redirecting its budgetary resources. Under this approach, military exercises and training sessions designed to maintain troop combat readiness are being scaled back or canceled. Additionally, funds originally allocated for the maintenance and repair of military equipment and facilities are being transferred to operational expenses.
In recent weeks, the Department of Defense requested permission from Congress to shift $4.3 billion—initially allocated for personnel training and weapons procurement—to cover emergency requirements. However, no decision has yet been made regarding this request.
The White House has also requested that Congress allocate $67 billion in emergency supplemental funding to cover military expenditures. Despite this, the House of Representatives plans to begin a one-month recess on Thursday, which will delay any decision on the funding for at least several weeks.
“Everyone needs to look at this situation and shake off the complacency,” said Representative Pat Harrigan, a Republican from North Carolina, commenting on the development.
Pentagon Spokesperson Sean Parnell emphasized the critical importance of defense funding, stating that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth will do everything necessary to maintain the combat readiness of the armed forces.
Secretary Hegseth and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Caine, are scheduled to present the justification for the funding allocation at an upcoming hearing before the Senate Appropriations Committee. Russell Vought, the Director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, is also among those scheduled to testify before the committee.
Vought stated last month that the cost of the war had reached approximately $30 billion. However, this White House calculation did not include the cost of rebuilding and repairing US bases damaged as a result of Iranian attacks in the Middle East.
Current and former officials warn that if Congress fails to act, military leadership will soon be forced to make even deeper compromises.
In closed-door discussions, Pentagon officials are expressing more profound anxieties. They emphasize that supplemental funding is urgently required to replenish munitions stockpiles, which are vital for deterring adversaries such as Russia and China.
The US defense budget for this year stands at approximately $1 trillion. This figure includes $150 billion in one-time funding approved by Congress last year for various priority goals, ranging from designing advanced weapons systems to stimulating the domestic defense industry. Meanwhile, the Donald Trump administration has requested a $1.5 trillion defense budget for 2027.
Internal Pentagon assessments indicate that when accounting for base repairs, the replacement of destroyed aircraft, and the replenishment of munitions stockpiles, the total cost of the Iran war could rise to between $80 billion and $100 billion, according to reporting by NBC. Sources state that the repair costs for US military facilities in Bahrain alone could reach $1 billion.
Senators are expected to question Hegseth on the collapse of the ceasefire, rising war costs, and the American service members who lost their lives in Jordan, Bloomberg reported.
-
America2 weeks agoUS controls $13 billion in Venezuelan oil revenues with little transparency, raising congressional concerns
-
America2 weeks agoUS agricultural superpower status at risk as trade wars shift global markets to Brazil
-
Europe2 weeks agoUS secures multi-billion-dollar energy and AI deals at Three Seas summit in Dubrovnik
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoPalantir CEO Alex Karp says he would not vote for ‘pro-Russian’ AfD in Germany
-
Diplomacy2 weeks agoWorld Bank warns US-Iran conflict could slash global growth to 1.3% as inflation looms
-
Middle East2 weeks agoPentagon faces severe budget crunch as Middle East operational costs drain key military funds
-
Europe2 weeks agoGermany accelerates African energy diplomatic push to secure natural gas and green hydrogen
-
Middle East2 weeks agoOil passes $90 as tanker attacks halt Hormuz shipping
