USA

In a case that has sparked debate in Ireland, a woman continued to collect her dead mother’s pension for three years, claiming it was a way to keep her memory alive. The incident came to light in County Meath, where authorities recently discovered that pension payments intended for an elderly woman- who had died years earlier- were still being withdrawn.

According to the Irish Mirror, 56-year-old Catherine Byrne, the woman’s daughter, never registered her mother’s death or informed the Department of Social Welfare, allowing the payments to continue unnoticed for over 36 months.

The case was eventually brought before the Dundalk Circuit Court, where Catherine admitted to withdrawing the money but insisted it was not used for personal luxury. Instead, she claimed the funds were spent on flowers for her mother’s grave, calling it her way of keeping her mother “alive”.

Despite the emotional explanation, the court ruled the act as serious welfare fraud. Catherine was sentenced to 240 hours of community service and ordered to repay the funds in weekly instalments of 12,000 Euros to the Department of Social Welfare. The total amount taken was not disclosed, but officials said a full recovery would be pursued.

The unusual case has raised concerns over gaps in death registration systems and the potential for similar oversights in public welfare payments.

George Bell, once recognised as the tallest man in the United States, has died at the age of 67. Standing at 7 feet 8 inches, Bell held the Guinness World Record for being the tallest American in 2007, the People reported. 

The Norfolk Sheriff’s Office in Virginia, where Bell served as a deputy from 2000 to 2014, confirmed his death in a Facebook post on March 19. “We are saddened to learn of the passing of former deputy George Bell,” the office said. “He will be remembered for his kind and fun-loving personality. He will always be considered a member of the Norfolk Sheriff’s Office family.”

Bell died at his home in Durham, North Carolina, surrounded by loved ones, local affiliate WVEC-TV reported. The cause of death has not been publicly disclosed.

Nicknamed the “gentle giant” by those close to him, Bell grew up in Portsmouth, Virginia. While he was always considered tall, he reached his extraordinary height in his 20s due to gigantism – a rare condition caused by excess growth hormone.

Before joining law enforcement, Bell pursued a career in basketball. He played as a backup centre for Biola University in California during the early 1980s and later joined the Harlem Wizards, a show team similar to the Harlem Globetrotters.

Bell also appeared in entertainment projects, including season 4 of American Horror Story and the reality show Freakshow, where he played himself.

Meta chief and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg took the stand Monday in a landmark US anti-trust trial in which his social media juggernaut stands accused of abusing its market power to acquire Instagram and WhatsApp before they could become competitors.

The start of the trial in a Washington federal court dashed the hopes of Zuckerberg that the return of Donald Trump to the White House would see the government let up on the enforcement of antitrust law against Big Tech.

The Meta case is being made by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the powerful US consumer protection agency, and could see the owner of Facebook forced to divest Instagram and WhatsApp, which have grown into global powerhouses since their buyout.

“They decided that competition is too hard and it would be easier to buy out their rivals than to compete with them,” FTC attorney Daniel Matheson said in opening remarks at the trial.

Meta attorney Mark Hansen countered in his opening salvo that “acquisitions to improve and grow an acquired firm” are not unlawful in the United States and that is what Meta, then called Facebook, did.

The trial will be run and decided by Judge James Boasberg, who is also presiding over a high-profile case involving White House orders to deport Venezuelans without a hearing, using an obscure wartime law, on grounds they belong to dangerous gangs.

The case against Meta was originally filed in December 2020, during the first Trump administration, and all eyes were on whether he would ask the FTC to stand down.

Zuckerberg, the world’s third-richest person, has made repeated visits to the White House as he tries to persuade the US leader to choose settlement instead of fighting the trial, a decision that would be extraordinary at this late stage.

As part of his lobbying efforts, Zuckerberg contributed to Trump’s inauguration fund and overhauled content moderation policies. He also purchased a $23 million mansion in Washington in what was seen as a bid to spend more time close to the center of political power.

The Meta lawsuit represents one of five major tech antitrust actions recently initiated by the US government.

Google is facing two cases and was found guilty of search-market dominance abuse last August, while Apple and Amazon are also heading to court.

Zuckerberg, his former lieutenant Sheryl Sandberg, and a long line of executives from rival companies are scheduled to testify at a trial expected to last at least eight weeks.

Central to the case is Facebook’s 2012 billion-dollar purchase of Instagram — then a small but promising photo-sharing app that now boasts two billion active users.

An email from Zuckerberg cited by the FTC showed him depicting Instagram’s emergence as “really scary,” adding that is “why we might want to consider paying a lot of money for this.”

The FTC argues that Meta’s $19 billion WhatsApp acquisition in 2014 followed the same pattern, with Zuckerberg fearing the messaging app could either transform into a social network or be purchased by a competitor.

Meta’s defense attorneys will argue that its substantial investments transformed these acquisitions into the blockbusters they are today.

They will also highlight that Meta’s apps are free for users and face fierce competition.

The FTC argues that Meta’s monopoly power is demonstrated by a severely downgraded user experience — with too many ads and product changes that users have no choice but to tolerate.

– Defining the market –

A key courtroom battleground will be how the FTC defines Meta’s market.

The US government argues that Facebook and Instagram are dominant players in apps that provide a way to connect with family and friends, a category that does not include TikTok and YouTube.

But Meta disagrees. “The evidence at trial will show what every 17-year-old in the world knows: Instagram, Facebook and WhatsApp compete with Chinese-owned TikTok, YouTube, X, iMessage and many others,” a spokesperson said.

“The bigger that Meta can make the relevant market… the more likely it is to defeat the FTC’s case,” said lawyer Brendan Benedict on Substack.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday he wants to deport some violent criminals who are U.S. citizens to El Salvador, where they would be incarcerated under an agreement with that country’s government.

Trump’s spoke to journalists at the White House during the state visit of Salvadoran President Nayib Bukele.

The remarks were one of the clearest signals yet that the U.S. president is serious about deporting naturalized and U.S.-born citizens, a proposal that has alarmed civil rights advocates and is viewed by many legal scholars as unconstitutional.

Trump said he would only go through with the idea if his administration determined it was legal. It was not clear what level of due process an American would receive before being deported.

“We always have to obey the laws, but we also have homegrown criminals that push people into subways, that hit elderly ladies on the back of the head with a baseball bat when they’re not looking, that are absolute monsters,” Trump said.

“I’d like to include them in the group of people to get them out of the country, but you’ll have to be looking at the laws on that.”

Trump told reporters last week that he “loved” the idea of deporting citizens to El Salvador, after Bukele said the country was open to housing U.S. prisoners.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later confirmed that the proposal was on the table, saying Trump had “simply floated” the idea.

The Trump administration has sent hundreds of migrants accused of criminal affiliations to El Salvador’s harsh mega-prison known as the Terrorism Confinement Center, under often-contested legal authorities. The U.S. is paying El Salvador $6 million.

The highest-profile deportee, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran national, was deported despite a judicial order protecting him from removal. The U.S. government has described his deportation as an administrative error.

The U.S. Supreme Court last week upheld a lower court ruling directing the administration to “facilitate and effectuate” his return. But it said the term “effectuate” was unclear and might exceed the authority of the district court judge.

In a court filing on Sunday, the administration said it was not obligated to help Abrego Garcia get out of prison in El Salvador. Bukele said during the Monday meeting with Trump that he would neither return Abrego Garcia nor release him in El Salvador, and Trump said he was not interested in asking for Abrego Garcia back.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

NASA’s Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion or DEI chief Neela Rajendra, who is of Indian origin, has been sacked by the US space agency in compliance with Donald Trump’s executive order to “terminate” all persons employed under such initiatives, and end all such programmes across the country.

In an attempt to save her from being fired, NASA had reportedly changed her designation to ‘Head of Office of Team Excellence and Employee Success’ shortly after President Trump’s executive order. But attempts to protect her ultimately failed.

In an e-mail update shared by NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory last week, employees working at the top space lab were informed of Ms Rajendra’s exit. “Neela Rajendra is no longer working at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. We are incredibly grateful for the lasting impact she made to our organisation. We wish her the very best,” read the e-mail, which, according to British newspaper Daily Mail, was sent by Laurie Leshin, Director of NASA’s JPL.

Ms Rajendra was among a handful of employees whose job was not axed last year when NASA’s Jet Propulsion Lab faced a severe fund crunch. The jobs of nearly 900 other DEI employees at the top space agency were terminated at the time.

Even when NASA pulled the shutter down on its Diversity department in March this year, following Donald Trump’s presidential order, Ms Rajendra managed to evade it as her designation had been changed, though her responsibilities remained the same. An entirely new department was created for her.

In an email dated March 10, NASA had informed its employees that Neela Rajendra would now head the ‘Office of Team Excellence and Employee Success’. The lab staff was told that in her new role, Ms Rajendra would would be responsible for “affinity groups” at the laboratory, which includes the “Black Excellence Strategic Team”.

After assuming her revised role, Ms Rajendra had written on her LinkedIn page that her job as the head of the newly formed office at NASA was primarily to “unlock our potential to dare mighty things together.”

However, after a strict crackdown by the Trump administration in early April, she was relieved of her duties at NASA.

Neela Rajendra had been at a leadership role at NASA for several years. During her tenure, she was in-charge of efforts to help diversify NASA, which included the ‘Space Workforce 2030’ pledge, whose primary objective was to hire women and minorities in the organisation.

NASA now joins a host of other federal government agencies which have completely shut down its diversity programs. Donald Trump’s executive order states that such programs have divided Americans on the basis of race, colour, and gender; have wasted taxpayer dollars, and “resulted in shameful discrimination”.
 

A strong, shallow 5.1 magnitude quake hit southern California on Monday, US geologists said.

The tremor was centered 2.5 miles (four kilometers) south of Julian, which sits around 20 miles from the US border with Mexico, and was eight miles deep, according to data from the US Geological Survey.

The initial quake was followed by a series of smaller aftershocks.

There were no immediate reports of damage.

The US West Coast is the confluence of several of the Earth’s tectonic plates, and tremors are not uncommon.

Southern California has been struck by a number of major earthquakes, including a 1994 quake that hit Northridge, in the Los Angeles area, killing dozens of people and injuring thousands more.

It also wrought billions of dollars of damage to homes and infrastructure.

The San Francisco earthquake of 1906, which also caused a tsunami, is thought to have killed upwards of 3,000 people, some of whom died in fires that erupted after the powerful tremor

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Pop star Katy Perry became the biggest name in an all-woman group to safely blast off into space Monday, roaring into the cosmos on one of billionaire Jeff Bezos’s rockets.

The “Firework” and “California Gurls” singer was lofted more than 60 miles (100 kilometers) above the Earth’s surface in a vessel from Blue Origin, the space company owned by the Amazon founder.

Five other women, including Bezos’s fiancee Lauren Sanchez, also joined the flight, which took off from western Texas shortly 8:30 am (1330 GMT) before landing again some 10 minutes later.

Their fully automated craft rose vertically before the crew capsule detached mid-flight, later falling back to the ground slowed by parachutes and a retro rocket.

Monday’s mission is the first all-woman space crew since Valentina Tereshkova’s historic solo flight in 1963.

It is also the 11th sub-orbital crewed operation by Blue Origin, which has offered the space tourism experiences for several years.

The company does not publicly communicate the price of trips made possible by its New Shepard rocket.

The flight brought the passengers beyond the Karman line — the internationally recognized boundary of space.

They were expected to have a brief period when the women could unbuckle from their seats and float in zero gravity.

– ‘Inspiration’ –

Perry recently told Elle magazine that she was taking part “for my daughter Daisy,” whom she shares with actor Orlando Bloom, “to inspire her to never have limits on her dreams.”

“I’m just so excited to see the inspiration through her eyes and the light in her eyes when she sees that rocket go, and she goes back to school the next day and says ‘Mom went to space,'” Perry added.

She said in a separate video posted to Instagram that she was shocked to discover during space training that the capsule she will travel in was named the “Tortoise” and decorated with a “feather” design — the two nicknames her parents have for her.

“There are no coincidences and I’m just so grateful for these confirmations and so grateful that I feel like something bigger than me is steering the ship,” Perry said in the video.

Perry, launched onto the international stage with her 2008 hit “I Kissed a Girl,” was also travelling alongside TV presenter Gayle King, film producer Kerianne Flynn, former NASA scientist Aisha Bowe and Amanda Nguyen, founder of a campaign group against sexual violence.

They follow 52 previous Blue Origin passengers, including longtime “Star Trek” leading man William Shatner.

King’s close friend — talk show legend Oprah Winfrey — was among those watching the launch in Texas.

Such high-profile guests are intended to keep public interest in Blue Origin’s work, as it battles multiple rival firms in the space tourism field.

Bezos’ top challenger in passenger flights is Virgin Galactic, which offers a similar sub-orbital experience.

But Blue Origin aims in the future to bring space tourists into orbit, competing directly with Elon Musk’s SpaceX.

In January, Blue Origin’s much more powerful New Glenn rocket successfully completed its first unmanned orbital mission.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

For my generation, the year 1991 is etched in memory not merely as a deep economic crisis, but as a chapter of deep national humiliation. It was the year when India, desperate and cornered, was compelled to kneel – forced to mortgage its gold and open up its economy on terms dictated by the West. Just to secure a $2.2 billion IMF loan and a $500 million World Bank package, we had to accept conditions that felt like a surrender of sovereignty.

Let me quickly clarify that it wasn’t the reforms that hurt, but the way they were forced upon a proud and ancient civilisation, reduced in that moment to a supplicant. As a matter of fact, the dismantling of the corrupt licence raj or the tearing down of irrational tariff barriers was long overdue. We were happy to get rid of them. But what stung was the way we were made to do it: not as a partner in progress, but as a failed pupil being punished. The terms were harsh, the tone condescending.

I remember how the West behaved, particularly the United States, which was self-righteous at its best those days. They had the swagger of a free world and the free market. They demanded the same from us. They saw the world in their own image.

Today, the irony is too bitter to ignore. The same US, once the self-declared champion of globalisation, is now hiding behind tariff walls of its own making. President Donald Trump has, annoyingly for everyone, put a universal 10 percent tariff and is engaged in bullying friends and foes alike. And no one, it seems, dares to confront him.

Treasury bonds’ aura fading

Trump’s erratic threats, his disregard for international norms and his open dadagiri have triggered chaos in global markets. US consumers, once shielded by the confidence of economic stability, now flounder in a sea of uncertainty.

The most striking sign of the current turmoil is that even US Treasury bonds – once seen as the safest investment in the world – are starting to shake. For decades, investors turned to these bonds during crises, trusting they were a safe place to park their money.

But that trust is now fading. Over the past 10 days or so, a dramatic sell-off has swept through global markets. Investors who once found comfort in US debt are now asking what was once unthinkable – is America still the anchor of the global economy?

This fresh wave of panic was sparked by Trump’s move last week – a new round of sweeping tariffs on dozens of countries, including a massive 145% duty on Chinese imports. The interest rate (or “yield”) on the 10-year US bond jumped to 4.516 percent before falling back slightly – a big and sudden change not seen since Trump was first elected in 2016. The 30-year bond also saw a sharp rise, nearly hitting 5%. It’s hard to say if one should laugh at Trump’s tactics or cry, because at a time when America is flexing its protectionist muscle, its most sacred financial instruments are losing their shield of invincibility.

“This is a fire sale of Treasuries,” said Calvin Yeoh, a hedge fund portfolio manager, who was quoted in the media, his words echoing the fear that this is no routine correction but a structural unravelling. “I haven’t seen moves or volatility of this size since the chaos of the pandemic in 2020.”

Trump had to blink, thanks to bond market jitters

The bond market sell-off was so jarring it rattled nerves even inside the White House. “People were getting a little queasy,” Trump admitted last Wednesday, telling reporters he had been closely watching the market. “The bond market is very tricky,” he added. While criticism from Wall Street and economists had failed to sway the mercurial President, the deepening turmoil in the bond market was enough to make him pause-prompting a delay on several of his planned tariffs.

Even with Trump’s 90-day pause on higher tariffs, the financial markets are still very nervous. Last Wednesday, the interest rate on US government debt jumped to 5% – a big move that usually only happens in a crisis. The last time something like this happened was during the Covid pandemic in March 2020, when the world was more worried about finding ventilators and vaccines than watching bond markets. Back then, it took emergency action to calm things down. This time, Trump’s sudden pause on tariffs acted like a quick fix to stop the panic – at least for now, for 90 days.

Traditionally, when the world gets jittery, for example during a looming recession, investors rush into US Treasuries, driving prices up and yields (interest rate) down. But not this time. Despite growing fears of a US recession, investors are spooked, bond prices are falling and yields are rising, a symptom of growing fear about where this trade war might be heading. It is the financial equivalent of seeking shelter from a storm or heavy rains and finding the roof leaking. Helplessness is today’s global order.

Who’s to blame for this market mayhem? Well, who else but President Trump. His raised tariffs and his decision to slap 145 percent tariffs on Chinese goods has reignited the “Sell America” narrative. The media quoted a blunt financial expert as saying: “Treasuries and US equities are under pressure. That’s a toxic combination for the dollar.” In short: the markets are not impressed.

Now for a slightly technical twist – but one that’s really important. Hedge funds have been placing big, risky bets known as “basis trades.” These bets count on tiny price differences between US government bonds and the futures tied to them. When markets are calm, that can work. But when things get jumpy, like now, those trades can fall apart fast. To make matters worse, brokers are now asking these funds to pay up or put down more money, and the easiest thing to sell in a hurry are US government bonds. Yes, the very same bonds everyone sees as safe and stable. One expert put it simply: “US bonds are usually rock-solid, but when big investors need cash quickly, even those get dumped”.

What are government bonds?

The other day I was chatting with a London-based fellow journalist and a few random neighbours and they seem to have very little idea about government bonds and how they work. So, before going any further let me explain it as well as I can: Government bonds are the instruments they use to borrow money. When a government issues bonds (like US Treasury bonds, UK gilts, or Chinese government bonds), it’s borrowing money from investors – promising to pay it back later with interest. Let’s take the US as an example. When the US wants to borrow money, it issues Treasury bonds. Investors, such as governments, banks, pension funds and even individuals, buy them, giving the government cash up front. The US government pays back the face value at a future date. It also pays interest regularly. So, in reality the US government’s total bonds are its total debt.

Why it matters to India in a big way

This story is of massive interest to India and Indians. For Indian investors, especially the government, US bonds remain a trusted tool for stability and risk management in an unpredictable global economy. India is a significant holder of US Treasury securities, ranked 14th, with total investments-government and private-reaching around $225.7 billion as of January 2025 (It was $247.2 in September 2024). While precise figures splitting public and private holdings aren’t publicly available, these investments are primarily driven by a mix of portfolio diversification strategies, foreign exchange reserve management and responses to global and domestic economic conditions.

Another potential twist

Now let me come to another twist in the tale. As of January 2025, China held roughly $760.8 billion in US Treasury securities, making it the second-largest foreign holder after Japan. If China were to suddenly sell a significant portion of its US Treasury holdings, a few things could happen. It could lead to increased US interest rates. A large sell-off would flood the market with Treasuries, decreasing their prices and increasing yields, which translates to higher borrowing costs for the US government and consumers. Such a Chinese move could unsettle global financial markets, leading to increased volatility and uncertainty. It could also strain US-China relations. It could escalate economic tensions between the two nations, potentially fuelling the ongoing trade war further.

However, this action would also pose significant risks to China. Here are some scenarios. Financial losses — a rapid sell-off could devalue China’s remaining holdings, leading to substantial financial losses; currency appreciation – selling US assets could strengthen the yuan, making Chinese exports more expensive and less competitive globally; and finally, it would lead to global economic instability. As a major player in the global economy, actions that destabilise markets could also negatively impact China’s own economic interests.

So, while China has the capacity to influence US financial markets through its Treasury holdings, a sudden sell-off would entail significant risks for both nations and could lead to broader global economic repercussions.

US government neck-deep in debt

As of March 2025, the total US Federal government debt stood at $36.56 trillion; China’s debt by the end of 2024 was approximately $6.7 trillion; the UK’s borrowings stood at $2.5 trillion. These bonds are tradable – so their prices move up and down based on demand, interest rates, inflation expectations and global confidence. If investors sell off bonds, like they are doing with US Treasuries now, prices fall and yields (interest rates) rise, which makes borrowing more expensive for the US government and it can derail its budget plans.

Anyway, this isn’t just about market jitters or investor nerves. This is about the erosion of trust in the very instruments that have long underpinned the global economy. US Treasury bonds have, for decades, been seen as the ultimate safe haven-a place to park money when the world feels unstable. But what happens when the instability emanates from the safe haven itself?

The consequences could be seismic. If confidence in US debt continues to erode, borrowing costs will continue to rise. That, in turn, affects everything from mortgage rates to infrastructure funding to social spending. Already, whispers are growing louder on Wall Street that the Federal Reserve may need to step in with an emergency interest rate cut-a drastic measure that reflects just how serious the situation is becoming.

And yet, the architects of this chaos remain defiant. President Trump continues to tout tariffs as a cure-all, bullying trading partners and flouting international norms.

In 1991, India was told to shape up or ship out. It did so, with courage, resilience and long-term vision. Today, it is America that is showing signs of fragility-not in its fundamentals, but in its political leadership and economic direction. The rest of the world is watching and saying this turmoil will be bad for everyone. But when you are on top you often stop listening.

(Syed Zubair Ahmed is a London-based senior Indian journalist with three decades of experience with the Western media)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

An Indian response to the provocation by Bangladesh’s Chief Adviser, Mohammed Yunus, was inevitable. While on a visit to China, Yunus had called India’s Northeast ‘landlocked’. The remark by Yunus alluded to the perception of Bangladesh being the guardian of access to the Indian Northeast through the sea routes as the land route ran through a constricted corridor. Yunus suggested that this geographical positioning presents significant opportunities for China, proposing that Bangladesh could serve as an extension of the Chinese economy by facilitating production and trade activities aimed at both China and global markets.

No Let-Up In Tensions

The Indian response and the actual interpretation of what Yunus said and meant are important issues in the emerging standoff between India and Bangladesh. Despite the one-on-one meeting at the BIMSTEC Summit in Bangkok, between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chief Adviser Mohammad Yunus, there appears no let-up in the rising tensions between the two countries. The Indian response has been to put an end to the June 2020 initiative, under which India allowed Bangladeshi export cargo to transit through Indian land customs stations enroute to third countries, via Indian ports and airports. The New Delhi airport is one such important outlet for Bangladesh. This arrangement facilitated smoother trade flows for Bangladesh’s exports to nations such as Bhutan, Nepal, and Myanmar – in particular, to nations where goods moved by land routes.

On April 8, post the provocation by Yunus, India rescinded this facility, citing significant congestion at its airports and ports. This led to logistical delays and increased costs for Indian exporters. Internationally, this is being interpreted as a response to what Yunus said and meant. The negative effect on Bangladesh exports, especially after the 37% tariff also imposed by the US, will indeed be mind-boggling, thanks to the uncalled-for and unnecessary buccaneering by Yunus under Jamaat pressure. Yunus and the Jamaat leadership may be unaware of the fact that India has a major contribution to the growth of the garment industry in Bangladesh – as much as $1.20 billion worth of cotton yarn and raw cotton worth $556.84 million were exported by India to Bangladesh in 2023.

The Possible Chinese Airfield

India is also studying reports of a Chinese plan to build an airfield in Bangladesh’s Lalmonirhat district, which is sure to be a challenge for New Delhi’s security interests along the eastern border, including the Chicken’s Neck area, that is, the Siliguri Corridor. The area, considered a strategic vulnerability for India, is a sliver of territory that provides access to all transportation and energy arteries to Northeast India, as well as a petroleum pipeline to Nepal. Several power grids crisscross the narrow territory. About 45-50 kilometres to the north is the strategic Chumbi Valley, separating the Indian state of Sikkim and Bhutan, where the famous (though some call it infamous) ‘Trijunction’ exists. Adjacent to it is Doklam, which every Indian by now probably knows about, thanks to the 72-day long standoff between Indian and Chinese forces in 2017.

So, is this to be an airfield to be occupied by the Bangladesh air force? Or, will the Chinese air force place its assets here under a strategic partnership agreement? If assets are deployed here for the dual purpose of maintaining an eye over the Bay of Bengal (much less likely) and posing a threat to India’s interests, this will surpass arrangements that China has with even Pakistan, in PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan areas. So, at best, this must be seen as good psychological warfare to hem India in. Lalmonirhat is just 15 kilometres from the India-Bangladesh border. It won’t be wrong to expect the Chinese air force to display an unprofessional approach towards defence and strategic cooperation with Bangladesh were it to place assets at such an airfield.

A Slew Of Pakistani Visits

Since the end of 2024, the Pakistan army has been making a beeline for Bangladesh. In January 2025, a high-level ISI delegation led by Major General Shahid Amir Afsar had visited Dhaka, marking one of the first significant engagements between the ISI and Bangladeshi officials in decades. The agenda probably focused on military and intelligence cooperation, including discussions on establishing an intelligence-sharing network between the two countries. The objective of that step does not need a second analysis. For the first time since 1971, the Pakistan army is set to train Bangladeshi military personnel. Starting

February 2025, training sessions were to be conducted in multiple cantonments across Bangladesh, beginning with the one in Mymensingh, all supervised by senior officers of the Pakistan Army.

The Bangladesh army views itself as professional, and second to none. Its leadership seeks to showcase itself in various UN missions and, often, overreaches itself in projection. Why such a force needs to bring in Pakistani training advisers is questionable. Can they be attempts at establishing intelligence bases? As I have always said, India left Bangladesh after defeating and evicting the Pakistan Army way back in January 1972, but Pakistan never left Bangladesh. It always maintained a shadowy presence there. Sheikh Hasina’s government and Awami League cadres ensured that Pakistani Islamism remained under control. Her government also resisted former Pakistan President Zia ul Haq’s infamous strategy of using Islamism to drive an anti-India circle around and within India. Now with Hasina gone and the Awami League itself under severe strain, the potential to revive the Zia plan seems bigger than ever before.

Demons At Every Corner?

A high-level delegation from Pakistan’s Foreign Office is scheduled to visit Bangladesh this month, marking a significant step in revitalising bilateral ties, which have remained largely dormant for over a decade. Ishaq Dar, Pakistan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, is slated to visit Dhaka on April 22 at the invitation of Bangladesh’s Foreign Affairs Adviser, Md Touhid Hossain. Similarly, Pakistan Foreign Secretary Amna Baloch is scheduled to arrive for a Foreign Secretary-level meeting on April 17. The visits can be seen as part of efforts to restore the old relationship.

Is India seeing demons at every corner, and are Indian analysts giving Pakistan and Bangladesh more than what their strategic worth merits? These are relevant questions in the face of an obvious attempt by a non-strategically-inclined Chief Advisor to directly target India. The entire controversy about the ‘landlocked’ nature of Northeast India was an obvious red herring. That it was made despite full knowledge of a much sought-after meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi a week later points to deliberate instigation.

The last of the Pakistan-Bangladesh shenanigans is yet to unfold even as there is a growing impatience in India about the intransigence on display. So far, the Indian response has invariably been measured and effective. This is the approach that usually wins strategically perched awkward situations. The government needs appreciation for handling this well.

(The writer is a Member of the National Disaster Management Authority, Chancellor of the Central University of Kashmir, and Former GOC of the Srinagar-based 15 Corps.)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

Diamantaire Mehul Choksi’s arrest in Belgium is the result of a relentless pursuit by Indian agencies for over seven years and spanning three countries that faced multiple setbacks. 

The Gitanjali Group owner is accused of a Rs 12,636 crore fraud at the state-run Punjab National Bank along with his nephew Nirav Modi, his wife Ami Modi, and his brother Neeshal Modi. Sixty-five-year-old Choksi fled India in 2018, shortly before the massive fraud came to light. He flew to Antigua, where he had taken citizenship through the investment programme.

In 2021, Choksi was arrested in the Dominican Republic for illegal entry. A CBI team was rushed to the Caribbean nation to secure his custody. Choksi’s lawyers told a Dominican court that he needed to return to Antigua for treatment and assured that he would return to face trial later. After 51 days in jail, Choksi got relief from the British Queen’s Privy Council and the extradition could not proceed. He flew back to Antigua. Later, the illegal entry charges against him in the Dominican Republic were dropped.

The CBI and the Enforcement Directorate tracked him throughout this time. Last year, they learned that he was in Belgium, and they promptly alerted the agencies there, sources in the agencies said. All documents regarding the fraud case were also shared. Belgian police arrested Choksi on April 12 and found he was trying to flee to Switzerland. Choksi’s wife Preeti is a Belgian citizen. According to reports, Choksi submitted fabricated documents to get a residency card in Belgium. He also concealed that he was a citizen of India and Antigua. Earlier, in February, Choksi’s lawyer told a Mumbai court that he cannot return to India because he was in Belgium for blood cancer treatment.

The businessman also said he was ready to cooperate with Indian agencies and appear before courts through video-conferencing, but this suggestion was rejected and the agencies kept working towards his extradition. These efforts have now culminated in his arrest and Indian authorities are now working to bring him back for trial. Choksi’s legal team has said it will file for bail and oppose his extradition to India.