India warns of ‘loud and clear’ response after deadly Kashmir attack

Indian soldiers are on guard in Srinagar, Indian-controlled Kashmir, April 23, 2025. (AP)
Short Url
Updated 23 April 2025
Follow

India warns of ‘loud and clear’ response after deadly Kashmir attack

  • Gunmen kill 26 men in the popular tourist resort of Pahalgam
  • Kashmir Valley shuts down in response to region’s deadliest attack in years

NEW DELHI: India’s Defense Minister Rajnath Singh vowed on Wednesday to pursue those who planned and carried out a deadly attack in Jammu and Kashmir, where gunmen opened fire on visitors at a popular Himalayan tourist hotspot.

The attackers killed 26 people, all men, and left many critically injured at a site near the resort town of Pahalgam. It was the deadliest such incident in years, shattering the relative calm in the disputed Indian-controlled region.

“We will not only reach the perpetrators of this act but also the actors behind the scenes,” Singh said in a press briefing in New Delhi. “The responsible will soon see a loud and clear response.”

Prime Minister Narendra Modi cut short his visit to Saudi Arabia and returned to New Delhi on Wednesday morning in the aftermath of the attack, which took place as US Vice President J.D. Vance is visiting India.

The assault is seen as a setback to the peace and stability that Modi’s government has touted as a key achievement of revoking Kashmir’s semi-autonomous status in 2019.

“It is a big setback because they claimed that everything is normal in Kashmir,” Showkat Hussain, former dean of the School of Legal Studies at the Central University of Kashmir, told Arab News.

“They have been portraying to the whole world that we have managed to (cut) the resistance in Kashmir, and it seems that that mirage has dissipated because of this attack. Kashmir is as volatile as it used to be before 2019.”

The Kashmir Valley shut down on Wednesday following a call by the local ruling party, the Jammu and Kashmir National Conference.

Several newspapers across the region printed black front pages as a gesture of mourning, people across the valley held vigils to protest the violence, while government employees observed two minutes of silence in respect for those killed in Pahalgam.

“And a sense of insecurity has spread all across Jammu and Kashmir,” Hussain said.

The region is part of the larger Kashmiri territory, which has been the subject of international dispute since the 1947 partition of the Indian subcontinent into Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan.

Both countries claim Kashmir in full, and rule in part.

Indian-administered Kashmir has for decades witnessed outbreaks of separatist insurgency to resist control from the government in New Delhi.

According to Air Vice Marshal Kapil Kak, a retired officer of the Indian Air Force, the Pahalgam attack was not, however, an indication of insurgency being on the rise after decades of lull but rather that the forced scrapping of the Muslim-majority region’s constitutional autonomy has not brought what the Indian government has been referring to as “normalcy.”

It was a message by the perpetrators and “some elements on the ground in the valley,” he said, that “Kashmir is not normal, and those elements have a role. They may lie low, they may come up ... and that’s what they’ve done.”

Attacks such as the Pahalgam shooting have over decades strained ties between India and Pakistan. In 2019, a suicide bombing in Kashmir’s Pulwama district killed 40 Indian paramilitary personnel and triggered cross-border air strikes, pushing the nuclear-armed neighbors to the brink of war.

Pakistan’s foreign office said in a statement that it was “concerned” about the attack and extended condolences to the victims’ relatives.


Trump pivots to new 10 percent global tariff, new probes after Supreme Court setback

Updated 28 min 46 sec ago
Follow

Trump pivots to new 10 percent global tariff, new probes after Supreme Court setback

WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump moved swiftly on Friday to replace tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court with a temporary ​10 percent global import duty for 150 days while opening investigations under other laws that could allow him to re-impose the tariffs.
Trump told a briefing he was ordering new tariffs under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, duties that would go on top of surviving tariffs. These would partly replace tariffs of 10 percent to 50 percent under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act that the top court declared illegal.
Trump said later on Truth Social that he had signed an order for the tariffs on all countries “which will be effective almost immediately.”
A spokesperson for the US Customs and Border Protection agency declined comment when asked when collections of the illegal IEEPA tariffs would halt at ports of entry.
Trump’s Treasury Secretary, Scott Bessent, said the new 10 percent duties and potentially enhanced tariffs under the Section 301 unfair practices statute and the Section 232 national security statute would result in virtually unchanged tariff revenue in 2026.
“We will get back to the same tariff level for the countries. ‌It will just be ‌in a less direct and slightly more convoluted manner,” Bessent told Fox News, adding that the Supreme ​Court ‌decision had ⁠reduced Trump’s ​negotiating ⁠leverage with trading partners.
The never-used Section 122 authority allows the president to impose duties of up to 15 percent for up to 150 days on any and all countries to address “large and serious” balance of payments issues. It does not require investigations or impose other procedural limits. After 150 days, Congress would need to approve their extension.
“We have alternatives, great alternatives,” Trump said. “Could be more money. We’ll take in more money and we’ll be a lot stronger for it,” Trump said of the alternative tools.
While the administration will likely face legal challenges, the Section 122 tariffs would lapse before any final ruling could be made, said Josh Lipsky, international economics chair at the Atlantic Council, a think tank in Washington.
Trump said his administration also was initiating several new country-specific investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 “to protect our country from unfair trading practices of ⁠other countries and companies.”
Trump’s shift to other statutes, including Section 122, while initiating new investigations under Section 301 ‌had been widely anticipated, but these have often taken a year to complete.
The 10 percent tariffs only last ‌five months, but Trump said that would allow his administration to complete investigations to enhance tariffs.
Asked if rates ​would ultimately end up being higher after more probes, Trump said: “Potentially higher. ‌It depends. Whatever we want them to be.”
He said some countries “that have treated us really badly for years” could see higher tariffs, whereas for others, “it’s going to ‌be very reasonable for them.”
The fate of dozens of trade deals to cut IEEPA-based duties and negotiations with major US trading partners remained unclear in the wake of the ruling, though Trump said he expected many of them to continue. He said deals that are abandoned “will be replaced with the other tariffs.”
“This is unlikely to affect reciprocal trade negotiations with our trading partners,” said Tim Brightbill, trade partner with the law firm Wiley Rein in Washington. “Most countries would prefer the certainty of a trade deal to the chaos of last year.”
US ‌Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said details on new Section 301 investigations would be revealed in coming days, adding these are “incredibly legally durable.” Trump relied on Section 301 to impose broad tariffs on Chinese imports during his first term.
The Supreme Court’s ruling puts about $175 ⁠billion in tariff revenue collected over the past year subject to potential refunds, according to estimates provided to Reuters by Penn-Wharton Budget Model economists.
Asked if he would refund the IEEPA duties, Trump said, “I guess it has to get litigated for the next two years,” a response indicating that a quick, automatic refund process was unlikely.
Speaking in Dallas, Bessent told business leaders that since the Supreme Court did not provide any instructions on refunds, those were “in dispute,” adding: “My sense is that could be dragged out for weeks, months, years.”
Part of the reason why Trump opted for IEEPA to impose tariffs last year was because the 1977 sanctions statute allowed fast and broad action with almost no constraints. Until Friday, he had also used it as a cudgel to swiftly punish countries over non-trade disputes, such as Brazil’s prosecution of former president and Trump ally Jair Bolsonaro.
While Trump’s new investigations will prolong tariff uncertainty, they could inject more order into his tariff policy by forcing him to rely on trade laws that have well-understood procedures, research and public comment requirements, and longer timelines, said Janet Whittaker, senior counsel with Clifford Chance in Washington.
“The administration will need to follow these set processes, conduct the investigations, and so for businesses, that means more visibility into the process,” Whittaker said.
Robert Lighthizer, Trump’s trade chief during his ​first term, said on Fox News that he hoped Congress would revise decades-old ​trade laws to give Trump new tariff tools.
“I think there’s consensus in this Congress that we have to change the old system, and I hope that they will take this as an opportunity to do that,” Lighthizer said.