Moscow, Oct 6 (Sputnik/UNI) Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Turkey have expressed their readiness to jointly counter those who attack the kingdom, Saudi Defence Minister Khalid bin Salman said.

Increasingly, the Global South is expected to adopt a common position in a time when global fault lines seem more clearly drawn than ever before. The Russian-Ukrainian crisis, the Gaza crisis, and the wider West Asian crisis point to the fact that global politics cannot simply be viewed as a binary divide between the West and the rest. Countries in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East are taking independent decisions based on issues such as energy security, economics, food security, development, and national interest.

For India, this scenario poses a major problem. Along with China, India has made efforts to exercise greater influence within developing countries as well as bring about changes in an international order perceived to be imbalanced. But if both countries assert their role as voices of the Global South, then the question emerges whether such an eclectic group can speak with one voice.

The Global South Was Never One Political Community

The term ‘Global South’ still makes sense as many developing countries have been in similar situations with colonialism, economic inequalities and lack of representation in international institutions. The government of India has tried to tap into these similarities for diplomatic influences, through events such as The Voice of the Global South Summit in 2023.

But common history is not the same as common geopolitical interests.

The current disputes make this evident. The Russia-Ukraine war has forced developing countries to find a balance between the principles of sovereignty with economic and strategic relations. The conflict in Gaza raises hard issues related to humanitarian duty, security, and international law. Moreover, the situation in West Asia jeopardizes energy supply routes, sea lines of communication, and general economic equilibrium on a much larger scale.

The Global South, therefore, should not be viewed as a group waiting for a leader. It is a collection of countries pursuing their own interests in an uncertain world.

The BRICS Test

India’s 2026 BRICS chairmanship makes this contradiction particularly significant. The expansion of BRICS has brought together countries with different political systems, economic priorities and relationships with major powers. Its growing engagement with countries such as Iran also reflects the desire among several states for alternatives to existing global financial and political structures.

But greater membership does not automatically create greater unity.

India should work towards managing its differences with other BRICS countries while ensuring that its relations with nations like the USA, Russia, Europe, Iran, and other Gulf nations are not affected. This principle of balancing one’s relationship with countries is actually the reality of modern-day diplomacy which dictates that a country may work with another country regarding a particular matter but have a completely different opinion on another matter.

India’s Real Advantage: The Ability to Convene

China possesses considerable economic influence across the developing world through trade, investment and infrastructure. India cannot, and perhaps should not, attempt to replicate this model. India’s advantage may actually lie in flexibility in its diplomatic stance.

It can work with the US without formally becoming its ally, build its relations with Moscow and with the West at the same time, take part in the Quad group while being active in BRICS, and simultaneously keep relations with Iran and other Gulf nations.

This does not necessarily imply that India agrees with the stances of the above-mentioned countries, however. . It means India has relationships across geopolitical divisions. Its opportunity, therefore, may not be to become the “voice” of the Global South, but to become a bridge between its different voices.

The Counterargument

Critics may argue that a fragmented Global South needs stronger leadership and that India must compete more directly with China to establish itself as a major power. China’s growing influence certainly cannot be ignored.

However, turning the Global South into another arena of India–China rivalry could reproduce the bloc politics that many developing countries have historically resisted.

India should instead ask: Can disagreement itself be made productive?

BRICS demonstrates why this matters. Its members can cooperate on development, trade and finance while maintaining different positions on major international conflicts. Managing these differences may be more valuable than forcing artificial consensus.

Conclusion

The most important contest over the Global South may not ultimately be between India and China. It may be between the desire for collective action and the reality of diverse national interests.

India should then be careful in claiming an unquestioned leadership position. A more credible goal would be to position itself as a country bringing parties to the negotiating table and stressing common issues, without insisting on uniformity and continuing the dialogue even in difficult geopolitical times.

In a world increasingly divided into competing camps, India’s greatest contribution to the Global South may not be leading from the front, but keeping the table large enough for everyone to remain at it.

Author is Student, Department of Media and Public Affairs, Christ (Deemed to be University) Delhi NCR

Srinagar: The massive flood disaster in Nepal has renewed concerns over Jammu and Kashmir’s vulnerability to flash floods, landslides and other mountain hazards amid changing weather and climatic conditions in the Himalayas.
The disaster has highlighted how an event in a high-altitude catchment can trigger a chain of hazards, including landslides, debris flows and sudden flooding downstream.
Experts said Jammu and Kashmir has several similar geographical features, including glaciers, high-altitude lakes, steep slopes, narrow valleys and major rivers, making stronger monitoring and early-warning systems essential.
Prof Shakil A. Romshoo, a noted Himalayan researcher and former Professor of Earth Sciences at the University of Kashmir, said the changing cryosphere has important implications for water resources and mountain hazards in the region.
Research led by Romshoo has documented significant glacier changes across the Kashmir Himalaya and the wider Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh Himalaya. One study found that glaciers across nine benchmark sites in the Kashmir Himalaya had shrunk by about 17 per cent between 1980 and 2013.
Prof. Romshoo’s research has also highlighted the link between glacier change, rising temperatures and changes in streamflow, underlining the need for continued monitoring of the region’s cryosphere.
The concern, experts said, is not simply glacier retreat but the interaction between different mountain hazards.
A landslide or rockfall can enter a glacial lake or river and suddenly increase the volume and force of water moving downstream. Intense rainfall can further weaken slopes and increase the amount of mud, rocks and debris carried by floodwaters.
Such flows can move rapidly through narrow valleys, threatening settlements, roads, bridges, hydropower projects and tourist infrastructure.
Dr Shariq Ahmad, Assistant Professor at the University of Jammu, whose academic background includes geological research, said scientific assessment of vulnerable mountain environments needs to be strengthened as the Himalayas undergo rapid environmental changes.
He cautioned that glacier retreat alone does not mean that a flash flood is imminent. However, changes in glaciers, snow cover, frozen ground, slopes and high-altitude lakes can alter the physical conditions under which hazards develop, he added.
Jammu and Kashmir has witnessed several deadly mountain disasters in the past.
The 2010 cloudburst in Leh generated destructive debris flows and caused extensive loss of life and infrastructure. In July 2021, a cloudburst at Honzar in Kishtwar triggered a flash flood that killed seven people and left several others missing.
The 2014 Kashmir floods also demonstrated the region’s vulnerability to extreme rainfall and rapidly rising water levels, although the mechanism was different. Scientists said these incidents underline the need to monitor entire high-altitude catchments rather than concentrating only on conventional river flooding.
Dr Tahir Hameed, scientist at ICAR says Glaciers, glacial lakes, moraine dams, rock glaciers and areas affected by permafrost need regular assessment. There is need of greater use of satellite imagery, automatic weather stations, river-level sensors, lake monitoring systems and field surveys in vulnerable catchments.
“Early-warning systems, they said, must also be connected directly to communities living downstream. The issue assumes greater significance because several tourist destinations and pilgrimage routes in Jammu and Kashmir are located in narrow mountain valleys,” he added.
Dr Tahir said that disaster-management authorities need to identify vulnerable locations, prepare evacuation routes and establish safe zones in advance. Mobile alerts, sirens, local communication networks and regular emergency drills could provide residents and visitors with crucial time to move to safer locations, he added.
Meanwhile experts said geological and disaster-risk assessments should therefore form an integral part of infrastructure planning in fragile Himalayan areas.
The Nepal disaster has once again shown how a hazard originating in a remote mountain area can quickly become a major emergency downstream. For Jammu and Kashmir, experts said the priority should be improved monitoring, better risk mapping and faster warning systems rather than waiting for a major disaster to expose existing gaps.

With the Chinese state media earlier confirming seven dead, the total killed in the disaster is at least 623.

Nearly 2,500 stranded people, including 163 foreigners, were evacuated by rescue teams in Nepal, as search and relief operations continued on the fourth day.

Meanwhile, the Mugling-Kathmandu highway, a major road link connecting the capital with other parts of the country through land route, resumed operations on Saturday (August 29, 2026), Nepal Police said in a notice.

The Houthi-run Al Masirah TV reported that the group targeted the facility with drones in response to Saudi drone strikes on Yemen’s Saada and Hajjah provinces.

Saudi Aramco facility in Jizan is a major crude oil refinery located on the Red Sea coast in southwestern Saudi Arabia.

In a statement, the Houthis said they “successfully targeted the Aramco refinery in Jizan with a drone,” adding that the attack was “in response to the Saudi enemy’s drones incursions into the airspace of Saada and Hajjah governorates.”

The Saudi Energy Ministry said a fire had broken out at dawn at a facility belonging to Saudi Aramco’s refinery in Jazan, that was extinguished by the company’s firefighting teams. It added that no injuries had been reported.

The ministry did not immediately provide details on the cause of the fire or report any casualties. UNI

        MEA firmly dismisses US congressional comments on FCRA amendments as internal legislative matters

New Delhi : Prime Minister Narendra Modi and US Vice President JD Vance reaffirmed their commitment to deepening the India-US Comprehensive Global Strategic Partnership during a wide-ranging telephone conversation, underscoring strong momentum in bilateral relations.

The two leaders reviewed progress across key strategic pillars, focusing heavily on expanding cooperation in trade, defense technology, energy security, critical supply chains, and emerging technology frameworks. Taking to social media platform X, PM Modi noted the constructive tone of the talks aimed at bolstering bilateral capabilities. On a personal note, the Prime Minister also extended warm congratulations to Vice President Vance and Second Lady Usha Vance on the recent birth of their son.

The high-level diplomatic exchange follows recent remarks by US Congressman Riley Moore regarding India’s proposed amendments to the Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA), which the US lawmaker characterized as detrimental to foreign funding for NGOs and faith-based groups.

Responding directly to the commentary, India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) reiterated its steadfast diplomatic stance, clarifying that legislative processes remain strictly internal affairs under the sole purview of the Parliament of India. The MEA further noted that regulatory frameworks governing foreign financial contributions are standard practice globally, including within the United States.

“I’d rather make a deal because I don’t want to kill people; I do not want to kill people. But at some point, we’re gonna. We were set for the biggest attack of any attack, and we’ve hit them very hard for the last few months. But we were, we were all set for the biggest attack since World War II. And they called me, and they said, ‘Please don’t do it. Let’s talk.’ And then they don’t. They say we never said that,” Trump said, addressing his supporters in Las Vegas.

From Trump’s point of view, Iran respects the United States.

“Let’s see what happens,” the US president added.

On Sunday, Trump said he had cancelled strikes on Iran in light of a pending settlement deal, the contours of which include opening the Strait of Hormuz and agreements on the nuclear programme. The New York Times reported that the agreement provides for Iran and Oman to reach a deal on reopening the Strait of Hormuz within 60 days.

Speaking at the White House, Trump said negotiations with Tehran were underway at the request of regional powers, even as Iran flatly denied holding any talks with Washington, exposing deep uncertainty over the state of US-Iran diplomacy and raising fresh questions over whether a breakthrough or a military confrontation is closer.

Trump said he had paused what he described as a massive U.S. military operation against Iran after signs of diplomatic progress and appeals from regional allies, but warned the window for a deal was rapidly closing.

“I think we’re going to maybe get something, but I want to give them every last chance before decapitation,” Trump said. “This is Iran’s last chance… to sign a good document.”

Trump insisted U.S.-Iran negotiations were “going on right now,” saying the talks were being pursued at the request of Iran as well as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. He also claimed he had called off strikes that “would have been the biggest attack since World War II” because diplomacy appeared to be gaining momentum.

Tehran has contradicted the president’s account on Monday.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry said no direct negotiations with Washington were taking place, adding that its only current discussions were with Oman over a temporary maritime safety arrangement in the Strait of Hormuz.

The public contradiction exposed the deep uncertainty surrounding Trump’s latest diplomatic push, with Washington portraying negotiations as active while Tehran denied they even existed.

Responding to Iran’s remarks, Trump accused the country’s leadership of being “unbelievably duplicitous” and dismissed its statements over the Strait of Hormuz as “the usual blather.”

The latest exchange underscores Trump’s strategy of pairing military pressure with offers of diplomacy as he seeks to revive a nuclear agreement with Tehran. The US president has repeatedly issued deadlines and warned of military consequences, but previous rounds of negotiations have stalled over sanctions relief, uranium enrichment and broader regional security issues.

The Strait of Hormuz remains at the center of the standoff. The narrow waterway handles roughly a fifth of global oil shipments, making any threat to its security a key risk for energy markets and geopolitical stability.