Ukraine is investigating Belarus' suspected involvement in the forced transfer of minors from Russian-occupied territory, the prosecutor general's office said on Tuesday (May 23).

The declaration followed an allegation by the exiled Belarusian opposition saying that 2,150 Ukrainian children, including orphans aged six to 15, had been shipped to so-called recreation camps and sanatoriums in Belarus.

Based on the early assessment of the National Anti-Crisis Management, a group of political opponents of President Alexander Lukashenko's regime, the children were transferred to at least three locations in Belarus.

The office of Prosecutor General Andriy Kostin has opened criminal procedures into "the forced transportation/deportation of over 19,000 children" from the seized areas of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, and Luhansk, as per a Reuters report.&nbsp;

"The fact and circumstances of taking Ukrainian children from the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine to the so-called 'recreational camps' in Belarus are currently under investigation in the mentioned criminal proceedings," it said.

ALSO READ |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/russia-intercepts-us-military-jets-over-baltic-sea-595713">Russia intercepts two US military jets over Baltic Sea</a>

<h2>What are the violations involved?</h2>

The International Criminal Court, the world's permanent war crimes tribunal, issued arrest warrants in March for Russian President Vladimir Putin and his children's rights ombudsman, Maria Lvova-Belova, on two charges of war crimes in connection with the relocation of hundreds of Ukrainian children to Russia.

In the words of Yulia Ioffe, an assistant professor at University College London and an expert in children's rights legislation, if the allegations are proven, Belarus would "highly likely" be violating the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

"The actions of Belarus may also amount to the crime against humanity of ‘deportation of forcible transfer of population’ under the Rome Statute of the ICC, provided there is sufficient evidence of forcible transfers being widespread or systematic," Ioffe said.

Belarus, in any case, cannot be deemed a neutral nation to which children might lawfully be evacuated because there is no proof that Ukraine has provided authorisation, she added.

As per&nbsp;the report, Ukrainian children were brought to the Belarusian Golden Sands Sanatorium in the Gomel area, as well as the Ostroshitsky Gorodok Sanatorium and Dubrava camp in the Minsk region.

ALSO WATCH |&nbsp;Russia-Ukraine war: Why does Ukraine wants F-16 jets?&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/russia-ukraine-war-why-does-ukraine-wants-f-16-jets-595724/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The transfers of minors to Belarus were illegal and violated the Geneva Conventions and the statute of the International Criminal Court, the report said.

Additionally,&nbsp;the first group of roughly 350 youngsters arrived from the seized Donetsk area on September 5 and 6, followed by the second and third groups in late September and mid-October. Additional transfers were performed in April and May of this year.

The children were transported&nbsp;by bus to Russia from Russian-held territories of Ukraine and then by train to Belarus, it said.

"Lukashenko personally ordered the transfers of orphans to Belarus and facilitated their arrival by financial and organisational support," it said, accusing him of war crimes.

(With inputs from agencies)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

<iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe>

Ukraine is investigating Belarus' suspected involvement in the forced transfer of minors from Russian-occupied territory, the prosecutor general's office said on Tuesday (May 23).

Ukraine is investigating Belarus' suspected involvement in the forced transfer of minors from Russian-occupied territory, the prosecutor general's office said on Tuesday (May 23). The declaration followed an allegation by the exiled Belarusian opposition saying that 2,150 Ukrainian children, including orphans aged six to 15, had been shipped to so-called recreation camps and sanatoriums in Belarus. Based on the early assessment of the National Anti-Crisis Management, a group of political opponents of President Alexander Lukashenko's regime, the children were transferred to at least three locations in Belarus. The office of Prosecutor General Andriy Kostin has opened criminal procedures into "the forced transportation/deportation of over 19,000 children" from the seized areas of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, and Luhansk, as per a Reuters report. "The fact and circumstances of taking Ukrainian children from the temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine to the so-called 'recreational camps' in Belarus are currently under investigation in the mentioned criminal proceedings," it said. ALSO READ | Russia intercepts two US military jets over Baltic Sea What are the violations involved? The International Criminal Court, the world's permanent war crimes tribunal, issued arrest warrants in March for Russian President Vladimir Putin and his children's rights ombudsman, Maria Lvova-Belova, on two charges of war crimes in connection with the relocation of hundreds of Ukrainian children to Russia. In the words of Yulia Ioffe, an assistant professor at University College London and an expert in children's rights legislation, if the allegations are proven, Belarus would "highly likely" be violating the Convention on the Rights of the Child. "The actions of Belarus may also amount to the crime against humanity of ‘deportation of forcible transfer of population’ under the Rome Statute of the ICC, provided there is sufficient evidence of forcible transfers being widespread or systematic," Ioffe said. Belarus, in any case, cannot be deemed a neutral nation to which children might lawfully be evacuated because there is no proof that Ukraine has provided authorisation, she added. As per the report, Ukrainian children were brought to the Belarusian Golden Sands Sanatorium in the Gomel area, as well as the Ostroshitsky Gorodok Sanatorium and Dubrava camp in the Minsk region. ALSO WATCH | Russia-Ukraine war: Why does Ukraine wants F-16 jets? The transfers of minors to Belarus were illegal and violated the Geneva Conventions and the statute of the International Criminal Court, the report said. Additionally, the first group of roughly 350 youngsters arrived from the seized Donetsk area on September 5 and 6, followed by the second and third groups in late September and mid-October. Additional transfers were performed in April and May of this year. The children were transported by bus to Russia from Russian-held territories of Ukraine and then by train to Belarus, it said. "Lukashenko personally ordered the transfers of orphans to Belarus and facilitated their arrival by financial and organisational support," it said, accusing him of war crimes. (With inputs from agencies) WATCH WION LIVE HERE:

Ukraine probing reports of 2,150 children being shipped to Belarus, says prosecutor

Three fighters who were captured while fighting for Ukraine and sentenced to death are being used as ‘hostages’ by Russia to put pressure on the West over peace negotiations, a senior Ukrainian official said on Friday.&nbsp;

"The trial of the foreigners raises the stakes in the Russian Federation's negotiation process. They are using them as hostages to put pressure on the world over the negotiation process," he told national television.

Two Britons and a Moroccan received the death sentence on Thursday from a court in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR), one of Russia's proxies in eastern Ukraine, Russian news agencies reported.

They were brought to trial after a Ukrainian court sentenced a Russian soldier to life in prison last month for killing an unarmed civilian in Ukraine.&nbsp;

Kyiv said Thursday's court ruling had no authority, that the fighters were members of the Ukrainian armed forces and that they were subject to Geneva Convention protections.

Vadym Denysenko, an Interior Ministry adviser, said on Friday Ukraine would coordinate its position on the sentences with Britain, the United States and the European Union.

Peace talks between Ukraine and Russia are frozen. Russia has accused Ukraine of blocking talks, but Kyiv says Moscow is to blame.

Britain on Friday condemned Russian proxy authorities in Donbas for what it called an "egregious breach" of the Geneva convention in sentencing to death two British nationals captured in the separatist region while fighting for Ukraine.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson's spokesman said he was talking to Ukraine rather than Russia over the situation facing Aiden Aslin and Shaun Pinner, who were convicted of "mercenary activities" on Thursday by a court in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR).

Aslin's family said he and Pinner "are not, and never were mercenaries."

They had been living in Ukraine when the war broke out and "as members of Ukrainian armed forces, should be treated with respect just like any other prisoners of war," the family said in a statement.

[with inputs from agencies]

 
&nbsp;

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

Three fighters who were captured while fighting for Ukraine and sentenced to death are being used as ‘hostages’ by Russia to put pressure on the West over peace negotiations, a senior Ukrainian official said on Friday.

Three fighters who were captured while fighting for Ukraine and sentenced to death are being used as ‘hostages’ by Russia to put pressure on the West over peace negotiations, a senior Ukrainian official said on Friday. "The trial of the foreigners raises the stakes in the Russian Federation's negotiation process. They are using them as hostages to put pressure on the world over the negotiation process," he told national television. Two Britons and a Moroccan received the death sentence on Thursday from a court in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR), one of Russia's proxies in eastern Ukraine, Russian news agencies reported. They were brought to trial after a Ukrainian court sentenced a Russian soldier to life in prison last month for killing an unarmed civilian in Ukraine. Kyiv said Thursday's court ruling had no authority, that the fighters were members of the Ukrainian armed forces and that they were subject to Geneva Convention protections. Vadym Denysenko, an Interior Ministry adviser, said on Friday Ukraine would coordinate its position on the sentences with Britain, the United States and the European Union. Peace talks between Ukraine and Russia are frozen. Russia has accused Ukraine of blocking talks, but Kyiv says Moscow is to blame. Britain on Friday condemned Russian proxy authorities in Donbas for what it called an "egregious breach" of the Geneva convention in sentencing to death two British nationals captured in the separatist region while fighting for Ukraine. Prime Minister Boris Johnson's spokesman said he was talking to Ukraine rather than Russia over the situation facing Aiden Aslin and Shaun Pinner, who were convicted of "mercenary activities" on Thursday by a court in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic (DPR). Aslin's family said he and Pinner "are not, and never were mercenaries." They had been living in Ukraine when the war broke out and "as members of Ukrainian armed forces, should be treated with respect just like any other prisoners of war," the family said in a statement. [with inputs from agencies] WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

Ukrainian official says Russia wants to use captured fighters as ‘hostages’

For a while, it wasn’t clear that this week’s meeting in Geneva between President Vladimir Putin of Russia and President Biden would go ahead.

Mr. Biden, seeking his first encounter as president with Mr. Putin, made the invitation in&nbsp;mid-April; but it took until the&nbsp;end of May&nbsp;for the summit to be confirmed. Despite Mr. Putin’s experience with American presidents, he’s dealt with four, across two decades, the Kremlin, Russian officials said, was considering the risk that Mr. Biden would use the meeting to publicly lecture his Russian counterpart on democracy and human rights.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/live-blog-will-not-tolerate-violence-of-democratic-sovereignty-biden-tells-putin-391919">Live blog: Will not tolerate violence of democratic sovereignty, Biden tells Putin</a>

The caution seemed reasonable. After all, the new American administration, especially by comparison with its predecessor, devotes considerable attention to promoting human rights across the globe. And Mr. Biden set out his stall when he agreed in an interview in March that Mr. Putin is a “killer.”

Yet the Kremlin eventually accepted the invitation. Why? Besides the chance to de-escalate tensions, there’s one very good reason: Mr. Putin has nothing to fear from Mr. Biden. Enduringly popular and freshly buoyed by the quashing of the opposition, Russia’s president has ample cause to feel secure. Whatever the American president might say in Geneva — or his administration do, by way of sanctions — will not affect Mr. Putin’s rule in Russia.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/no-joint-press-conference-after-biden-putin-meet-says-white-house-391043">No joint press conference after Biden-Putin meet, says White House</a>

The first impediment for Mr. Biden is straightforward: His message will not get a good airing. Television, dominated by channels run or controlled by the state, remains the main source of news for&nbsp;three-quarters of Russians, so most people in Russia will see the American president through the Kremlin’s eyes. Independent media, recently curtailed by the authorities declaring several prominent outlets to be “foreign agents,” won’t be able to redress the imbalance.

Yet even without this media filter, Mr. Putin has no reason to fear any aspersions Mr. Biden might cast his way. Though the president’s popularity has waned a touch since its peak in 2014, he retains the trust and approval of over 60 per cent of Russians, according to&nbsp;Levada Center, an independent and highly respected polling organization. This might be more inertia and apathy than a conscious political affiliation, but the result is the same. The opposition can only dream about such ratings: Support for the most prominent opposition leader, Aleksei Navalny, doesn’t rise above&nbsp;20 per cent.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/excessive-expectations-over-biden-putin-summit-kremlin-387559">Excessive expectations over Biden-Putin summit: Kremlin</a>

The blame for that can’t be placed squarely on the Kremlin. Though the opposition is hampered by a range of state restrictions, the fact remains that opposition rallies do not attract significant numbers of participants. The last big protest in support of Mr. Navalny — one of the largest&nbsp;displays of dissent&nbsp;in the past decade, brought between&nbsp;51,000 and 120,000&nbsp;people to 109 cities across the country on April 21, according to opposition outlets. But even if you take the higher number, that amounts to less than 0.1 per cent of the country’s population. Protesting is a minority interest.

And that’s not just because Russian authorities have repeatedly demonstrated their willingness&nbsp;to brutally suppress gatherings. Many people unhappy with life in Russia stay away from protests because they don’t associate themselves with the organizers and don’t believe they can bring about change from the street. In a&nbsp;recent survey&nbsp;by the Levada Center, only 21 per cent of respondents said they would consider going to a rally in support of economic demands, and even fewer, 16 per cent, said they’d go in support of political demands. There are demographic divides, young people are generally more eager to protest, but that doesn’t really change the picture.

What’s more, those ready to actively challenge Mr. Putin’s rule have been repressed. Mr. Navalny, who returned to the country in January in the hope of setting off a substantive movement to oppose Mr. Putin,&nbsp;was imprisoned&nbsp;with a two-and-a-half-year sentence. Many of his allies were jailed, while others fled the country. And last week, his organization, the Anti-Corruption Foundation, whose activities were already suspended, was officially&nbsp;labeled “extremist”&nbsp;— effectively preventing its activists from running in future elections and further intimidating supporters.

It’s not just Mr. Navalny. Another opposition network;&nbsp;Open Russia, founded by a former oil tycoon and now exiled Kremlin critic, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, recently&nbsp;announced its closure, hoping to protect its coordinators. That didn’t stop the arrest on May 31 of one of the group’s executives,&nbsp;Andrey Pivovarov, who now faces up to&nbsp;six years in prison. Fearing the same fate, another prominent opposition figure,&nbsp;Dmitry Gudkov, fled to Ukraine in early June.

Ahead of September’s legislative elections, the authorities have disbanded the opposition and docked the media, closing down the space for dissent. But a majority of Russians, consumed by the concerns of everyday life and long inured to Mr. Putin’s rule, don’t seem to care much. With them, Mr. Biden’s message about the inviolability of human rights and the sanctity of democracy, both of which are slipping away in Russia, to no general uproar, is likely to ring hollow.

Even among Russians who actively support democracy, the rule of law and human rights, Mr. Biden won’t find much support. Over the past decades, many Russian liberals have become&nbsp;disillusioned with the West, especially the United States. For some, America’s image started to crack with the bombing of Yugoslavia and the war in Iraq. For others, it was the revelations of WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden, which brought to light a host of America’s covert operations and dirty dealings, that soured feelings of admiration.

And for many, the presidency of Donald Trump, during which Washington abandoned international agreements, treated allies as clients, badly mismanaged the pandemic and, most important, exacerbated political polarisation and social dysfunction, definitively&nbsp;stripped America of its authority. With this legacy, no American president would have a substantial audience in Russia.

Secure internally and with little to lose, Vladimir Putin is ready for President Biden. As for his image in the United States and the rest of the West, it’s fair to assume, after years as their arch-villain and evil mastermind, that Mr. Putin couldn’t care less.

For a while, it wasn’t clear that this week’s meeting in Geneva between President Vladimir Putin of Russia and President Biden would go ahead. Mr. Biden, seeking his first encounter as president with Mr.

For a while, it wasn’t clear that this week’s meeting in Geneva between President Vladimir Putin of Russia and President Biden would go ahead. Mr. Biden, seeking his first encounter as president with Mr. Putin, made the invitation in mid-April; but it took until the end of May for the summit to be confirmed. Despite Mr. Putin’s experience with American presidents, he’s dealt with four, across two decades, the Kremlin, Russian officials said, was considering the risk that Mr. Biden would use the meeting to publicly lecture his Russian counterpart on democracy and human rights. Also read | Live blog: Will not tolerate violence of democratic sovereignty, Biden tells Putin The caution seemed reasonable. After all, the new American administration, especially by comparison with its predecessor, devotes considerable attention to promoting human rights across the globe. And Mr. Biden set out his stall when he agreed in an interview in March that Mr. Putin is a “killer.” Yet the Kremlin eventually accepted the invitation. Why? Besides the chance to de-escalate tensions, there’s one very good reason: Mr. Putin has nothing to fear from Mr. Biden. Enduringly popular and freshly buoyed by the quashing of the opposition, Russia’s president has ample cause to feel secure. Whatever the American president might say in Geneva — or his administration do, by way of sanctions — will not affect Mr. Putin’s rule in Russia. Also read | No joint press conference after Biden-Putin meet, says White House The first impediment for Mr. Biden is straightforward: His message will not get a good airing. Television, dominated by channels run or controlled by the state, remains the main source of news for three-quarters of Russians, so most people in Russia will see the American president through the Kremlin’s eyes. Independent media, recently curtailed by the authorities declaring several prominent outlets to be “foreign agents,” won’t be able to redress the imbalance. Yet even without this media filter, Mr. Putin has no reason to fear any aspersions Mr. Biden might cast his way. Though the president’s popularity has waned a touch since its peak in 2014, he retains the trust and approval of over 60 per cent of Russians, according to Levada Center, an independent and highly respected polling organization. This might be more inertia and apathy than a conscious political affiliation, but the result is the same. The opposition can only dream about such ratings: Support for the most prominent opposition leader, Aleksei Navalny, doesn’t rise above 20 per cent. Also read | Excessive expectations over Biden-Putin summit: Kremlin The blame for that can’t be placed squarely on the Kremlin. Though the opposition is hampered by a range of state restrictions, the fact remains that opposition rallies do not attract significant numbers of participants. The last big protest in support of Mr. Navalny — one of the largest displays of dissent in the past decade, brought between 51,000 and 120,000 people to 109 cities across the country on April 21, according to opposition outlets. But even if you take the higher number, that amounts to less than 0.1 per cent of the country’s population. Protesting is a minority interest. And that’s not just because Russian authorities have repeatedly demonstrated their willingness to brutally suppress gatherings. Many people unhappy with life in Russia stay away from protests because they don’t associate themselves with the organizers and don’t believe they can bring about change from the street. In a recent survey by the Levada Center, only 21 per cent of respondents said they would consider going to a rally in support of economic demands, and even fewer, 16 per cent, said they’d go in support of political demands. There are demographic divides, young people are generally more eager to protest, but that doesn’t really change the picture. What’s more, those ready to actively challenge Mr. Putin’s rule have been repressed. Mr. Navalny, who returned to the country in January in the hope of setting off a substantive movement to oppose Mr. Putin, was imprisoned with a two-and-a-half-year sentence. Many of his allies were jailed, while others fled the country. And last week, his organization, the Anti-Corruption Foundation, whose activities were already suspended, was officially labeled “extremist” — effectively preventing its activists from running in future elections and further intimidating supporters. It’s not just Mr. Navalny. Another opposition network; Open Russia, founded by a former oil tycoon and now exiled Kremlin critic, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, recently announced its closure, hoping to protect its coordinators. That didn’t stop the arrest on May 31 of one of the group’s executives, Andrey Pivovarov, who now faces up to six years in prison. Fearing the same fate, another prominent opposition figure, Dmitry Gudkov, fled to Ukraine in early June. Ahead of September’s legislative elections, the authorities have disbanded the opposition and docked the media, closing down the space for dissent. But a majority of Russians, consumed by the concerns of everyday life and long inured to Mr. Putin’s rule, don’t seem to care much. With them, Mr. Biden’s message about the inviolability of human rights and the sanctity of democracy, both of which are slipping away in Russia, to no general uproar, is likely to ring hollow. Even among Russians who actively support democracy, the rule of law and human rights, Mr. Biden won’t find much support. Over the past decades, many Russian liberals have become disillusioned with the West, especially the United States. For some, America’s image started to crack with the bombing of Yugoslavia and the war in Iraq. For others, it was the revelations of WikiLeaks and Edward Snowden, which brought to light a host of America’s covert operations and dirty dealings, that soured feelings of admiration. And for many, the presidency of Donald Trump, during which Washington abandoned international agreements, treated allies as clients, badly mismanaged the pandemic and, most important, exacerbated political polarisation and social dysfunction, definitively stripped America of its authority. With this legacy, no American president would have a substantial audience in Russia. Secure internally and with little to lose, Vladimir Putin is ready for President Biden. As for his image in the United States and the rest of the West, it’s fair to assume, after years as their arch-villain and evil mastermind, that Mr. Putin couldn’t care less.

Sorry, Biden. Putin honestly could not care less.

After India asked for immediate <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-pakistan-standoff-us-supports-indias-airstrikes-on-jem-terror-camp-and-other-developments-200164">release of the pilot from Pakistan</a>, a media report said &nbsp;foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was willing to consider returning the Indian pilot it it lead to "de-escalation".

A government source had said earlier that India won't allow a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/wont-allow-a-kandahar-this-time-pakistan-must-immediately-send-our-pilot-back-says-india-200264">"Kandahar-like" situation</a> this time. &nbsp;"If they think they will hold us hostage with our captured defence personnel, this won't happen," the sources added.

Meanwhile, Pakistan's Foreign Office (FO) said that the Indian Air Force (IAF) pilot was safe and sound. "The armed forces rescued him from the mob that went after him after his plane crashed in Kashmir," the FO said.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7FerNiFKzs8" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

India on Wednesday had summoned the acting high commissioner of Pakistan&nbsp;Syed Haider Shah&nbsp; and demanded immediate and safe return of the IAF pilot who was detained by Pakistan following an aerial engagement by Air forces of the two countries.

"It has also been made clear to Pakistan that no harm should be caused to the Indian defence personnel, the external affairs ministry said, adding that it had conveyed "strong objection" to the Pakistan deputy high commissioner at the "vulgar display" of an injured personnel in violation of all norms of international humanitarian law and the Geneva Convention.&nbsp;

As tensions between the two nations continued to rise, US President Donald Trump sought to cool nerves asserting that &nbsp;"reasonably attractive" news was set to come from Pakistan and India.&nbsp;

Speaking to reporters in Hanoi, Vietnam after the second summit with North Korean leader Kim, Trump said, "We have reasonably attractive news from Pakistan and India. They have been going at it we have been involved in trying to help them stop. And we have some reasonably decent news."

He added, "I think, hopefully that will be coming to an end. It's being going for a long time. Decades and decades. There is a lot of dislike unfortunately." 
&nbsp;

After India asked for immediate release of the pilot from Pakistan, a media report said foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was willing to consider returning the Indian pilot it it lead to "de-escalation".

After India asked for immediate release of the pilot from Pakistan, a media report said foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was willing to consider returning the Indian pilot it it lead to "de-escalation". A government source had said earlier that India won't allow a "Kandahar-like" situation this time. "If they think they will hold us hostage with our captured defence personnel, this won't happen," the sources added. Meanwhile, Pakistan's Foreign Office (FO) said that the Indian Air Force (IAF) pilot was safe and sound. "The armed forces rescued him from the mob that went after him after his plane crashed in Kashmir," the FO said. India on Wednesday had summoned the acting high commissioner of Pakistan Syed Haider Shah and demanded immediate and safe return of the IAF pilot who was detained by Pakistan following an aerial engagement by Air forces of the two countries. "It has also been made clear to Pakistan that no harm should be caused to the Indian defence personnel, the external affairs ministry said, adding that it had conveyed "strong objection" to the Pakistan deputy high commissioner at the "vulgar display" of an injured personnel in violation of all norms of international humanitarian law and the Geneva Convention. As tensions between the two nations continued to rise, US President Donald Trump sought to cool nerves asserting that "reasonably attractive" news was set to come from Pakistan and India. Speaking to reporters in Hanoi, Vietnam after the second summit with North Korean leader Kim, Trump said, "We have reasonably attractive news from Pakistan and India. They have been going at it we have been involved in trying to help them stop. And we have some reasonably decent news." He added, "I think, hopefully that will be coming to an end. It's being going for a long time. Decades and decades. There is a lot of dislike unfortunately."

After India refuses to negotiate pilot's return, Pak foreign minister Qureshi says ready to send him back if it leads to 'de-escalation'