TOKYO — Eighty-five years after his ticket was first issued for a similar event, a man was allowed to use it at this year's World Expo in Japan. Fumiya Takenawa attended Expo 2025 in the city of Osaka with a ticket that was originally issued for the Grand International Exposition of Japan in 1940, the organizers of this year's event said said in a statement on Monday. They added that the original event did not take place because of Japan’s “intensifying war” in the region. Takenawa, 25, bought the old ticket in March in an online sale, he told Japan’s Mainichi newspaper, adding that he likes collecting things from old expos and had initially used it as home decoration. But after wondering whether it could be used for this year's event, he said he approached the organizers who agreed he could use it. “This is my first expo, and I feel part of history,” he said, adding that he visited the Czech and Saudi Arabian pavilions at the expo. “The person who had this ticket before me waited 85 years, and now their wish finally came true,” he said. Although he lives in Tokyo, he said he would like to revisit the expo when he travels to Osaka to see his family. The Expo, also known as World’s Fair, showcases scientific, technological, economic, and social progress from around the planet. Launched in 1851 London’s Crystal Palace, it is now held every five years in different locations under the supervision of an intergovernmental organization. The event in 1940 is known as the “phantom Expo” as it never happened, the organizers said, adding that those with tickets for it have previously been allowed to attend the 1970 expo in Osaka and the 2005 expo in the Japanese prefecture of Aichi. Other people with tickets from the canceled expo in 1940 would also be able to attend, they said. Arata Yamamoto reported from Tokyo, and Julia Zhong reported from Hong Kong.

MOSCOW — Russia marked the 80th anniversary of the World War II victory over Nazi Germany on Friday with a parade attended by Chinese President Xi Jinping, as the two countries vowed to strengthen ties and “firmly” counter U.S. influence. Amid tight security after Ukrainian drone attacks on Moscow this week, thousands of Russian troops marched on Red Square, with military units from China and 12 other countries also taking part. For Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is the subject of an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court over alleged war crimes in Ukraine, the parade was an opportunity to show that he is not isolated on the global stage. It also casts a spotlight on the post-WWII, U.S.-led international order that President Donald Trump now appears bent on dismantling, leaving Russia and China to portray themselves as its defenders. Xi signaled his support for Putin in both actions and words, arriving on Wednesday for a four-day visit shortly after the Ukrainian drone attacks disrupted flights in and out of Moscow. “China will work with Russia to shoulder the special responsibilities of major world powers,” Xi told Putin on Thursday, adding that the two countries should be “friends of steel.” In a lengthy joint statement, Xi and Putin said they would deepen military and other ties and “strengthen coordination and jointly respond firmly to the United States’ policy of ‘dual containment’ against both countries.” Xi’s visit comes as the Trump administration is seeking a 30-day “unconditional ceasefire” between Russia and Ukraine, and ahead of U.S.-China trade talks this weekend, the first since Trump imposed steep tariffs on U.S. trading partners around the world. Xi was among 29 world leaders expected to attend the commemorations, according to the Kremlin. Diplomats from other countries said the Chinese leader’s presence had factored into their decisions to come. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had warned world leaders against attending the commemorations, saying it would undermine some countries’ declared neutrality in the Ukraine war. But Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva told NBC News that Zelenskyy had asked him to deliver a message to Putin calling for a sustained ceasefire. The Ukrainian government did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Lula insisted that standing with Putin in Red Square “will not strengthen” the Russian leader. “Brazil’s position has not changed,” he said in an interview Thursday. “Brazil is critical of Ukrainian occupation and we have to find peace.” Also in attendance was Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, who said in an interview that he shared a “common opinion” with Putin and Xi. “China will definitely be with Russia. We need to get used to this,” he added. Asked about an end to the war in Ukraine, he said Putin “does not owe anyone anything.” He added that Russia was “ready not just for a ceasefire, but to conclude peace.” Moscow does not look like a city that wants peace at any cost. Ahead of the parade, hotel workers, officials and many members of the public wore the orange-and-black ribbon of St. George, a Russian military symbol that especially since Putin’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine has been associated with Russian nationalism and militarism. Streets were draped in the same colors. Huge billboards connected the World War II anniversary with Putin’s “special military operation” in Ukraine, while others welcomed world leaders individually, including those of Cuba and Venezuela. May 9 is a hallowed day for the former Soviet Union, which lost 27 million people during World War II. But the parade on Friday was haunted by the war in Ukraine, now in its fourth year. China, Russia’s biggest trading partner, has strived to portray itself as neutral in the Ukraine war while supporting Russia diplomatically and economically. “The relationship has solidified over the course of the war,” said Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center. During Xi’s visit this week, he said, “there was a very clear message that this alignment can really not be split.” Xi told Putin on Thursday that he hoped for “a fair and durable peace deal that is binding and accepted by all parties concerned.” Xi will leave Russia on Saturday, as U.S. and Chinese officials meet in Switzerland to discuss mounting tariffs between the two countries that have rattled the global economy. China agreed to the talks without any U.S. concessions, suggesting the tariffs “are having their intended effect,” said Craig Singleton, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Earlier this week, Beijing announced sweeping policy steps to bolster its economy, including interest rate cuts and measures to support employment and struggling sectors such as real estate. “These are not the actions of a confident regime,” Singleton said. “They’re the moves of a leadership racing to contain economic fallout before it metastasizes into political risk.” China said this week that the meeting was requested by the U.S. side and that while was it was open to talks, they “must be based on equality, respect and mutual benefit.” Trump suggested Thursday that U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports could go down as a result of the talks, telling reporters, “you can’t get any higher” than the current rate of 145%. But the talks are unlikely to lead to an immediate bilateral tariff reduction, the Economist Intelligence Unit financial forecasting service said in a note Thursday. “The two countries will continue to disagree over their preferred tariff rates and what concessions need to be made to allow for de-escalation,” it said. “Nonetheless, the exchange of positions between them will be constructive, in contrast to a standstill.” Keir Simmons and Natasha Lebedeva reported from Moscow, and Jennifer Jett from Hong Kong.

President Donald Trump has signaled a willingness to drastically cut the U.S.' current 145% tariff rate on China ahead of trade talks between the two countries. Trump wrote in a Truth Social post Friday morning: "80% Tariff on China seems right! Up to Scott B.," appearing to refer to Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. The post comes a day before Bessent and U.S. Trade Rep. Jamieson Greer meet with their Chinese counterparts in Geneva for trade discussions. Trump indicated Thursday that he might be open to lowering the current 145% tariff on China. “ I mean, we’re going to see. Right now, you can’t get any higher,” he said during remarks from the Oval Office. A representative for the Chinese embassy in the U.S. did not immediately respond to a request for comment. An 80% across-the-board tariff would still be far beyond the duties the U.S. had in place on China before Trump took office. He first imposed a 20% levy on America's third-largest source of imports in response to its alleged inaction on curbing fentanyl flows, then signed an executive order several weeks later imposing 125% duties. In general, Trump's unwieldy approach to tariffs negotiations has continued unabated: On Thursday, he announced an agreement was being worked out with the U.K. that contained few details but which would leave the U.S.'s 10% across-the-board duty on all countries mostly intact. Yet while the agreement signaled pathways to expand U.S. exports of beef, ethanol and other agricultural products, it provided no guarantees, as yet, that the U.K. would actually increase imports of those products. Trump has attempted to walk back the eye-watering country-by-country duties he announced during his shock "Liberation Day" speech more than a month ago. But sizable levies remain, including 25% duties on all steel, aluminum and auto imports. While discussion of trade deals remains plentiful, actual progress on them has been relatively scarce — leaving business confidence throttled. A number of companies have already changed their forward guidance or reversed it entirely as a result of the uncertainty. It's also not clear that the China tariffs are having Trump's desired effect. In April, according to CNBC calculations, China’s exports surged amid a ramp up in shipments to Southeast Asian countries — an indicator that China may simply be increasing trans-shipment of goods to third-party countries that then export to the U.S., an expert told CNBC.

With suspended cricket matches, power outages and air-raid sirens, fears are swelling of an all-out war between India and Pakistan amid questions over how much of a mediating role the United States will be able to play. The nuclear-armed neighbors engaged in their worst fighting in decades on Wednesday, when India launched an assault on Pakistan in response to a deadly terrorist attack for which New Delhi blames Islamabad. Almost four dozen people were killed in the initial violence between the two countries, including India’s strikes on what it said were “terror camps” and the shelling in response by Pakistan, which denies involvement in the April 22 attack in the disputed Himalayan region of Kashmir. Pakistan claimed partial victory, saying it downed five Indian fighter jets and dozens of drones, which India has not confirmed. India has said it does not wish to escalate but will respond firmly if Pakistan strikes its territory. Both countries accused each other of continuing to launch new attacks on Friday, including shelling towns near their de facto border that Pakistan said killed five civilians. The Indian army also said it had “effectively repulsed” drone attacks by Pakistan, which denied the claim. Villagers have fled their homes amid cross-border violence near the de facto border in Kashmir, which both India and Pakistan claim in full and control in part. Tensions have also escalated to cricket, a cherished sport in both countries. The Indian Premier League, which is among the richest sport leagues in the world, was suspended for one week on Friday amid safety concerns after a match was halted amid the turmoil. Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke with officials in both countries Thursday in the latest U.S. effort to ease tensions. Speaking with Indian External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, Rubio reiterated his condolences over the April 22 terrorist attack in Indian-administered Kashmir, which killed 26 people, most of them Indian tourists. He also “reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to work with India in the fight against terrorism,” the State Department said. In his call with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, Rubio “expressed sorrow for the reported loss of civilian lives in the current conflict,” the State Department said, and “reiterated his calls for Pakistan to take concrete steps to end any support for terrorist groups.” Speaking with NBC News, an official Indian government source dismissed the idea of the U.S. or any other country playing a central mediating role, saying the issues were bilateral and that the message of any government to Pakistan should be to stop supporting terrorism. The source said that India’s strikes targeted terrorist infrastructure and followed 15 days of waiting for the Pakistani government to take its own action against militant groups. An official Pakistani government source called India’s strikes “the ultimate act of provocation.” The source said that the actions taken by Pakistan so far have been in self-defense and that Pakistan reserves the right to respond to strikes on its soil. Pakistan has called for a “neutral” international investigation into the Kashmir attack, and the government source said there was “no shred of evidence” that Islamabad had supported it. President Donald Trump has not engaged directly with the leaders of India and Pakistan but said Wednesday that he wants “to see them work it out” and that “if I can do anything to help, I will be there.” Lisa Curtis, an expert on South Asia at the Washington-based Center for a New American Security, said the Trump administration had sent mixed signals to the two countries and needs to “clean up” its public messaging. Trump initially said the U.S. would not get involved in the crisis, and on Thursday Vice President JD Vance told Fox News, “We’re not going to get involved in the middle of a war that’s fundamentally none of our business.” Rubio has made measured statements calling for reducing tensions, while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said India had a right to defend itself. The U.S. has previously played a key role in defusing conflicts between India and Pakistan, said Curtis, who was senior director for South and Central Asia on the National Security Council from 2017 to 2021. But U.S. relations with Pakistan have deteriorated in recent years, calling into question Washington’s influence with Islamabad. The U.S. has left the door open to supporting Pakistan’s call for further investigation into the terrorist attack. “We want the perpetrators to be held accountable, and are supportive of any efforts to that end,” State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce told reporters Thursday. India responded to the attack by launching military strikes on “terror camps” in Pakistan early Wednesday, which according to Pakistan killed 31 people, including civilians. Pakistan immediately claimed partial victory saying it had downed five Indian fighter jets and dozens of drones, which India has not confirmed. The April 22 attack was the worst of its kind on Indian civilians in two decades and capped years of separatist insurgency and the bitter resentment between the two neighbors over Kashmir, a former princely state and the only Muslim-majority part of India which ceded territory to India in 1947 when the British colonial rule ended. Pakistan and India have since fought three out of their multiple wars over it, and India has long-accused Pakistan of supporting cross-border terrorism, which Islamabad denies. Both countries now lay claim to Kashmir in full but only partly control.

VATICAN CITY — Pope Leo XIV has inherited a raging battle for not only the soul of the Catholic Church, but also its place in the geopolitical world. The new pope will have to decide whether his global pulpit will continue Pope Francis’ broadly progressive legacy, or revert to a more conservative approach. The first American pontiff will grapple with the spiritual decline in the church’s European power base, coupled with its rise in parts of Africa, Asia and Latin America. And he will be forced to confront the legacy of the decadeslong sexual abuse scandal. “Usually the most important thing that the pope has to take care of is the Catholic Church — but right now it’s much more complicated because we are in a time of global disruption,” said Massimo Faggioli, a professor and world-leading expert on the church’s inner workings, based at Villanova University. “The church is much more global than ever before, so the cardinals will have to consider what it means to elect a global leader of the Catholic Church in this situation.” After hundreds of thousands of cases emerged in dozens of countries over the past century, the church’s endemic sexual abuse scandal is far from resolved. Cases continue to be uncovered, and although Francis went further than his predecessors in addressing this, campaigners said he did nowhere near enough. “The next pope must institute a zero tolerance law for sexual abuse that immediately removes abusive clergy and leaders who have covered up abuse from ministry,” Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests, or SNAP, a Chicago-based watchdog, said before Leo was elected. “He must use his authority to enact fundamental, institutional changes to end the systematic practice of sexual abuse and its concealment,” it said. Ideology Francis was widely seen as a progressive force, at least compared with predecessors and peers. He allowed priests to informally bless same-sex couples, asking, “Who am I to judge?” And over doctrinal dogma he favored topics such as global capitalism and the climate crisis. Though this was not cut-and-dried (he likened abortions to “hiring a hitman”), his message enraged conservative traditionalists, including those on the American hard right, who would like to see Francis’ successor revert to what they believe are the church’s core teachings.“In a time when illiberalism is gaining ground internationally,” Francis’ “messaging was an unexpected oasis for many, and unwelcomingly out of step for others,” said Effie Fokas, a research associate specializing in geopolitics and religion at the London School of Economics and Political Science before Thursday’s election of Leo. “So there is great anticipation over whether the church will, on the one hand, choose to be an oasis or, rather, in step with the waves of right-wing conservatism sweeping over the United States and much of Europe and beyond.” Geopolitics Whether Leo likes it or not, the new leader of 1.4 billion Catholics will become a leading voice in an upended world. Francis chose to use that platform to pontificate against the war in the Gaza Strip, for example, and even rebuked President Donald Trump’s stance on immigration. The next pope can choose to continue these fulminations, or not. But even a less outspoken pope would be notable by his absence on the world stage. “Francis has been a beacon of hope in the world, probably the only ethical helm in the (sinking) ship of global politics,” said Sara Silvestri, a senior lecturer in international politics at City

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un supervised tests of short-range ballistic missile systems that simulated nuclear counterstrikes against U.S. and South Korean forces, state media said Friday, as the North continued to blame its rivals for escalating tensions through their joint military exercises. The report came a day after South Korea’s military detected multiple launches from North Korea’s eastern coast and assessed that the tests could also be related to the country’s weapons exports to Russia during its war in Ukraine. North Korea’s official Korean Central News Agency said Thursday’s tests involved a mobile ballistic missile system apparently modeled after Russia’s Iskander, as well as 600-millimeter multiple rocket launchers that South Korean officials classify as ballistic due to their self-propulsion and guided flight. Both are part of a growing lineup of weapons systems that the North says could be armed with “tactical” nuclear weapons for battlefield use. KCNA said the tests were intended to train military units operating missile and rocket systems to more effectively execute attacks under the North’s nuclear weapons control system and ensure a swift response to a nuclear crisis. The agency criticized the United States and its “vassal states” for expanding joint military exercises on and around the Korean Peninsula, which the North claims are preparations for nuclear war, and said Thursday’s launches demonstrated the “rapid counteraction posture” of its forces. Kim stressed the need to strengthen the role of his nuclear forces in both deterring and fighting war, and called for continued efforts to improve combat readiness and precision strike capabilities, KCNA said. Kim Inae, spokesperson for South Korea’s Unification Ministry, which handles inter-Korean affairs, described the latest North Korean launches as a “clear act of provocation” that violates U.N. Security Council resolutions and poses a serious threat to peace and stability in the region. South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff said multiple missiles of various types were launched from the area around the eastern port city of Wonsan on Thursday from about 8:10 to 9:20 a.m. (7:10 to 8:20 p.m. Wednesday ET), with the farthest traveling about 500 miles. Lee Sung Joon, spokesperson for the Joint Chiefs, said in a briefing that the North Korean launches were possibly intended to test the performance of weapons it plans to export, as the country continues to send military equipment and troops to fuel Russia’s warfighting against Ukraine. Japanese Defense Minister Gen Nakatani told reporters that none of the North Korean missiles reached Japan’s exclusive economic zone and there was no damage to vessels or aircraft in the area. It was the North’s first known ballistic activity since March 10, when it fired several ballistic missiles hours after U.S. and South Korean troops began an annual combined military exercise, and the country’s sixth launch event of the year. Tensions on the Korean Peninsula have escalated in recent months as North Korean leader Kim continues to accelerate the development of his nuclear and missile programs and supply weapons and troops to support Russia’s war against Ukraine. Thursday’s launch came a day after North Korean state media said Kim urged munition workers to increase the production of artillery shells amid his deepening alignment with Moscow.

SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea fired what appeared to be multiple short-range ballistic missiles off its east coast, South Korea’s military said Thursday, in what may be a performance test of various projectiles for export. The missiles were launched from Wonsan, North Korea’s eastern coastal city, around 8:10 a.m. (7:10 p.m. ET Wednesday) and flew up to about 500 miles before splashing down in the sea, the military said in a statement. South Korea is closely communicating with the U.S. and Japan to share information about the launch, it added. South Korean Joint Chiefs of Staff spokesperson Lee Sung-jun declined to comment on the exact number of missiles detected or their characteristics but said at a news briefing that the launch might have been to test the performance and flight stability of missiles intended for export. The Japanese government also said it detected a launch of a ballistic missile by North Korea, which may have flown on an irregular trajectory. The nuclear-armed North’s ballistic missile program is banned by United Nations Security Council resolutions, but in recent years Pyongyang has forged ahead in developing missiles of all ranges. In March, North Korea fired multiple ballistic missiles, while blaming the South Korean and U.S. militaries for conducting drills it calls dangerous and provocative. North Korea has also exported short-range ballistic missiles, among other weapons, to Russia for use in the war in Ukraine, according to U.S. and allied intelligence agencies as well as independent researchers. Pyongyang and Moscow have denied the weapons trade, although North Korean troops have been deployed to fight on the frontlines in Russia’s Kursk region.

Canada has been "over reliant on the US for too long," and wants to forge closer ties with the UK and the EU, Canada's foreign minister Melanie Joly said. "We are the most European of all non-European countries," she told the BBC on Wednesday. "That's why we want to be closer to Europe." Her latest remarks come after she and Prime Minister Mark Carney met with US President Donald Trump in the Oval Office on Tuesday to talk about a new partnership. US-Canada relations have been tense in recent months, after Trump imposed tariffs on Canada's auto, aluminium and steel industries, and said Canada would be better off as a US state. The meeting between Trump and Carney, however, appeared to go well, as the two agreed on a "fresh start" for the US-Canada relationship, Joly said. The foreign minister told the BBC on Wednesday that it was important for Canada to assert its sovereignty while putting itself in a position to negotiate a "new trade and security partnership" with its southern neighbour. "I think we're up to a good start," Joly said, but added: "We know that there is a lot of unpredictability coming out of the White House, and we know that we have to be ready and hold steady." While Trump praised Carney during and after Tuesday's meeting, his messages were mixed on the question of whether he would remove tariffs on Canada. He was initially non-committal, saying "we'll be talking about different things", but later told reporters there was nothing Carney could say to sway him in Canada's favour. Trump has imposed general tariffs of 25% on Canada and Mexico, and sector-specific import taxes on cars, some of which have been suspended pending negotiations. The US president, who accuses Canada of not doing enough to stop the flow of fentanyl south, levied similar duties on steel and aluminium. Joly said the tariffs caused widespread anxiety in Canada, and became the number one ballot question in the recent Canadian election. "Some have lost their jobs, and many families are affected," she said. "My job and the prime minister's job is to make sure that we defend them." Carney told reporters that he "pressed the case" to the US president on lifting tariffs, and found him to be "willing to have that negotiation". On Wednesday, the prime minister was back in Ottawa where he held a virtual meeting with the leaders of Canada's provinces to update them on his trip. Ontario premier Doug Ford told reporters that they congratulated Carney. "I don't think I'd have the restraint that he had, to be very frank, but in saying that, I think it's a good start on a new relationship," Ford said. Carney is now busy assembling his cabinet, which is expected to be unveiled next week ahead of Canada's parliament opening later this month. The prime minister invited King Charles III to formally open parliament on 27 May - the first time Canada's monarch has done so since 1977. The King's visit is yet another "clear signal" of Canada's sovereignty, Joly said. Canada also plans to host the G7 summit in June, which Trump is expected to attend.

While the government of Canada may not have changed hands, the federal election results are anything but business as usual. Party leaders lost their own seats, the New Democratic Party (NDP) now faces the possibility of life on the sidelines and the Liberal Party pulled off a dramatic turnaround in fortunes, all while led by a prime minister who wasn't even a member of Parliament (MP). Validated results for most districts from Elections Canada show that 17% of seats - 58 out of 343 - changed hands in this election, up from just 7% - 22 out of 338 - in 2021. The rise in the number of available seats in the House of Commons, from 338 to 343, reflects a new political map which accounts for changes in population. Leaders from three of the five parties represented in the House of Commons failed to win their seats. Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre - who was on course to become prime minister three months ago when his party held a double-digit lead in the polls - lost his seat in Carleton, Ontario to the Liberals. Jagmeet Singh resigned as NDP leader after finishing third in his British Columbia seat of Burnaby Central, while the Green Party's co-leader Jonathan Pedneault came fifth in Outremont, Quebec. Only Yves-François Blanchet of the Bloc Québécois and Elizabeth May, the other Green co-leader, retained their seats while Mark Carney became an MP for the first time. All 58 seats that flipped went to either the Liberals or Conservatives. The NDP lost 17 of the 24 seats they were defending - 10 to the Conservatives and seven to the Liberals - and fell short of the 12 seats required for official party status. This means the loss of parliamentary funding for things like office budgets and technology equipment, as well as fewer chances to ask questions of the government and sit on committees. NDP losses were part of a wider shift away from Canada's smaller parties. The Bloc Québécois had 35 seats going into Monday's vote, taking into consideration the impact of boundary changes on 2021 results - calculated by Elections Canada - and last year's victory in the LaSalle-Émard-Verdun by-election. It lost 13 of them, with all but one going to the Liberals. Terrebonne, a suburb of Montreal, had to go to a judicial recount which found that it had been won by the Liberals by just one vote. Meanwhile, the Greens lost their Kitchener Centre riding, the first Ontario seat in their history, to the Conservatives. Despite making overall gains it was still a turbulent night for incumbents in the two largest parties. The Liberals gave up 15 seats - all to the Conservatives - which was twice as many as the eight they lost in 2021. Eight of the 15 losses came in Toronto and the surrounding "905" - places that all share the same area code. Preliminary results suggested the Conservatives had taken another, Milton East-Halton Hills South by 298 votes. However, Elections Canada's vote validation process found it had stayed Liberal by just 29 votes. The result will now go to a judicial recount. The Conservatives saw 12 of their MPs suffer defeat including Poilievre, up from nine four years ago. All 12 were won by Liberals, including Toronto St Paul's which the Conservatives previously flipped in a 2024 by-election.

Pakistan has vowed to retaliate after India launched missiles at it early Wednesday, as tensions escalated dramatically between the nuclear-armed neighbors. India said the deadly strikes had targeted “terrorist camps” and were in response to the massacre last month of 26 people, most of them Indian tourists, in Indian-administered Kashmir. New Delhi has long accused Pakistan of supporting cross-border terrorism and blamed Islamabad for the Kashmir attack, the latest in a long history of conflict between the two countries. Here’s a look at that history: 1947-48 With the end of British colonial rule in 1947, the Indian subcontinent was divided into what became Hindu-majority India and Muslim-majority Pakistan. A territory then called East Pakistan is now known as Bangladesh. Over a million people are estimated to have died in the explosion of communal violence that accompanied the dismemberment of the British Raj, as huge numbers of Hindus fled their homes in Pakistan to cross to India and Muslims in India did the same to Pakistan. The mountainous state of Jammu and Kashmir, which at the time was still a kingdom, soon became a flashpoint. Pakistan backed an insurgency there, leading to the first war with India. Kashmir’s Maharaja Hari Singh sought help from the Indian military in exchange for ceding territory, and in January 1949 the war ended in a ceasefire after U.N. intervention. Details of the agreement, under which the two new and unstable countries controlled parts of Kashmir, have been disputed ever since. 1965 Pakistan, still hoping to gain control of the mountainous region, launched an incursion across the ceasefire line. India responded by sending ground troops into the Pakistan-controlled areas. The conflict triggered another wave of displacements, with millions leaving formerly East Pakistan for India. New Delhi used the conflict to back guerrilla forces fighting the Pakistani army. India’s involvement opened a new front with Pakistan, which launched aerial attacks in late 1971. The Pakistani army ultimately surrendered in Dhaka, which became the capital of Bangladesh. As part of agreements following the war, the existing ceasefire line between India and Pakistan in Kashmir was ratified in 1972. The "Line of Control" remains the de facto border between the two countries. In 1974, India became a nuclear power. 1989 A yearslong armed resistance broke out in Indian-administered Kashmir amid resentment over Indian rule. 1999 As the Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan after a decadelong occupation, Islamic jihadist fighters began infiltrating across the Line of Control into Kashmir. Meanwhile, Pakistan, which became a nuclear power in 1998, backed the anti-Indian uprising in Kashmir and its troops entered the region. India and Pakistan then engaged in a high-altitude war in and around the city of Kargil. Both sides suffered hundreds of casualties, and thousands of people fled their homes. Fighting ended in July 1999 with India reclaiming Kargil. Later that year, Gen. Pervez Musharraf led a military coup in Pakistan, a pivotal moment that shapes Pakistani politics to this day.2000s In 2001, a suicide-bombing on Kashmir's Assembly killed 38 people in Srinagar, the main city in the Indian-administered region. This was followed by an attack on the Indian Parliament in New Delhi that killed 14 people. A year later, 36 people were killed when militants hurled grenades at an army station in Kashmir and opened fire on passengers aboard a bus. More attacks continued throughout the decade as did regular firing between Indian and Pakistani forces across the Line of Control, which continued to rock Kashmir along with separatist insurgencies. In 2008, a four-day terror attack in the Indian commercial capital of Mumbai killed 166 people. Militants from the Pakistan-based group Lashkar-e-Taiba armed with rifles and, according to India, supported by Pakistan’s spy agency, took hostages at three locations, including luxury hotels. 2016 and 2019 Border skirmishes along the Line of Control had become common, and in 2016 militants from the Jaish-e-Mohammed group attacked an Indian army brigade headquarters near the town of Uri in Kashmir, killing 19 soldiers. Led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, a Hindu nationalist, India responded by conducting “surgical strikes” against what it said were launchpads of Islamist militant groups in Pakistan. Pakistan said there was no Indian incursion and it did not respond to the attack. Then in 2019, another militant affiliated with the same group rammed a car bomb into a convoy of Indian security forces in Pulwama in Kashmir, killing 40 personnel.