Empty Ultimatum

In declaring a sharply reduced deadline for a Ukraine ceasefire, US President Donald Trump has added urgency and confusion to an already volatile geopolitical situation.

- 

An audit by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), uncovered 51 safety violations at Air India, including seven Level I lapses – those considered serious enough to "seriously endanger safety". These revelations arrive in the shadow of the Air India Flight 171 crash of 12 June, a tragedy that claimed 241 lives on board and 19 on the ground, with dozens more injured in Ahmedabad's B.J. Medical College area. AI 171 – a Boeing 787 8 Dreamliner bound for London – lost engine power seconds after takeoff. Both fuel control switches inexplicably shifted to "CUTOFF," resulting in a complete loss of thrust. After a last-minute Mayday call, the aircraft crashed into a densely populated neighbourhood. It was the deadliest aviation disaster in India in nearly thirty years, and the first fatal hull loss of a Boeing 787. While DGCA has stated that larger carriers tend to generate a higher number of audit findings due to their complexity, this explanation offers little comfort. Serious failures such as inadequate pilot training, use of unapproved simulators, and poor rostering are not inevitable by-products of scale – they are symptoms of operational complacency and oversight failure. India's aviation boom has outpaced its regulatory preparedness. With increased routes, newer fleets, and ambitious international tie-ups, operational complexity is rising faster than oversight capacity. This imbalance must be corrected. A robust civil aviation sector needs not only investment and expansion, but deep-rooted institutional vigilance. Without strengthening DGCA's resources, staffing, and independence, expecting sustained safety in a liberalised market is not only unrealistic – it is dangerous. The fact that some violations were self-reported is a welcome development, suggesting a shift towards a more transparent safety culture. But transparency must not be