Connect with us

Pakistan News

PTI embroiled in controversy over who gets to meet Imran

Published

on

• Ex-PM reportedly refuses to meet Salman Akram Raja; Hammad Azhar quits party office
• Jailed leader asks KP CM Gandapur to ‘re-engage’ with establishment
• Party fails to make good on promise to hold protest outside Adiala over Eid

ISLAMABAD: Amid a deepening rift within the PTI’s upper echelons, KP Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur held a meeting with jailed party founder Imran Khan, along with an aide, on Wednesday.

In a separate development that hints at the PTI’s internal differences, the president of its Punjab chapter Hammad Azhar also resigned from his party position the same day.

During the Adiala meeting, Imran Khan reportedly asked CM Gandapur to re-engage with the establishment within the parameters of the Constitution and law, Adviser to CM Barrister Muhammad Ali Saif, who accompanied Mr Gandapur, claimed while talking to Dawn after the huddle.

https://www.dawn.com/news/card/1891813

The meeting continued for two-and-a-half hours in the conference room of Adiala Jail. However, as per orders of the Islamabad High Court, they left without holding a media talk outside the jail.

Party sources said the meeting was a continuation of Tuesday’s huddle between ex-minister Azam Swati and Mr Khan.

On Tuesday, PTI leaders Advocate Salman Akram Raja and others reached Adiala Jail and Mr Raja provided to the authorities a list of persons who had to meet Imran Khan. However, Mr Raja was stopped from going inside while Mr Swati was allowed to meet Imran Khan. Jail sources claimed that Imran Khan was not willing to meet Mr Raja.

Later, Mr Swati also claimed that the party founder was not willing to meet Mr Raja. Mr Swati said he assured Mr Khan that Mr Raja was sincere with the party and was standing on principles.

He also informed that based on his discussion with Mr Khan, some changes will be made in the KP government.

Party sources said that during the meeting between CM Gandapur and Imran Khan, various issues related to KP including political and security came under discussion.

Call for re-engagement

Talking to Dawn, Barrister Saif claimed that Imran Khan had asked CM Gandapur to re-engage with the establishment within the parameters of the Constitution and law.

“Khan sahib believes that the country and people of Pakistan are suffering because of the problems between his party and the establishment and that his party being the only federal party with roots in all the provinces can bridge the gap and address political, economic and security issues confronting the country,” said the adviser to CM.

He said the CM discussed a broad range of issues with the ex-premier including the situation in KP, terrorism and the party’s internal matters. “As such there was nothing new,” Mr Saif said.

However, he added, the party chairman allowed them to re-engage with the establishment “for the good of the country”. He acknowledged that there was a mutual lack of trust between the two sides, and underlined the need for bringing down the temperature “to a reasonable level” for meaningful negotiations.

Mr Saif distanced the party from certain YouTubers abroad, who, he added, were responsible for creating a gulf between the party and the establishment. “We have no control over them,” he argued. “We have disowned them.”

Asked if the party chief had set any conditions for re-engagement with the establishment, Mr Saif clarified that any dialogue would have to be done within the parameters of the Constitution and democratic values.

He said Mr Khan also emphasised the need for engaging with Afghanistan to end terrorism and that the chief minister apprised him of the efforts they were making to reach out to the Afghan Taliban in this regard.

He said the KP government had approached the federal government for permission to engage with the Afghan Taliban. “But the federal government is sitting on the request.”

Mr Saif said that the chief minister also discussed party matters with the chairman, particularly the rift between Azam Swati and Speaker KP Assembly Babar Salim Swati. He said the chairman asked the chief minister to play a lead role and resolve the differences between the two party figures.

Hammad’s resignation

Hammad Azhar, who had been away from public eye since May 9, 2023, resigned as president of PTI’s Punjab chapter, apparently following complaints by a senior party leader in a meeting with Imran Khan.

Mr Azhar announced his resignation in a message on X. He alleged that Azam Swati had complained to Mr Khan that he was causing obstructions in the working of party’s Punjab chief organiser Aliya Hamza.

“I spoke to Aliya Hamza and asked whether he was obstructing in her party working and she expressed with astonishment that she never felt obstructed,” he claimed.

Mr Azhar stated that he would continue working as a party worker.

No camp outside jail

Strict security arrangements were made outside the Adiala Jail and heavy contingent of the security personnel was deployed in wake of PTI’s plans to hold a protest there.

However, despite claims by the party leaders, PTI could not hold the protest camp outside the jail during Eid days. It may be recalled that party’s KP head Junaid Akbar during the holy month of Ramazan had hinted that PTI workers will set up a protest camp outside the jail to express solidarity with the incarcerated founding chairman. However, the central leadership disassociated itself with the statement.

On the second and third days of Eid, PTI leaders including Salman Akram Raja, Azam Swati, CM Gandapur, Barrister Saif and others reached the jail but the aim was to meet Imran Khan rather than holding a protest.

Mansoor Malik in Lahore and our Peshawar bureau also contributed to this report

Published in Dawn, April 3rd, 2025

https://www.dawn.com/news/1901759/pti-embroiled-in-controversy-over-who-gets-to-meet-imran

Pakistan News

Strategic Siege: Is Pakistan Being Surrounded

Published

on

By

Paris (Imran Y. CHOUDHRY) :- Former Press Secretary to the President, Former Press Minister to the Embassy of Pakistan to France, Former MD, SRBC Mr. Qamar Bashir analysis : Geopolitics has never been governed by sentiment. Not religion, not shared history, not cultural brotherhood—only interests. The unfolding realignments across South Asia and the Middle East illustrate this truth with striking clarity. Alliances are shifting, rivalries are recalibrating, and Pakistan finds itself increasingly positioned at the intersection of competing strategic designs.
The roots of today’s complexity stretch back to 1979, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Pakistan became the frontline state in a U.S.-backed campaign to counter Moscow. Billions of dollars in American and Saudi assistance flowed through intelligence networks to arm and train Afghan fighters. The mobilization of religious ideology was not incidental—it was strategic. Fighters from across the Muslim world converged in Afghanistan. By 1989, the Soviet withdrawal marked a Cold War victory for Washington and its partners.
But militant infrastructures rarely dissolve once their immediate utility ends. The Taliban emerged in the 1990s from the ashes of war, establishing control over Kabul in 1996. Pakistan was among the few nations to recognize their regime. Following the attacks of September 11, 2001, however, the same Taliban became the primary target of American military intervention. The subsequent 20-year war cost over $2 trillion and claimed more than 170,000 lives before the U.S. withdrawal in August 2021.
The Taliban’s return to power reshaped the region yet again. Instead of ushering in stability for Pakistan, however, cross-border militancy intensified. The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), operating from Afghan soil, escalated attacks in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan. Islamabad responded with cross-border airstrikes against militant sanctuaries. While tactically decisive, these actions strained relations with Kabul and risked civilian backlash.
Instead, Pakistan with its deep intelligence roots in Afghanistan, had the option to adopt the same tactics which Afghanistan is using by infiltrating Pakistani Taliban in Pakistan and killing innocent people mostly by detonating human bombs in Mosque. This could have been a more discrete way to weed out the menace of TTP. History suggests that purely kinetic responses can produce unintended strategic consequences. Airstrikes may eliminate immediate threats, but they can also deepen mistrust and create diplomatic openings for rival powers.
In geopolitics, tactical victories can sometimes yield strategic setbacks. By intensifying overt military pressure, Islamabad may have inadvertently accelerated Kabul’s search for diversified partnerships.
That diversification is perhaps the most striking development. The Taliban government, ideologically committed to Islamic governance, has increasingly explored diplomatic and economic engagement beyond traditional Islamic partners. India reopened diplomatic channels in Kabul and expanded humanitarian assistance. Israel has pledged billions of dollars of aid to Kabul in alignment with India. This is a profound geopolitical entanglement: an Islamic Emirate seeking expanded engagement with a Hindu-majority India and a Jewish-majority Israel, even as tensions simmer with neighboring Muslim Pakistan.
This underscores a fundamental principle of realpolitik: states pursue survival and leverage, not theological alignment. Religious brotherhood and shared culture matter, but only when they coincide with national interest calculations. Facing economic collapse, frozen reserves, and diplomatic isolation, Kabul seeks diversification. India offers infrastructure and access. Israel offers technological cooperation and strategic outreach. Ideology yields to necessity.
For Pakistan, however, the optics intensify concerns of encirclement. On its eastern border, India remains a strategic competitor, particularly over Kashmir. On its western frontier now stands an Afghanistan willing to engage Islamabad’s rivals. To the southwest lies Iran, itself navigating tense relations with the United States. This evolving geometry fuels perceptions of a tightening strategic ring.
An additional dimension complicates matters further: Bagram Airbase. During the U.S. presence in Afghanistan, Bagram served as the largest American military installation in the country, with dual runways capable of handling heavy aircraft and advanced surveillance platforms. Its geographic location—approximately 500 kilometers from China’s Xinjiang region—made it strategically significant.
U.S. President Donald Trump publicly criticized the abandonment of Bagram in 2021, arguing that retaining the base would have preserved American leverage, particularly in the context of intensifying U.S.-China rivalry. Bagram’s proximity to Central Asia, Iran, and western China positions it as more than a counterterrorism platform—it is a potential springboard in great-power competition.
While direct American military reentry into Afghanistan appears unlikely in the near term, evolving regional alignments could create indirect pathways of influence. The strengthening of India’s presence in Kabul, combined with Israel’s strategic engagement in broader Asian geopolitics, introduces analytical possibilities. Washington maintains deep defense partnerships with both New Delhi and Tel Aviv. If Afghanistan continues diversifying toward these actors, space may gradually reopen for U.S. strategic leverage—without formal troop deployments.
Interestingly, geopolitics often unfolds through indirect channels. For Washington, containing China remains a central strategic priority. For India, Afghanistan offers westward strategic depth. For Israel, expanded regional engagement broadens diplomatic influence. For Kabul, diversified partnerships reduce isolation. For Pakistan, however, these convergences heighten strategic anxiety.
For Israel, extending its engagement with Kabul through India would provide a strategic foothold in South Asia and enhance its capacity to deter Pakistan from aligning with Turkey and Saudi Arabia in any configuration perceived as intimidating to Israel. Such cooperation could be viewed as a counterweight to a potential alignment involving Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and nuclear-armed Pakistan, which some analysts argue might aim to exert strategic pressure or encirclement against Israel.
Simultaneously, the Persian Gulf remains heavily militarized. The U.S. Fifth Fleet in Bahrain deploys advanced naval assets, while Iran has invested in ballistic missiles, drones, and anti-ship systems designed to offset conventional asymmetry. China, importing substantial Gulf energy supplies, and Russia, expanding ties with Tehran, both observe carefully.
Any escalation between Washington and Tehran would reverberate in Pakistan. The country already hosts approximately 1.3 million registered Afghan refugees. A major Iran conflict could trigger further displacement, compounding economic strain amid IMF-backed reforms and domestic political polarization.
Internally, Pakistan faces political turbulence, including debates surrounding the incarceration of former Prime Minister Imran Khan and federal-provincial tensions. External pressure combined with internal division magnifies vulnerability.
Yet one broader truth emerges from this complex web: strategic encirclement is not solely a product of adversarial design. It can also arise from miscalculation, overreliance on hard power, and insufficient diplomatic agility. States that rely exclusively on military tools risk narrowing their strategic options.
This is a defining moment. Great-power rivalry, regional insecurity, and ideological contradictions intersect at fragile fault lines. Afghanistan’s outreach beyond traditional religious alignments demonstrates the primacy of interest over identity. Bagram symbolizes the enduring shadow of great-power competition. India and Israel’s evolving engagement in Kabul reflects the fluidity of modern alliances.
But history offers a sobering lesson. From the Soviet-Afghan war to the U.S. intervention, military campaigns have reshaped borders without resolving deeper grievances. Stability requires not merely deterrence but diplomacy.
Encirclement strategies may promise leverage. Hybrid doctrines may promise precision. Yet sustainable security demands cooperation grounded in mutual recognition of vulnerabilities.
Geopolitics may be ruthless in its calculations, but peace remains the only enduring strategic victory.

Continue Reading

Pakistan News

Pakistan and Russia deepen media and diplomatic dialogue ahead of PM Sharif’s visit to Moscow

Published

on

By

Monitoring Desk: The Moscow–Islamabad Media Forum will be held on February 27, 2026, to coincide with the official visit of the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif, to Moscow, scheduled for the first week of March 2026.
The forum will serve as a platform for journalists, political experts, and diplomats from Pakistan and Russia to discuss the current state of bilateral relations, explore future opportunities, and analyze how the Russia–Pakistan partnership impacts global politics, the economy, and the contemporary media landscape.

Cooperation between Russia and Pakistan is of particular importance in the context of the transformation of international relations and the formation of a new system of global interaction. In recent years, contacts between the two countries have intensified at inter-parliamentary, expert, and media levels, while practical cooperation in the humanitarian and socio-political spheres continues to expand.
Within the framework of the forum, Russian and Pakistani journalists, political scientists, and representatives of diplomatic circles will discuss the current state and future prospects of bilateral relations, as well as the role of the Russia–Pakistan partnership in political, economic, and information processes shaping the modern world.
The event is timed to coincide with the official visit of the Prime Minister of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, Shehbaz Sharif, to Moscow from March 3 to 5, 2026.
Admission for media representatives will be granted only through prior accreditation upon presentation of a passport and a valid editorial certificate confirming the journalist’s affiliation with the accredited media organization.
MSPC “Russia Today” reserves the right to refuse accreditation without providing an explanation.
This News is taken from
https://dnd.com.pk/pakistan-and-russia-deepen-media-and-diplomatic-dialogue-ahead-of-pm-sharifs-visit-to-moscow/328726/

Continue Reading

Pakistan News

Pakistan launches strikes on Afghanistan, with Taliban saying dozens killed

Published

on

By

Pakistan has carried out multiple overnight air strikes on Afghanistan, which the Taliban has said killed and wounded dozens of people, including women and children.

Islamabad said the attacks targeted seven alleged militant camps and hideouts near the Pakistan-Afghanistan border and that they had been launched after recent suicide bombings in Pakistan.

Afghanistan condemned the attacks, saying they targeted multiple civilian homes and a religious school.

The fresh strikes come after the two countries agreed to a fragile ceasefire in October following deadly cross-border clashes, though subsequent fighting has taken place.

The Taliban’s defence ministry said the strikes targeted civilian areas of Nangarhar and Paktika provinces.

Officials in Nangarhar told the BBC that the home of a man called Shahabuddin had been hit by one of the strikes, killing about 20 family members, including women and children.

Pakistan’s Ministry of Information and Broadcasting said it had carried out “intelligence based selective targeting of seven terrorist camps and hideouts”.

In a statement on X, it said the targets included members of the banned Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan, which the government refers to as “Fitna al Khawarij,” along with their affiliates and the Islamic State-Khorasan Province.

The ministry described the strikes as “a retributive response” to recent suicide bombings in Pakistan by terror groups it said were sheltered by Kabul.

The recent attacks in Pakistan included one on a Shia mosque in the capital Islamabad earlier this month, as well as others that took place since the holy month of Ramadan began this week in the north-western Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province.

Pakistan accused the Afghan Taliban of failing to take action against the militants, adding that it had “conclusive evidence” that the attacks were carried out by militants on the instructions of their leadership in Afghanistan.

The Taliban’s defence ministry later posted on X condemning the attacks as a “blatant violation of Afghanistan’s territorial integrity”, adding that they were a “clear breach of international law”.

It warned that “an appropriate and measured response will be taken at a suitable time”, adding that “attacks on civilian targets and religious institutions indicate the failure of Pakistan’s army in intelligence and security.”

The strikes come days after Saudi Arabia mediated the release of three Pakistani soldiers earlier this week, who were captured in Kabul during border clashes last October.

Those clashes ended with a tentative ceasefire that same month after the worst fighting since the Taliban returned to power in 2021.

Pakistan and Afghanistan share a 1,600-mile (2,574 km) mountainous border.

Continue Reading

Trending