Pakistan News
Will take on terrorists, enablers both inside and outside Pakistan: DG ISPR
Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Director General Lt Gen Ahmed Sharif Chaudhry said on Friday that terrorists and their enablers and facilitators would be challenged both inside and outside the country, as he held a press conference in Islamabad related to the Jaffar Express attack.
The attack began on Tuesday afternoon when Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) terrorists ambushed the Peshawar-bound train carrying 440 passengers, opening fire and taking hostages. Security forces launched a two-day operation, concluding on Wednesday evening. Lt Gen Chaudhry confirmed that all 33 terrorists were neutralised, but no hostages were harmed in the final rescue phase. He also said the incident had changed the “rules of the game”.
During the presser — conducted alongside Balochistan Chief Minister Sarfaraz Bugti — Lt Gen Chaudhry was asked whether there had been any changes or developments in the “rules” since his statement.
“Terrorists will be dealt with as they deserve, as those who drag innocent people out of buses and slaughter them, a group that divides people by ethnicity, have no connection to Baloch [ethnicity] or Islam.
“We will deal with them as they deserve. We will take them on, their facilitators, their abettors, whether inside Pakistan or outside Pakistan,” he responded.
DG ISPR then criticised the Indian media for spreading propaganda about the incident.
“The Indian media displayed fake footage of the incident to spread propaganda,” he said, as he showed some video clips on a screen to prove his point.
“They attempted to create a narrative by sharing AI-generated images and fake videos. They were leading an informational warfare.”
The DG ISPR said a “nexus” was working amid the situation to give legitimacy to the terrorists and their narrative.
Showing various clips of Indian officials and personalities discussing efforts to destabilise Balochistan, the DG ISPR said the Jaffar Express attack was a “continuation of the same policy”.
Most successful hostage operation
Providing details of the train attack and the ensuing rescue operation, he said that the terrorists had deliberately selected a remote location to conduct the attack where there were no telecommunication signals, adding that one group of hostages with women and children was kept inside the train, while the other travellers were brought outside and gathered on the ground.
“They operated in multiple groups, taking strategic positions on higher ground. After planting the improvised explosive device (IED), which disabled the train, they took the passengers hostage,” he detailed.
Lt Gen Chaudhry added that the terrorists had suicide bombers among their ranks.
The military media chief gave a detailed breakdown of the operation, describing each step. “Within 36 hours, in a remote area with inaccessible terrain and the presence of suicide bombers, our soldiers, the air force and the FC (Frontier Corps) successfully conducted the operation with professionalism and bravery.”
He added that the Special Services Group’s Zarrar Company had arrived in the area by midday and was monitoring the terrorists from a distance.
“They carried out a situational assessment,” he said. “They had to plan the operation very carefully because of suicide bombers, who could detonate their vests and kill the maximum number of people.”
DG ISPR said that Zarrar Company targeted the suicide bombers from a distance before moving in to secure the hostages, adding that the hostages, who were sitting in the open for 24 hours, took the opportunity to run to safety.
The media chief showed the audience drone footage of people running from the train.
“They ran in multiple directions, wherever they could go,” he said, adding that once they were safe, Zarrar Company operators cleared the train, moving from the front engine to the rear bogie.
Highlighting drone footage of the soldiers moving into the front engine, DG ISPR said, “They entered and cleared the front engine, killing any terrorists they encountered. They then cleared the whole train bogie by bogie.”
“Not even a single casualty was recorded among the hostages during this entire operation,” DG ISPR highlighted. “Despite their intentions, they (the terrorists) were unable to kill even a single hostage,” he added, clarifying that some passengers had embraced martyrdom before the operation.
“In terms of operations carried out on trains, this can very rightly be put out as the most successful hostage operation conducted,” DG ISPR said.
“A group of hostages was released based on their ethnic affiliations. Just as the CM said it, these terrorists have nothing to do with being Baloch, being Pakistani or being a Muslim.”
He added that there were logistical reasons for the terrorists to release some passengers since there were too many on the train for them to be able to control.
He said the terrorists tried to create a “false impression” of humanitarian values by claiming they had released some hostages.
DG ISPR further stated that a Zarrar Comapny soldier was injured by a sniper positioned on higher ground. “He (the sniper) was taken out, but our young soldier was injured.”
Pictures of terrorists killed during the operation and the weapons and equipment they were using were also shown to the audience. Additionally, DG ISPR also showed video clips of soldiers during the operation itself, along with video messages from rescued hostages.
‘No intelligence failure’
Questioned if the attack represented an intelligence failure, the DG ISPR said that Balochistan presented a “very challenging intelligence environment”, adding that agencies were working round the clock to find leads and preempt attacks.
“I don’t agree with the term ‘intelligence failure’ because behind this are thousands of intelligence successes you don’t hear about — the incidents that never happened because our intelligence detected and neutralised them.”
Speaking to the reporter who raised the question, the DG said that as a journalist, one must be getting many leads on stories, but it was impossible to cover all the stories which were unfolding in Pakistan right now.
“It’s not possible,” he said.
When it came to the work of an intelligence agency, he said, what was normally seen and pointed out was failure.
“The intelligence game is such that you don’t thump your chest on your successes.
“Firstly, we need to realise that Pakistan’s intelligence agencies — in a very challenging hostile environment — are trying their level best,” he said, adding that one should be careful to characterise such incidents as an intelligence failure.
He said that the terrorists operating in the region were not the only threat to the intelligence agencies as they were also backed by the complete intelligence support of their sponsors.
The DG ISPR added that the intelligence agencies knew that in this area, a threat existed, adding that it was because of the intelligence agencies that the security forces were able to respond in a successful manner.
26 passengers martyred
Giving a breakdown of the figures in the incident, the DG ISPR said 33 terrorists were killed, while the count of martyred passengers had been updated to 26 from the previous figure of 21.
He said 354 passengers were successfully identified and rescued, bringing the total passenger count to 380.
Questioned later on about the number of fatalities and discrepancies with figures reported in international media, DG ISPR reiterated that there were 26 fatalities with the potential for more since he said 37 of the 354 recovered hostages were injured.
Chaudhry added that 18 of the 26 martyred belonged to the army or FC, three were linked to the railways and other departments, while the remaining five were civilians.
He said the operational fatalities—those not aboard the train—included three FC personnel killed at the picket, one FC soldier martyred on Wednesday morning, and another stationed for security duty on the train.
Speaking about the rise in terrorism, the DG ISPR said the pace of implementation of the National Action Plan’s 14 points needed to be considered first.
He said law enforcement agencies conducted 59,775 intelligence-based operations, both major and minor, in 2024. So far in 2025, 11,654 IBOs have been carried out.
“This year, we are averaging 180 IBOs per day,” he added. Meanwhile, around 1,250 terrorists were “sent to hell” in 2024 and 2025, while 563 security personnel were martyred in the line of duty, he said.
‘Purely evil forces’
Taking over the press conference, CM Bugti denounced the attack on unarmed people, saying that the “so-called fight against the state” was a farce, driven by purely evil forces. Therefore, the perpetrators should only be referred to as “terrorists.”
“We’re in an intelligence-driven war waged against the state of Pakistan by RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) and other hostile agencies through Afghanistan, especially because Afghan soil is being used against us,” Bugti said.
Islamabad has repeatedly demanded that Kabul take action against the banned Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and other terrorist factions using Afghan soil to launch attacks in Pakistan. Kabul denies the allegations.
Adding to the comment, the military’s media chief said the train incident was yet another that could be traced back to Afghanistan, noting that the terrorists remained in contact with their handlers there throughout.
“It is part of an ongoing process,” he said, adding that the groups involved were composed of Afghan nationals.
Echoing Chaudhry’s point, Bugti said the past policy of “appeasement” followed by some previous governments toward terrorist groups had allowed key figures to be released, enabling them to reestablish insurgent camps against the state.
Bugti said the security forces had the capacity and capability to “handle this mess very soon”, saying that such a surge was not a new thing.
In 2021, former prime minister Imran Khan had offered a general pardon to the TTP, provided the banned group laid down weapons. In 2023, Imran admitted that his government had planned to relocate at least 5,000 TTP fighters and their families, totaling around 35,000 people, but the plan fell through as provinces refused to bear the cost.
BLA attacks
Balochistan has witnessed an uptick in terrorist attacks over the past year. In November 2024, at least 26 people were killed and 62 injured after a suicide blast ripped through a Quetta Railway Station.
In 2024, the banned BLA emerged as a key perpetrator of terrorist violence in Pakistan, according to a report by Islamabad-based think tank Pak Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS).
In August last year, dozens of militants affiliated with BLA launched numerous attacks across the province, in which at least 50 people, including 14 security men, lost their lives. In response, security forces had neutralised 21 militants.
Earlier that month, then-Panjgur deputy commissioner Zakir Baloch was shot dead on the Quetta-Karachi National Highway, with CM Bugti stating that the BLA was the group behind it.
In October 2024, a suicide bombing near Karachi airport killed two Chinese nationals and a Pakistani citizen, for which two BLA suspects were sent to jail on judicial remand while a probe body was formed as well.
The group also claimed responsibility for the Quetta railway suicide bombing in November last year, in which at least 26 people, including 16 security personnel, lost their lives, and 61 others were injured.
Pakistan designated the BLA as a terrorist organisation in April 2006 after the group repeatedly attacked security personnel.
In January this year, a former BLA member said during a press conference that the banned group “brainwashed average citizens into thinking a certain way about Balochistan and resorting to terrorist activities.”
Last month, the BLA claimed responsibility for an attack in Balochistan’s Barkhan, where seven Punjab-bound passengers were offloaded from a bus and shot dead.
In earlier grand-scale hijackings in the country, one that particularly comes to mind was in 1994, when three armed militants from Afghanistan took control of a school bus near Peshawar and took around 70 children hostage. The bus was driven to the Embassy of Afghanistan in Islamabad, where units of elite commandoes gunned them down the next day.
Taken From DAWN News
Pakistan News
Strategic Siege: Is Pakistan Being Surrounded
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.
Pakistan News
Pakistan and Russia deepen media and diplomatic dialogue ahead of PM Sharif’s visit to Moscow
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/
Pakistan News
Pakistan launches strikes on Afghanistan, with Taliban saying dozens killed
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.
-
Europe News1 year agoChaos and unproven theories surround Tates’ release from Romania
-
American News1 year agoTrump Expels Zelensky from the White House
-
American News1 year agoTrump expands exemptions from Canada and Mexico tariffs
-
Pakistan News9 months agoComprehensive Analysis Report-The Faranian National Conference on Maritime Affairs-By Kashif Firaz Ahmed
-
American News1 year agoZelensky bruised but upbeat after diplomatic whirlwind
-
Art & Culture1 year agoThe Indian film showing the bride’s ‘humiliation’ in arranged marriage
-
Art & Culture1 year agoInternational Agriculture Exhibition held in Paris
-
Pakistan News12 months agoCan Pakistan be a Hard State?
