Defence Minister Khawaja Asif strongly criticised Afghanistan on Saturday, citing the nation’s failure to “fulfil its neighbourly responsibilities” and uphold the terms of the Doha agreement.
Through a series of tweets, the minister pointed out that Pakistan had provided asylum to approximately five to six million Afghans over the past four to five decades, granting them full rights. In contrast, he accused Afghanistan of offering safe havens to terrorists responsible for violence in Pakistan.
He emphasized, “This cannot continue indefinitely,” affirming Pakistan’s commitment to leverage all its resources to safeguard its territory and citizens.
Asif’s statement followed the Pakistan Army’s expression of grave concern about the banned Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan’s (TTP) freedom of operation in Afghanistan.
On Friday, Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Syed Asim Munir visited the Quetta Garrison. During this visit, he received a briefing about the recent Zhob terrorist attack that led to the martyrdom of nine soldiers.
Expectations from the Interim Afghan Government
In the aftermath, the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) communicated an expectation that the interim Afghan government would prevent its territory from being used to promote terrorism against any country, aligning with the commitments outlined in the Doha agreement.
Commenting on the matter, retired Lt Gen Naeem Khalid Lodhi, a Defence Analyst, urged for caution before directly accusing Afghanistan. He advised cooperative efforts to identify the forces attempting to fuel discord between the two nations.
Lodhi stated that several countries and agencies harbour antagonism towards Pakistan’s growing proximity with Afghanistan, Iran, and China.
Reacting to Lodhi’s statements, Brigadier (r) Haris Nawaz, another defence analyst, asserted that the forces opposing Pakistan’s diplomatic relations with these countries were apparent. He named America and India nations that did not wish to see Pakistan prosper.
Nawaz explained their intent by stating, “This is why they left their weapons there [in Afghanistan] when they departed”. He concluded that challenging decisions would be necessary to navigate the prevailing crisis.
