Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) Terrorism Watch

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
BANNU: A high-profile terrorist who was killed in a recent operation by security forces in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s Bannu district was a member of the Afghan Taliban regime’s special forces, security sources said on Friday.

Security sources said the terrorist, Fatehullah alias Mudassir, was an active member of Yarmook 60 Special Forces Battalion. The unit operates under the Taliban regime’s Ministry of Interior Affairs.

They added that Fatehullah belonged to the Zarmat district of Afghanistan’s Paktia province and was actively involved in terrorist activities in Pakistan alongside the banned Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

Reports further suggest that he was also involved in facilitating cross-border terrorist networks and planning various militant operations, the security sources elaborated.


Security sources said that Fatehullah was killed along with his accomplices during an intelligence-based operation (IBO) conducted near Bannu’s Baka Khel Airport on April 9. During the operation, security forces effectively targeted militant hideouts and neutralised the terrorists.

The security sources maintained that the revelations regarding Fatehullah’s Afghan background had raised serious questions over repeated claims by the Afghan Taliban government that their soil would not be allowed to be used against any other country, particularly Pakistan.

Such evidence strengthens concerns regarding cross-border terrorist networks in Afghanistan and regional militant connections, acting against Pakistan, the security sources added.

Bannu district has been the scene of repeated security incidents in recent months, with both civilians and local security forces coming under attack amid a broader surge in militant violence.

Violence in Bannu has included attacks on police and jirga members, prompting targeted operations by police and security forces in various localities to disrupt militant networks.
 
Couldn't even establish a buffer zone or commit to mowing the lawn.

20 years of incompetence on the western border continues.

Afghanistan should be getting the Lebanon treatment. This is how you deal with proxies.

I'm assuming the establishment wants to kick the can down the road let the next generation deal with this problem.
 
Last edited:
All those people who said Afghan taliban and TTP are one and same turned out to be right. Pakistan played double game with USA for 2 decades just to deny India base in Afghanistan but ended up installing Taliban pashtuns who are cucks of India anyway because of their religion fatherland deoband is in India.
 
Probably one of those "NATO trained special forces" who fled on a boat and pretended he was "hunted" by talibs, a story which no longer gained traction with the UK/USA visa offices, hence he came home and was redeployed by the same talibs. They all lie and lie and lie again just to make a buck. And this is where they end up.

And then these khawarij have the nerve to name their battalion "Yarmouk"!
 
The problem never was which type of afghan pashtun is right for Pakistan. The problem was being in delulu land thinking one set of afghan pashtun can be your ally but other is enemy. When reality is all of them are enemies and need to dealt with. Even if it mean turning Kandahar/Kabul in to Gaza.
 
hydrabadi_arab said:
All those people who said Afghan taliban and TTP are one and same turned out to be right. Pakistan played double game with USA for 2 decades just to deny India base in Afghanistan but ended up installing Taliban pashtuns who are cucks of India anyway because of their religion fatherland deoband is in India.
Click to expand...
Pakistan's Afghan policy is actually quite simple - an Afghanistan for Afghans but one that doesn't threaten Pakistan.

Neither the Soviets were acceptable on the border, nor were the Americans. The double games Pakistan is accused of playing are grounded in a Pakistan-first policy. While Pakistan has a close relationship with America, there is little to no trust in that relationship. Both sides are deeply suspicious of each other but have always tried to work closely as partners on mutually shared objectives. It's a rocky relationship and it's not lost on anyone that the US (and Israel) have always had their sights on Pakistan's nuclear program.

Pakistan would rather deal with Afghan tribal warlords than have to deal with American or Soviet bases on its Western border. This clarity of thought is also driven by the threat India poses on the Eastern flank. Imperial powers in the region are basically where Pakistan draws the redline.

The Afghan policy has worked well in some ways and also not worked at the same time. It's worked because neither the Soviets nor the Americans have any military capacity to bear on the Western frontier. Pakistan flies uncontested in Afghan airspace and can project military power at will in Kabul. This would not have been possible if the Americans or Soviets were still in Afghanistan.

At the same time the policy has not worked because Pakistan has lost all goodwill or leverage that it once had with the Talibs. The idea, especially post the Doha Agreement, was always to see a friendly Afghan government led by Pashtuns emerge in Kabul. Pashtuns particularly because the establishment banked on their shared cultural bonds with KP. Instead the Talibs doubled down on religious bigotry, the oppression of women, fascism, the murder of Tajik/Hazara minorities and to everyone's surprise racism against Pakistani Pashtuns. Not only do they see Pakistan as a kafir state but the Talibs have revived all the discourse around Pashtunistan which Daoud Khan once used to champion. Concerning? Yes. A threat to Pakistan? Not really.

With all the talk of terrorism in KP, especially in Waziristan, it is easy to forget how much worse it actually used to be at one time. When Fazlullah ruled the roost, Swat was under complete Taliban control. While the terrorist attacks in KP (and Balochistan) today are a bed sore to deal with, the situation is no where near as dangerous as it was from 2004 - 2015. The IDPs, the lawlesslness in ex-FATA, the death of Nawab Akbar Bugti, the Nizam e Adl Regulations, Shamsi airbase, the Salala incident...the list is endless and for those who remember, it was not a pleasant time.

Having said all that Pakistan's policy of Afghanistan even today hasn't changed one bit - the goal is still an Afghanistan for Afghans but one that doesn't threaten Pakistan. There is plenty of academic discourse on the subject that is underway. Where we once saw the Mujahideen as partners, the partners emerging today are quite surprisingly the pro-Soviet forces under Massoud whom we once opposed in the 90s. Who could possibly have seen the Talibs running to the Hindu rasthra for support? At the same time who could have thought that the offspring of the anti-Mujahideen (and anti-Pak) Northern Alliance would find favour in Pakistan?

The reality is that the Great Game of influence in Afghanistan never went away - only the players have changed.
 
Distant_Observer said:
Couldn't even establish a buffer zone or commit to mowing the lawn.

20 years of incompetence on the western border continues.

Afghanistan should be getting the Lebanon treatment. This is how you deal with proxies.

I'm assuming the establishment wants to kick the can down the road let the next generation deal with this problem.
Click to expand...
Thats why people from within them should be employed. Such as their ex special forces
 
diaspora said:
Pakistan's Afghan policy is actually quite simple - an Afghanistan for Afghans but one that doesn't threaten Pakistan.

Neither the Soviets were acceptable on the border, nor were the Americans. The double games Pakistan is accused of playing are grounded in a Pakistan-first policy. While Pakistan has a close relationship with America, there is little to no trust in that relationship. Both sides are deeply suspicious of each other but have always tried to work closely as partners on mutually shared objectives. It's a rocky relationship and it's not lost on anyone that the US (and Israel) have always had their sights on Pakistan's nuclear program.

Pakistan would rather deal with Afghan tribal warlords than have to deal with American or Soviet bases on its Western border. This clarity of thought is also driven by the threat India poses on the Eastern flank. Imperial powers in the region are basically where Pakistan draws the redline.

The Afghan policy has worked well in some ways and also not worked at the same time. It's worked because neither the Soviets nor the Americans have any military capacity to bear on the Western frontier. Pakistan flies uncontested in Afghan airspace and can project military power at will in Kabul. This would not have been possible if the Americans or Soviets were still in Afghanistan.

At the same time the policy has not worked because Pakistan has lost all goodwill or leverage that it once had with the Talibs. The idea, especially post the Doha Agreement, was always to see a friendly Afghan government led by Pashtuns emerge in Kabul. Pashtuns particularly because the establishment banked on their shared cultural bonds with KP. Instead the Talibs doubled down on religious bigotry, the oppression of women, fascism, the murder of Tajik/Hazara minorities and to everyone's surprise racism against Pakistani Pashtuns. Not only do they see Pakistan as a kafir state but the Talibs have revived all the discourse around Pashtunistan which Daoud Khan once used to champion. Concerning? Yes. A threat to Pakistan? Not really.

With all the talk of terrorism in KP, especially in Waziristan, it is easy to forget how much worse it actually used to be at one time. When Fazlullah ruled the roost, Swat was under complete Taliban control. While the terrorist attacks in KP (and Balochistan) today are a bed sore to deal with, the situation is no where near as dangerous as it was from 2004 - 2015. The IDPs, the lawlesslness in ex-FATA, the death of Nawab Akbar Bugti, the Nizam e Adl Regulations, Shamsi airbase, the Salala incident...the list is endless and for those who remember, it was not a pleasant time.

Having said all that Pakistan's policy of Afghanistan even today hasn't changed one bit - the goal is still an Afghanistan for Afghans but one that doesn't threaten Pakistan. There is plenty of academic discourse on the subject that is underway. Where we once saw the Mujahideen as partners, the partners emerging today are quite surprisingly the pro-Soviet forces under Massoud whom we once opposed in the 90s. Who could possibly have seen the Talibs running to the Hindu rasthra for support? At the same time who could have thought that the offspring of the anti-Mujahideen (and anti-Pak) Northern Alliance would find favour in Pakistan?

The reality is that the Great Game of influence in Afghanistan never went away - only the players have changed.
Click to expand...

The way I see it Afghan taliban would have made in to Kabul anyway without Pakistan support. USA or Soviets they would have left eventually.

The only thing double game archived by supporting Afghan taliban is Pakistan semi pariah status in 2010’s which allowed India to delude themselves in to being wishwaguru. It needed clarity of though and new leadership in Asim Munir to put Pakistan back in track to being middle power. Pakistan needed to burst India’s buble to be accepted back as middle power with real teeth.
 
Distant_Observer said:
Couldn't even establish a buffer zone or commit to mowing the lawn.

20 years of incompetence on the western border continues.

Afghanistan should be getting the Lebanon treatment. This is how you deal with proxies.

I'm assuming the establishment wants to kick the can down the road let the next generation deal with this problem.
Click to expand...
So like Israelis blindly murdering Palestinian and Lebanese civilians using their criminal Dahiya doctrine, we should also kill innocent Afghans en masse?

Kindly, aqal k nakhun lo bhai jan!
 
Baadil said:
I don't intend to follow up with any further engagement with the member account being replied to, but I just want to explicate, if it somehow wasn't clear already, that this account is a fan of Israel's modus operandi:

Mowing the grass - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

@RescueRanger @Master Chief @Waz @Musings, solely bringing to your attention for two reasons:
That perhaps you brothers in Islam can be made aware of what this account stands for.
That you may consider that a pattern of such posts may pose a liability for the forum.
Click to expand...
Sir you're confusing me for a member of the respected moderation team, perhaps because I spend as much time here as the mods do.

In my humble opinion, forum members should be entitled to their opinions, as long as they're in line with forum rules. Hopefully a mod can clarify further for you.
 
Blain2 said:
So like Israelis blindly murdering Palestinian and Lebanese civilians using their criminal Dahiya doctrine, we should also kill innocent Afghans en masse?

Kindly, aqal k nakhun lo bhai jan!
Click to expand...

Ofcourse not. But should there be consequences for this? Absolutely.
1778255520044.png

You are ranked number 1. These are exceptional circumstances. Your capital has already been bombed twice within a year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Pakistan Defence Latest

Country Watch Latest

Latest Posts

Share this page

Back
Top