The Transcript 1 second Recent remarks by Kayas, the EU foreign policy chief, during his trip to Islamabad 7 seconds have sparked a new wave of debate in political and media circles. In his blunt statement, 14 seconds he referred to attacks by groups based in Afghanistan against Pakistan, saying that Islamabad has the right to defend itself against these 23 secondsaggressions. This stance is significant for several reasons. First, it maysignal a shift in Europe’s — and even the world’s — discourse regardingAfghanistan’s security crisis after 30 seconds theTaliban’s return to power. Second, has Pakistan succeeded in convincing theinternational community that Taliban-ruled Afghanistan has become a base forterrorism against its neighbors and beyond? This is the debate of the day. 1:11 Greetings, welcome to “Debate of the Day.” I am Vaid Pekan, and my guests today are Mehrab Sarjoi, a Baloch political activist from London; Ajmal Sohail, counterterrorism expert from Germany; and Sang Siddiqi, political activist from the Netherlands. 1:27 We begin with Mr. Sohail: where is the geography of terrorism? Ajmal Sohail’s Remarks 1:36 It is very interesting, because today terrorism has no geography. 1:43 Terrorism today is largely directed through cyberspace, so we cannot designate a specific geography for terrorist activities. But what is important is that, as youmentioned, the EU seems to have been influenced by Pakistan’s narrative — thatPakistan is defending itself against 2:16 terrorist activities originating from Afghanistan. What pains me is that either theinternational community, the West, and Europe are turning a blind eye to thefacts, or they are being deceived by Pakistan. This is not new. 2:40 In 2011, when Osama bin Laden was hunted down in Pakistan during President Obama’s term, despite the fact that the U.S. had pursued him for 11 years as the symbol of anti-democracy and anti-American values, he was found in Pakistan. And in that same year, Pakistan became a non-permanent member of the UN Security Council. 3:36 If anyone researches how Pakistan managed to secure that seat in 2011, they will see the irony. Regarding the EU’s statements, what is striking is that Pakistan isbehind much of what happens in Afghanistan and the region. 4:07 If necessary, I can share written documents with you showing how Pakistan iscomplicit — not just complicit, but leading — in these matters, while trying towash its hands and blame Afghanistan. My aim is not to defend Afghanistan orthe Taliban, but to show that the Taliban are instruments of Pakistan, managedby it for tactical and strategic purposes. 5:10 I have a letter from Pakistan’s military intelligence (ISI), dated February 5 of thisyear, about a meeting in Rawalakot. Representatives of groups such as “Network47” led by Mufti Asghar Kashmiri, and Taliban representative Ibrahim Sadr, wereinvited. The meeting discussed relocating Kashmiri and Hamas militants intoAfghanistan and opening training centers. 6:20 The letter specifies provinces like Herat, Kandahar, and Helmand as locations for these camps. It was even confirmed by Afghan officials in Kandahar. 7:32 So where are the terrorist camps located? Without doubt, some are in Afghanistan, used by Pakistan against other countries — for example, against India through Kashmiri militants, and in the Middle East through Hamas. 8:28 Another letter from Pakistani intelligence refers to “Night Birds,” a codename forISIS-Khorasan. It states that ISI relocated ISIS fighters into Balochistan touse them against Baloch separatists and to pressure Afghanistan. 9:34 With the Taliban’s return, have terrorist centers shifted from Pakistan to Afghanistan?Partly, yes — for Pakistan’s tactical and strategic interests, especiallyagainst India, China, and in the Middle East. 10:32 Terroristgroups can be divided into three categories: · Global groups:al-Qaeda and ISIS. · Regional groups:ISIS-Khorasan, the Taliban, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, Islamic Movement ofTajikistan, etc. · Local groups:operating between Afghanistan and Pakistan with state awareness and support. 26:32 Now, why have the Taliban entered this game? What benefit do they see in supporting terrorist groups? 26:41Professionally speaking, we must clarify the definition of terrorism. If weaccept the cliché definition — any non-state group that takes up arms forpolitical, economic, social, religious, or ideological reasons, killingcivilians and disrupting life — then even resistance groups fighting oppressiveregimes would be called terrorists. 27:27 For example, Baloch liberation groups mostly target Pakistani military, notcivilians. If we apply the cliché definition, then even Ahmad Massoud’sNational Resistance Front fighting the Taliban would be labeled terrorist. Thatis incorrect. 28:44 We must distinguish between groups fighting a legitimate government versus those fighting an occupying, illegitimate regime. The Taliban themselves areterrorists, so resistance against them cannot be defined as terrorism. 30:07 Pakistan has succeeded in pushing its narrative diplomatically, through lobbying, so that EU officials echo its stance. Meanwhile, the Taliban have also lobbied to deny it. But the presence of terrorist groups in Afghanistan is undeniable. 30:49 The Taliban allow these groups to operate, giving Pakistan a pretext to claim “legitimate defense” and attack Afghanistan whenever it wishes. 31:15 Pakistan uses these groups as tools of influence — against Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and others. The Taliban lack deterrence power, so they use terrorist groups as a substitute for defense. 32:01 Afghanistan has indeed become recognized globally as a center of terrorism. 33:41 The Taliban’s strategy is not truly effective, but they use these groups to exertinfluence. Pakistan, however, has far greater freedom to threaten and attackAfghanistan under this pretext. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit ajmals.substack.com/subscribe
