Gandapur distances K-P govt from Bajaur op
Chairing a provincial cabinet meeting in the metropolis, the chief minister, however, opposed the forced displacement of civilians from areas affected by the recent surge in terror activities.
"Operations and forced displacement of civilians are not my government's policy," he told his cabinet colleagues while briefing them on the law-and-order situation in the province.
His remarks came a day after media reports said security forces, reportedly assisted by helicopter gunships and artillery, pounded terrorist hideouts in Lowi Mamund and War Mamund tehsils, located about 20km from Khar, the district headquarters.
No loss of life was reported on the first day of the operation, which continued until sunset. The offensive, codenamed Operation Sarbakaf, was initially launched on July 29 but was postponed the next day after peace talks between the Bajaur Amn Jirga and local terrorist commanders made some headway.
However, negotiations for relocating terrorists to Afghanistan collapsed last week due to a stalemate over certain issues.
The chief minister categorically stated that the provincial government had not authorised any such operation. It is worth noting that PTI founding chairman Imran Khan had instructed the provincial chief executive to oppose any form of military operation "tooth and nail".
Addressing the situation in Bajaur, the chief minister said that following the collapse of negotiations, "the authorities concerned are now conducting targeted actions". To safeguard residents, Section 144 has been imposed in the affected areas, he added.
The chief minister condemned anti-state elements attempting to destabilise the country, reiterating that terrorism was "unequivocally unacceptable" as it affected all citizens equally.
He highlighted the provincial government's proactive strategy, beginning with the establishment of jirgas to build public trust and enlist community support in combating terrorism.
The chief minister informed the cabinet that the federal government had expressed willingness to engage in negotiations with Afghanistan. "The provincial government is currently preparing its groundwork in this regard," he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Recorder
7 hours ago
- Business Recorder
PTI leaders condemn amendments in anti-terrorism law
ISLAMABAD: In a fiery backlash, the opposition Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) on Wednesday condemned the amendment to Section 4 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, terming it an outright assault on constitutional freedoms and a flagrant violation of Article 10 – the cornerstone of fundamental rights. Speaking at a press conference following a turbulent parliamentary committee meeting, PTI leaders described the controversial amendment as nothing short of a state-sanctioned instrument for unchecked tyranny. The legislation now permits detention without trial for three months, extendable by a further quarter-year. PTI MNA Latif Khosa criticised the amendment, saying it stripes away the previous safeguard requiring high court approval for custody extensions, instead bestowing unchecked powers upon local police chiefs. 'This is a cynical political weapon, designed to suppress opposition dissent.' He reiterated that detainees must be presented before magistrates within 24 hours – a constitutional guarantee now flagrantly ignored under the new law's sweeping 'suspicious' catch-all criteria, effectively legalising indefinite detention without accountability. 'The government's actions are unforgivable. This regime is brazenly weaponising the law to silence political opposition through brute force.' Another PTI MNA, and Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), Junaid Akbar, joined the condemnation, exposing the legislation as a thinly veiled attempt to muzzle political campaigning. He revealed chilling 'state tactics' of sedition charges and terror-tagging of political activities, signalling an unprecedented crackdown in recent memory. Akbar contrasted the incumbent government's arrogance with his party's initial struggles in governance, asserting that those responsible for these draconian laws will ultimately be held to account. He also criticised the establishment's opaque record, questioning the outcomes of over 21 operations. He asked who exerted influence over the Taliban's movements, particularly in relation to Punjab. However, he dismissed allegations linking PTI with the Taliban, affirming the party's unequivocal stance against terrorism. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Express Tribune
10 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Convicts can't travel abroad, PHC tells Shibli
The Peshawar High Court (PHC) on Wednesday dismissed a petition by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Senator Shibli Faraz against the placement of his name on the Provisional National Identification List (PNIL), ruling that a convicted person cannot be permitted to travel abroad. A two-member bench, comprising Justice Syed Arshad Ali and Justice Dr Khurshid Iqbal, heard the matter. Faraz's counsel, Bashir Khan Wazir, informed the court that while his client's name had been removed from the Exit Control List (ECL), it was subsequently placed on the PNIL. He acknowledged that the petition had been filed before his client's conviction, which had altered the circumstances. Justice Syed Arshad Ali observed that Faraz now had only two legal options, to serve his sentence in jail or seek bail from the court. "We cannot turn a blind eye. How can we allow a convicted person to travel abroad?" the judge remarked. The government counsel submitted a report confirming that Faraz's name had been moved from the ECL to the PNIL. The defense stated that Faraz intended to surrender before the court and requested disposal of the petition. The bench accepted the request and closed the case. Bail extensions for PTI leaders In separate proceedings, the PHC extended the protective bail of PTI Peshawar Region President and MNA Atif Khan, MNA Shahid Khattak, and Senator Mishaal Azam until September 2, barring authorities from arresting them in any registered case. The court also directed the federal government to provide complete details of all cases filed against them. Hearing petitions filed by the three leaders and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa Minister Meena Khan, the same bench was told by their counsel that numerous cases had been lodged against them without providing specifics. The Assistant Attorney General admitted the government's report was still pending and assured the court it would be submitted at the next hearing. In Meena Khan's case, the Assistant Deputy Attorney General revealed that three cases were registered against him in Islamabad, with no pending inquiries at NAB or FIA. The court disposed of his petition, advising him to approach the relevant trial courts. Azam Swati moves contempt petition Meanwhile, PTI Senator Azam Swati once again faced a travel ban when stopped at Peshawar Airport. He filed a contempt of court petition through Advocate Ali Azeem against the federal government, FIA, and other authorities, alleging violation of court orders that had directed the removal of his name from all stop-lists. Swati contended that despite the PHC's recent acceptance of his plea to remove his name from the ECL and Passport Control List (PCL), it was added to the PNIL in defiance of the
Express Tribune
11 hours ago
- Express Tribune
Social media and fracturing of Pakistan's political discourse
The writer is a public policy analyst based in Lahore. She can be reached at durdananajam1@ Political polarisation in Pakistan has intensified manifold since the ouster of former prime minister Imran Khan in 2022 through a no-confidence vote. A sharp divide emerged from this so-called democratic process, eroding the possibility of consensus even on matters of national security. As Hamra Tariq noted in Paradigm Shift, "The present time's political polarization in Pakistan has made it extremely difficult to differentiate between manipulation and guidance", with reason and evidence increasingly absent from public debate. In this fragmented environment, social media has emerged not just as a mirror of division, but as its amplifier. A recent study by the Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI), titled Impact of Social Media on Political Polarisation in Pakistan, offers a comprehensive analysis of how platforms like X, TikTok, Facebook and WhatsApp are reshaping political engagement and deepening ideological divides. The findings are both illuminating and sobering. Between 2017 and 2025, Pakistan's social media user base more than doubled — from 31 million to 66.9 million. This digital expansion has brought new voices into the political conversation, but it has also created echo chambers and filter bubbles that reinforce existing biases. According to the IPRI study, 62.5% of respondents agreed that social media has made Pakistan's political sphere more polarised. The algorithms powering these platforms prioritise emotionally charged content, often at the expense of factual accuracy. As political scientist Emilia Palonen has argued, polarisation thrives on the creation of binary identities — "us versus them" — which social media is uniquely positioned to cultivate. The study's quantitative analysis, using Spearman's Rank Correlation Coefficient, reveals platform-specific dynamics. X showed a statistically significant positive correlation with political polarisation, suggesting that users who trust its political content are more likely to perceive heightened division. TikTok, interestingly, showed a statistically significant negative correlation - indicating that users who trust its political content are less likely to view it as a source of polarisation. Facebook, WhatsApp, YouTube and Instagram showed weak or no correlation, underscoring the differentiated impact of each platform. These findings challenge simplistic narratives about social media's role in politics. It is not merely the presence of political content but its structure, delivery and emotional tenor that shape public perception. The study also highlights the role of political actors in weaponising social media. Parties now routinely hire PR firms, influencers and digital activists to push partisan narratives, often blurring the line between engagement and propaganda. This has led to a spillover effect, where ordinary users become unwitting participants in a digital war of attrition. The consequences are far-reaching. Hate speech, misinformation and personal attacks are not just tolerated — they are rewarded by algorithms that prioritise virality over veracity. The IPRI study found strong correlations between political polarisation and exposure to extremist content, with respondents acknowledging that such content influences both their online and offline relationships. What makes this moment particularly dangerous is the erosion of trust — not just between political parties, but between citizens and institutions. The study notes that national institutions have increasingly become targets of online disinformation campaigns, often without credible evidence. Political actors use social media to mobilise support and discredit opponents; but in doing so, they also undermine the legitimacy of democratic institutions. This erosion of trust is not incidental — it is a deliberate attempt of polarising digital rhetoric. The study also identifies key drivers of polarisation: algorithmic amplification; political incidents; and, lack of media literacy. Algorithms create echo chambers by showing users content that aligns with their existing beliefs, reinforcing confirmation bias and limiting exposure to diverse viewpoints. Political events — such as protests, arrests and electoral disputes - are often distorted online, fuelling outrage and deepening divisions. Meanwhile, low levels of media literacy make users more susceptible to misinformation, reducing their ability to critically evaluate content. To address these challenges, the study offers a set of thoughtful recommendations. These include integrating digital literacy into educational curricula; regulating algorithmic amplification; and, promoting inclusive discourse. It also calls for the development of indigenous social media platforms to reduce dependence on foreign tech giants whose moderation policies may not align with Pakistan's socio-political realities. These reforms are not just technical — they are political. They require a commitment to democratic norms, institutional transparency and civic education. The future of political engagement in Pakistan will depend on how these digital spaces are managed. Censorship and shutdowns, as the study rightly notes, are counterproductive. What is needed is a multi-stakeholder approach involving policymakers, tech companies, educators and civil society. The current level of polarisation has made it increasingly difficult to foster social cohesion. Political engagement has become synonymous with tribal loyalty, and dissent is often treated as betrayal. Yet, the IPRI study also reveals that many users are open to opposing views and willing to verify information before sharing it. This suggests that the problem is not insurmountable — it is structural. In essence, social media is neither inherently good nor bad — it is a reflection of the society that uses it. In Pakistan, where political identities are deeply entrenched and institutional trust is fragile, the unchecked growth of polarising content poses a serious threat to democratic cohesion. The IPRI study provides a timely and rigorous framework for understanding this phenomenon and offers a roadmap for mitigating its impact. It is now up to the country's leadership - political, institutional and civic — to act on these insights and steer the digital discourse toward a more informed and united future.
