Former United States diplomat Zalmay Khalilzad has drawn sharp criticism from regional analysts and policy observers after accusing Pakistan of violating a ceasefire and bombing civilians in Afghanistan’s Paktika province, claims described by independent sources as factually inaccurate and politically motivated.
In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Khalilzad alleged that Pakistan “chose to break the ceasefire” and struck Urgoon district in Paktika, claiming that “eight cricket players were among the dead.” He further accused Islamabad of being “an intolerant and dishonest neighbor” that “must stop attacking Afghanistan.”
“Qatar is an honest broker, is Pakistan an honest neighbor?” Khalilzad wrote, asserting that Pakistan had sabotaged diplomatic efforts for peace.
However, the claims were quickly challenged by regional experts and fact-checkers who pointed out that Pakistan’s air operations on October 17 targeted militant compounds belonging to the Hafiz Gul Bahadur (HGB) Group, a Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP)-affiliated network accused of staging cross-border attacks and a recent suicide bombing in North Waziristan that took life of a Pakistani soldier.
What Led to Pakistan’s Strikes
According to security sources and open-source intelligence reports reviewed by HTN World, the Khost and Paktika strikes were launched hours after militants from the Gul Bahadur Group carried out a VBIED (vehicle-borne improvised explosive device) attack on Kashif Shaheed Fort in Mir Ali, North Waziristan. The suicide blast, followed by a ground assault, was repelled, killing multiple attackers.
The same faction, operating from sanctuaries in southeastern Afghanistan, has claimed several recent attacks targeting Pakistani forces.
Officials familiar with the operation said the air strikes were “precision-based, intelligence-driven, and proportionate,” aimed at terror leadership compounds used as launchpads for cross-border infiltration.
“These were not random targets, they were command nodes and assembly sites for suicide missions,” said one senior counterterror official. “The claim that civilians or sports players were killed is recycled propaganda that’s been used before by TTP and RAW-linked information channels.”
Ceasefire Reality and Misrepresentation
Diplomatic sources confirmed that the 48-hour ceasefire Khalilzad referred to was agreed between Islamabad and the Taliban regime, not with terror networks operating from Afghan soil.
Pakistan’s Foreign Office had earlier said the truce was initiated at Kabul’s request to create “space for dialogue” following a week of border clashes around Spin Boldak and Chaman.
Security officials insist that the Mir Ali suicide attack, launched by the HGB faction during the truce, effectively nullified the agreement before Pakistan responded.
“You cannot violate a ceasefire and then hide behind it,” said a defense analyst based in Rawalpindi. “Pakistan’s actions were defensive and consistent with international counterterrorism norms.”
Pattern of Partisan Commentary
Observers say Khalilzad’s remarks fit a pattern of selective outrage and historical bias. His earlier interventions, including calls for negotiations with the TTP and criticism of Pakistan’s deportation of illegal Afghan nationals, have often mirrored narratives propagated by anti-Pakistan lobbies.
His commentary routinely ignores that Pakistan continues to face daily attacks from groups operating inside Afghanistan, analysts note. They also said that Khalilzad’s credibility has eroded since the collapse of the US-brokered peace framework in 2021, and his frequent social-media interventions are viewed as attempts to stay relevant.
“For someone who failed to bring peace to his own country, moral grandstanding over Pakistan’s fight against terrorism seems ironic,” one retired Pakistani diplomat remarked.
Pakistan’s Broader Counterterror Context
Officials in Islamabad said that the recent precision operations in Khost, Paktika, and Kandahar were part of a broader strategy under Operation Azm-e-Istehkam, aimed at dismantling Fitna al-Khawarij, the state’s official term for militant groups aligned with the banned TTP.
Since January, over 500 cross-border incidents have been recorded along the Afghan frontier, killing dozens of Pakistani soldiers and civilians.
Independent security trackers note that nearly 90% of the attacks in 2025 originated from areas inside Afghanistan now under Taliban control.
Despite the provocations, Pakistan maintains that it “remains committed to regional peace” but will “exercise its right to self-defense when attacked.”
A Familiar Deflection
Regional commentators describe Khalilzad’s remarks as an attempt to deflect attention from the Taliban’s failure to curb terrorist groups on its soil. “It’s the same script,” one analyst said. “Blame Pakistan when militants strike from your territory, it’s convenient, but not credible.”
For now, Islamabad has chosen not to respond officially, signaling that it prefers strategic restraint over trading barbs with what officials privately call “irrelevant provocateurs.”
