In a nation still healing from the scars of terrorism, the recent statement by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur, accusing the country’s intelligence agencies of harboring terrorists, is not only careless but deeply hurtful. At a time when national unity and institutional integrity are critical, such statements serve only to empower the enemies and undermine the very foundations that have kept Pakistan intact in the face of relentless internal and external threats.

Accusing intelligence agencies of harboring terrorists undermines national unity and institutional integrity.

The Pakistan Army, alongside its intelligence apparatus, has borne the brunt of the war on terror for nearly two decades. No institution in the country has sacrificed more militarily, economically, and emotionally than the Pakistan Army. Thousands of soldiers have laid down their lives in the tribal areas, along the western border, and in major urban centers in a protracted battle against extremism. The intelligence agencies, often operating in the shadows and with limited recognition, have played a central role in dismantling terrorist networks, intercepting threats, and cooperating with global intelligence communities to protect not just Pakistan but regional stability at large.

Ali Amin’s statement is not only contradictory to ground realities but appears to be driven by personal and political frustration. Facing criticism from within his party and public backlash over governance and performance, he seems to have chosen a path of deflection, targeting institutions that have historically delivered where politics has often failed. Instead of confronting the shortcomings within his administrative sphere, particularly in a province repeatedly hit by militancy, he has taken the dangerous route of conspiracy rhetoric.

To suggest that Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency is colluding with the very actors it has spent years fighting with is not only absurd but also self-contradictory. Pakistan’s counterterrorism operations like Zarb-e-Azb, Radd-ul-Fasaad, and ongoing intelligence-based operations have dismantled safe havens, killed or captured thousands of militants, and denied operational space to international terror outfits like ISKP, and Al-Qaeda. These operations have been deeply reliant on the synergy between military planning and intelligence precision, and their success has been recognized not only domestically but also by international observers and allies.

It is easy to make inflammatory statements; it is far harder to back them with evidence or face the consequences of their long-term implications. Ali Amin’s remarks risk legitimizing narratives long peddled by Pakistan’s detractors, those who seek to portray the country as a state complicit in instability rather than one constantly battling it. Such rhetoric is music to the ears of anti-Pakistan propagandists and hostile foreign lobbies who have, for years, tried to isolate Pakistan diplomatically and economically by questioning the intentions of its security institutions.

Pakistan’s military and intelligence have borne immense sacrifices in the war on terror.

The people of Pakistan, particularly in KP and border areas, know rightly the price Pakistan Army has paid. From Swat to Waziristan, the restoration of peace was not achieved through negotiation or compromise with terrorists; rather, it was earned through blood, resilience, and an unwavering commitment to national security. Such statements not only dishonor the fallen but disrespect the families who have sacrificed everything for the flag.

Moreover, the ISI, often an easy scapegoat due to its clandestine nature, has played a critical role in intercepting terror plots, eliminating sleeper cells, and even assisting in the capture of international terrorists in coordination with allies like the U.S. and Turkey. These efforts have saved countless lives and averted potential disasters both inside and outside the country. Alleging that this very agency is strategically leveraging terrorism is not only baseless but intellectually dishonest.

There is a time for political point-scoring and there is a time for national responsibility. When politicians cross that line in pursuit of personal vendettas, they do more harm than good, not just to institutions but to the broader democratic and national fabric. Discrediting the armed forces for short-term political mileage undermines morale, emboldens enemies, and fractures public confidence in the country’s defense mechanism.

Ali Amin’s comments, therefore, are not just unsubstantiated; they are reckless. In a polarized environment, leaders must act as unifiers, not as a source of division. He must be reminded that criticism of the military should be constructive, rooted in evidence, and mindful of the sacrifices made. Turning baseless accusations into public narratives only weakens the state’s posture against terrorism and emboldens those who wish to see Pakistan divided and vulnerable.

Baseless accusations serve the narratives of detractors seeking to isolate Pakistan.

The Pakistan Army and ISI have been consistent in stating that they operate under the will of the people and in defense of the Constitution. While no institution is above accountability, that accountability must be informed, fair, and objective, and not driven by political animosity or misinformation.

In conclusion, Pakistan’s security institutions have paid in blood to defend this country. They deserve respect, not defamation. Politicians must realize that in undermining the military for political gain, they are undermining the very state they claim to serve. Responsible leadership means putting the nation above narrative, and that is a principle worth defending.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.