• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Transcript of the Weekly Media Briefing by the Spokesperson on Friday, 17th October 2025

Pakistan Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Assalam-o-Alaikum,

Welcome to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Pakistan is deeply concerned at the unwarranted aggression by the Afghan Taliban, Fitna-al-Khawarij and Fitna-al-Hindustan along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border on the night of 11-12 and then 14-15 October 2025. Such unprovoked actions aimed at destabilizing the Pakistan-Afghanistan border belied the overall spirit of peaceful neighborhood and cooperative relations between the two neighboring countries.

Pakistan, exercising its right of self-defense, not only effectively repulsed the assaults all along the border, but also inflicted heavy losses on Taliban forces and affiliated terrorist groups operating from the Afghan soil, in terms of men, material and infrastructure. These infrastructures were used to plan and facilitate terrorist attacks against Pakistan.

Our targeted and precise defensive response was not targeted towards the Afghan civilian population. Unlike Taliban Forces, we exercised extreme caution in our defensive responses to avoid loss of civilian lives.

At the Taliban regime's request and with mutual consent, the Government of Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban regime decided to implement a temporary ceasefire which became effective 06 PM on 15th October 2025 and will span for 48 hours. During this period, both sides are making sincere efforts to find a positive resolution to this complex but solvable issue through constructive dialogue.

Pakistan greatly values dialogue and diplomacy and a mutually beneficial relationship with Afghanistan. At the same time, the Government of Pakistan continues to closely monitor the situation and would take all possible measures to safeguard its territory and the lives of its people.

Pakistan strongly rejects assertions and insinuations by the Interim Afghan Foreign Minister in India to divert attention from the presence of terrorist elements in Afghanistan. By making these baseless assertions, the Taliban regime cannot absolve itself of its responsibilities towards regional peace and stability. Continued presence of terrorist elements on Afghan soil and the freedom of activities enjoyed by them in Afghanistan are well documented, including in the UN Monitoring Team reports.

The fight against terrorism is a common cause. Instead of shifting responsibilities, the Taliban regime should honor its commitment of not allowing its territory to be used for terrorism against other countries and play its due role in achieving peace and stability in the region and beyond.

Pakistan has repeatedly shared its concerns related to the presence of Fitna-al-Khawarij and Fitna-al-Hindustan operating from Afghan soil. Pakistan expects concrete and verifiable actions against these terrorist elements by the Taliban regime.

Pakistan, in the spirit of good neighborliness, Islamic brotherhood, and humanity, has generously hosted around four million Afghans for more than four decades. Pakistan will take all actions to regulate the presence of Afghan nationals on its territory, in accordance with international norms and its domestic laws.

Pakistan is desirous of a peaceful, stable, friendly, inclusive, regionally connected, and prosperous Afghanistan. Pakistan expects Taliban regime to act responsibly, honor its commitments, and play a constructive role in achieving the shared objective of rooting out terrorism from its soil. We also hope that one day, the Afghan people would be emancipated and they would be governed by a true representative government.

Pakistan has also conveyed its strong reservations on the elements of India-Afghanistan Joint Statement, issued on 10 October 2025 in New Delhi, to Afghanistan's Ambassador to Pakistan.

The reference to Jammu and Kashmir as part of India was in clear violation of the relevant UN Security Council resolutions and the legal status of Jammu and Kashmir. It was highly insensitive to the sacrifices and sentiments of the people of Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir in their just struggle for their right to self-determination.

Pakistan also strongly rejected Afghan Acting Foreign Minister's assertion that terrorism is Pakistan's internal problem as Pakistan has repeatedly shared details regarding the presence of Fitna-al-Khawarij and Fitna-al-Hindustan terrorist elements operating from Afghan soil against Pakistan with the support from elements within Afghanistan. It emphasized that by deflecting the responsibility of controlling terrorism towards Pakistan, the Interim Afghan Government cannot be absolved of its obligations towards ensuring peace and stability in the region and beyond.

On 14th October 2025, Foreign Secretary Ambassador Amna Baloch hosted a comprehensive briefing session on the latest developments on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border for the resident ambassadors in Islamabad where she underscored Pakistan's legitimate security concerns and its unwavering resolve to protect its territorial integrity and national security.

On the recent statements made by the Spokesperson of Taliban regime on Pakistan's internal affairs, Pakistan strongly encourages the Afghan spokesperson to prioritize issues pertinent to Afghanistan and refrain from commenting on matters outside their jurisdiction.

The principle of non-interference in matters of other countries should be adhered to as per international diplomatic norms. Pakistan does not require outside advice on its internal matters. We also expect the Taliban Regime to abide by its obligations and promises made to the international community during Doha Process.

At the joint invitation of Egypt's President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi and US President Donald Trump, Prime Minister Muhammad Shehbaz Sharif undertook an important diplomatic visit to Sharm El Sheikh from 13-14 October 2025.

The Prime Minister, along with Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister as well as senior cabinet members, participated in the high-level multilateral initiative aimed at addressing the grave humanitarian and security crisis in Gaza.

Pakistan's active role in peace diplomacy has reinforced Pakistan's position as a responsible regional actor committed to global peace and justice. Pakistan's contributions and constructive role in shaping the peace process is widely acknowledged. It has strengthened Pakistan's image as a leading Muslim country for regional security and cooperation.

Around 30 leaders, including UK Prime Minister, German Chancellor, President Erdogan of Türkiye, Emir of Qatar, President of Indonesia, Canadian Prime Minister and several other leaders from Muslim and European countries attended the summit in Sharm-el-Sheikh. The event included a quadrilateral ceremony for signing of the document by US, Egypt, Qatar and Türkiye as guarantors of the peace deal.

According to the official schedule of the summit, only President Trump and President Sisi were scheduled to make statements after the signing ceremony. Breaking with the agenda, President Trump invited Prime Minister to speak. In his brief remarks, PM Shehbaz thanked President Trump for providing exemplary leadership in bringing peace to many regions, particularly to Gaza. He also highlighted and thanked President Trump for stopping conflict between India and Pakistan.

On the sidelines of the Summit, Prime Minister held meetings with the President of Palestine, Mahmoud Abbas, and King of Bahrain, Sheikh Hamad bin Isa Al-Khalifa; the President of the United States, Donald Trump; President of Azerbaijan, Ilham Aliyev, and Prime Minister of Armenia, Nikol Pashinyan.

The Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister, Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar, also held meetings with counterparts from countries that participated in the Summit. The Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister met the Foreign Minister of Egypt, President of Palestine, Secretary of State of the United States and Foreign Minister of Türkiye. The Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister also accompanied the Prime Minister for a meeting with His Majesty King Abdullah II of Jordan on the sidelines of the Summit.

On his way back from Egypt the Prime Minister stated that the reason Pakistan was so deeply involved in the Gaza Peace Summit was because the most important priority for Pakistan was the immediate cessation of the genocidal campaign imposed on Gaza. Along with other brotherly nations, this priority was stated and reinforced consistently.

He expressed Pakistan's gratitude to President Trump which was anchored in him promising that he would make it stop, and delivering on that promise. He added further that Pakistan will continue to express its support and appreciation for President Trump's contribution to peace. The Palestinian people's freedom, dignity and prosperity remain a primary concern for Pakistan. The establishment of a strong and viable Palestinian state with pre-1967 borders and Al Quds Al Sharif as its capital remains the bedrock of Pakistan's Middle East policy and will remain so.

Ahead of the Summit in Sharm El Sheikh, the Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister held telephonic conversations with the Foreign Minister of Egypt, Foreign Minister of Azerbaijan, Foreign Minister of Iran, and the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of Qatar on 11th October 2025 to deliberate over diplomatic efforts led by Arab-Islamic countries to promote peace and stability in the region and strengthen coordination prior to the Summit.

On 16th October 2025, the Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister, Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar, received a telephone call from the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia regarding the regional situation & recent developments.

The Saudi Foreign Minister appreciated Pakistan's commitment to peace and security in the region and emphasized the importance of collective efforts for stability.

On 14th October 2025, United Nations General Assembly elected Pakistan for a three-year term on the United Nations Human Rights Council (HRC), commencing 1st January 2026. Pakistan secured its seat with resounding majority of 178 votes.

This election to the Council marks the sixth time Pakistan has been chosen for this role since the Human Rights Council's establishment in 2006. This recurring recognition underscores international community's trust in Pakistan's commitment to defending, promoting, and protecting human rights both domestically and globally, as well as its contribution to strengthening the international human rights system. Additionally, it highlights Pakistan's proven track record and persistent efforts as a consensus-builder within the Human Rights Council.

During its forthcoming term as a member of the Human Rights Council, Pakistan will actively engage with the broader UN membership and civil society to advance all facets of human rights. This includes civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights, alongside the right to development. Pakistan will also lend its full support to Human Rights Council's mandate and reiterates its commitment to work with the international community on the basis of TRUCE: tolerance, respect, universality, consensus-building, and engagement.

HRC is a platform for addressing human rights violations worldwide, including those in territories under foreign and illegal occupation. In accordance with the Council's mandate, Pakistan will continue to draw attention to the grave human rights violations by the Indian occupation forces in the Indian Illegally Occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IIOJK). Pakistan will similarly highlight the human rights violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

The Human Rights Council, an intergovernmental body based in Geneva within the United Nations system, is responsible for promoting and protecting human rights globally. Comprising 47 Member States, the HRC addresses thematic human rights issues and specific situations requiring urgent attention.

The Deputy Prime Minister/Foreign Minister, Senator Mohammad Ishaq Dar, received a telephone call today from the European Union High Representative/Vice President (EU HR/VP), Kaja Kallas.

They appreciated the frequent high-level exchanges and the positive momentum in Pak-EU relations. Both looked forward to continued engagement in the bilateral and multilateral context, including during the upcoming Pakistan-EU Strategic Dialogue in Brussels in November. They also exchanged views on recent regional and global developments.

I thank you all.
***

Spokesperson: For the matter of record, before I open the floor for questions and answers, during the last briefing, there was a question on Pakistan's participation in a conference held on Gaza in Paris, France. There was no news on Pakistan's participation in the said conference, despite it being one of the eight Arab-Islamic countries which participated in the making of the deal on Trump's proposal regarding Gaza. So, my answer at that time, and I need to confess that I was not fully briefed, was that one is not supposed to be in every briefing or every meeting, but I need to set the record straight as Pakistan was invited and it was represented at the meeting by our Ambassador in France, Mumtaz Zahra Baloch. So, this is for the record, I thought I should correct it before we can proceed further.

(Mateen Haider, GTV News): Two days ago, Pakistan carried out another round of strikes on terrorist hideouts in Kandahar and Kabul. For the strikes conducted by Pakistan against terrorist sanctuaries in Afghanistan so far, did Pakistan take the US CENTCOM into confidence before proceeding with this massive security operation in Afghanistan? Secondly, what is the future roadmap of peace after clashes between Pakistan and Afghanistan as there are reports that both countries are expected to hold talks in Doha. If so, please update on these talks. If not, is there is any contact either at the military, diplomatic or political level so that after the ceasefire expires, the conflict does not resume?

(Zahid Farooq Malik, Daily Metro Watch): You talked earlier about 48 hours of ceasefire, 3 hours are now left, are there any updates regarding its extension or are any deliberations taking place because only 3 hours are left before the ceasefire expires?

Journalist: With escalation from the western front as a backdrop, do you think that Kabul is fighting a proxy war on the behalf of Delhi?

(Anwer Abbas, 24 News HD): During this temporary ceasefire, there have been violations on part of the Afghan Taliban. Did we lodge any protests or contact Saudi Arabia or Qatar in response to these violations by the Afghan Taliban?

(Asghar Ali Mubarak, The Daily Mail International): Has the Taliban government directly contacted the Pakistan Government or has this process been ongoing indirectly?

(Ghazala Noreen, Suno News): Sir, first of all you fulfilled your obligations very well in very crucial situations. Best wishes for you and we welcome the upcoming Spokesperson. My question is that has any brotherly country played a mediatory role for ceasefire? If so, would you like to name those countries? Secondly, are there any ongoing talks, discussions or agreements currently taking place between the two countries?

(Zeeshan Syed, Neo News): Sir, first of all best wishes for you and we welcome the new Spokesperson. There are reports that very important talks are going to take place in Doha on Pak-Afghan border clashes. Can you confirm who will be representing Pakistan? And as only three hours are remaining before the end of the ceasefire, what would happen after that? Are there chances for extension of the ceasefire?

Spokesperson: Let me start by answering the question from Mr. Mateen, we are under no obligation to inform anyone, be it CENTCOM or any other country, that a situation has arisen where our territory has been attacked, and we are taking defensive measures. However, at the same time, you have a range of diplomatic relations, we have your allies, we have your friends. So, you keep telling your version of events that this is what has happened. This is what we are doing and why we are doing so, this is the normal diplomatic practice, but taking green signal or specifically informing a military command of a particular country? No. In general, we have briefed our friends and allies on the evolving situation and our concerns and our position on those issues.

The second question regarding the violation of the temporary ceasefire, I do not have specific information, but I will refer you to the ISPR for specific operational details. So far, the information has not come to my office. I would request you to contact the ISPR for any specific questions regarding the precise nature of any violations taking place anywhere.

About direct Taliban and Pakistan talks and the kind of ongoing dialogues, we have ambassadors, embassies are working in Islamabad and Kabul. Kabul has an ambassador in Islamabad; our ambassador is also working in Kabul. So, what I want to emphasize is that the regular diplomatic interaction is ongoing.

And I just want to reiterate that the ceasefire took place after the Taliban regime approached us, requested us for the ceasefire, and then the ceasefire was ultimately agreed and settled for the 48-hour period.

About any specific country playing a role, the bilateral track was dominating. But of course, when such an event takes place and there is an escalation of tensions, in the background there are lot of countries with whom regular diplomatic interactions and channels are already in place.

However, the primary track which was used for agreeing on the ceasefire was the bilateral track, following the request we received from the Taliban regime. And obviously I can preempt a question that the Taliban regime is saying that the request came from Pakistan. So, what I can say is that I have provided the facts to you, I cannot comment on the fantasy world or a bizarre world creating alternate facts. That is a different matter. But the facts are that there was a specific request from the Taliban regime, as a result of which the contacts were established and the 48-hour ceasefire was agreed.

About the Doha, frankly speaking, I have nothing concrete to share with you or whether to speculate on when or where these kinds of talks will take place. But at the same time, all of you are very experienced professional journalists, and you understand that things are moving fast. In this situation, there is a crisis situation, things are, you know, moving. But if a dialogue is to take place somewhere, we will, in the right time, inform you. But what I can convey to you at this point in time, there is no specific information which I can share with you about the agreement for a dialogue in terms of the time, in terms of the content, in terms of the level, in terms of the place. So, I do not have any information to share with you on that.

About what will happen after the 48-hours, so let's wait for the 48-hours and see if the ceasefire holds. And I have explained to you the broad template of our policy, which is based on emphasis on diplomacy and stability and there should be stability in the bilateral relations between the two countries. So, we work on that premise, and we move forward from there.

About proxy war for New Delhi, what I can tell you is that India's negative influence is casting its dark shadow over entire South Asia. It is one country which has bad relations with all of its neighbors and is a constant factor of instability. And we understand India nurturing and supporting terrorists who are attacking Pakistan and based in Afghanistan. This Indian role is well known, and international community is very well aware of that.

(Shaukat Piracha, Aaj TV): Sir, I have three questions. Firstly, the Indian government, their Ministry of External Affairs, has also issued a Statement on this conflict between Afghanistan and Pakistan, wherein they have assured and reiterated their commitment to Afghanistan's sovereignty and territorial integrity. How you view this statement? Secondly, you just spoke about Indian proxies and the Prime Minister, in his address to the cabinet yesterday, also talked about Afghan interim Foreign Minister Mullah Amir Muttaqi sitting in Delhi. So, is India a factor in this conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan? Thirdly, it was surprising to note that in a statement you said that Pakistan expects the Afghan people to be emancipated soon and that they would be governed by their chosen representatives, or true representatives. This is surprising for me because we were taunted by all that we are harboring or nurturing Quetta Shuras and networks, Haqqani networks, etc., etc. So, is this policy that we will not grow any more snakes, which not necessarily will bite our neighbors, over?

Spokesperson: About the first question, as I mentioned in my earlier answer as well, India's baleful influence on the entire South Asia and its negative role in destabilizing the entire region are well known. We have noted the remarks made by the Spokesperson of the Indian Ministry of External Affairs concerning recent developments in Pakistan-Afghanistan relations. These remarks are unfortunate and reflect a deliberate mischaracterization of the situation on the ground.

Pakistan's actions were guided solely by considerations of its own security and undertaken in self-defense against unprovoked and destabilizing activities along the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. Such comments are obviously aimed at sabotaging the efforts currently underway to restore peace and normalcy.

India is in no position to cast aspersions on others, given its own well documented record of involvement in acts of terrorism and extraterritorial assassinations in Pakistan and beyond. Its claims of respecting Afghanistan's sovereignty and territorial integrity ring hollow in light of its persistent interference in the internal affairs of other countries.

Your second question on Indian proxies and on the Indian factor, it obviously exists and is well known, especially with regard to funding and sustenance provided by India to all the terrorists, including the BLA and TPP to target Pakistan. It is very well known, there is nothing hidden about it.

For your third question, I can emphasize, it is something which one neighbor would obviously desire for its other neighbor is the hope for a true representative government taking over.

I can preempt this question about that why we have used the term Taliban regime. Again, the point is, there is a group in power in Kabul. There is no constitution. There is no legal framework but we are working with it. We have an ambassador there. But at the same time, we hope that there will be progress in terms of proper constitutional system of government taking root, truly representative of the Afghan people, taking root in Kabul.

9. (Anas Mallick, Capital TV): Two questions, first on Afghanistan and then Pakistan-China relations. We have seen footage of mutilation of bodies. And with regard to the change in nomenclature, your predecessors, your office have been on an overdrive to accommodate the Taliban as an interim Afghan government as a government in Afghanistan. So, is there a change in policy now where you say that there is a group in power because I can quote statements coming from your office which said Afghan government and interim Afghan government? With regard to the question on China, I would want your comments that recently, a lot of interactions between the US and Pakistani leadership, including the Prime Minister's interactions, have been witnessed. In light of this, how do you see the current state of Pakistan-China relations? Or, is there a threat to these relations?

Spokesperson: Pakistan and China enjoy an all-weather strategic cooperative partnership. A relationship anchored in mutual trust, deep understanding and a shared vision for peace, stability and prosperity at both regional and global levels. Relations with China remain the cornerstone, or, I would say, grundnorm, of Pakistan's Foreign Policy.

Our multifaceted cooperation continues to advance steadily and remains central to Pakistan's development agenda and foreign policy priorities as the flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative. The China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) holds profound strategic and economic significance for both countries. Pakistan remains fully committed to working closely with China to develop a high quality, upgraded version of CPEC, thereby ensuring its shared dividends reach our people and contribute to regional connectivity and sustainable growth.

We highly value and support President Xi Jinping's visionary Global Development Initiative, Global Security Initiative, Global Civilization Initiative and Global Governance Initiative, which collectively aim to promote inclusive development, lasting peace, and mutual respect among nations.

Pakistan regards China as a force for global good and pillar of strategic stability in an evolving international landscape. For over seven decades, our friendship has been firm in resolve, enduring in loyalty, simple in trust and modest in its quiet strength. Next year, the two countries will be celebrating the 75th anniversary of their diplomatic relations.

Pakistan looks forward to carrying this legacy forward into the future, deepening cooperation across emerging domains and contributing together to a more just, peaceful and multipolar world order.

And about your first question, specifically on the mutilation of the bodies of our soldiers. This kind of savagery, bestiality, is condemnable, and it needs to be condemned in the strongest words possible. This is beyond the pale. It is beyond humanity, and this has deeply offended us and deeply hurt the Pakistani people. It is not something to be forgiven and forgotten easily. We reserve the right to respond appropriately and we call upon the Afghan authorities, to take appropriate action, to hold the perpetrators to account.

About the specific question of change in nomenclature. We have interacted with different governments in Kabul for a long time, for decades. We do not enjoy the luxury of deciding that we will have diplomatic relations with this group and not with that group and this regime, or not with that regime. This has been consistent with any group in power in Kabul where we have maintained diplomatic relations, regular interactions provided transit trade access throughout the decades.

And in that way, what our hopes were, our overall policy remained rooted in good faith which hoped for Afghanistan to achieve stability, under the Taliban which took power in Kabul, but none of that has come to fruition. So, this is an evolving situation, we are dealing with it, but we remain persistent in our efforts to stabilize relations with Afghanistan on the basis of principles of the UN Charter, including non-interference in each other's internal affairs, and we hope that sense and sanity will prevail in Kabul.

(Muhammad Saleh Zaafir, The News): I have known you since the time you were serving as a Deputy Director in the Ministry, I would like to wish you all the best for your new posting to the UAE and what would be your priorities as Ambassador in UAE.

Spokesperson: Thank you, I am most grateful for your kind words, and also to my other friends and colleagues who expressed such warm sentiments. I am really touched. Specifically, about the Pakistan-UAE relations, it is a very important country for us; it has been a close friend and a partner. Our relationship is rich, dense, multifaceted, and still, as one of our close friends, I think there is wide potential that needs to be taped to take relations to new heights. There is goodwill; there are people-to-people contacts, trade, security, political and diplomatic engagements, all aspects are doing well. I have the clear mandate from the government to work on further strengthening this vital bilateral relationship we share with the UAE.

(Tahir Khan, NNI): Many questions have been asked about Kabul Air strikes but please inform us that in the Foreign Ministry's statement issued on 13th October, read that that one-day Afghanistan will be free and a new government will emerge in Afghanistan, representing true freedom for Afghan nation. In addition to this, Pakistan hosted political opponents of Afghan government from September 30th to October 1st. I met few of the delegates, and they claimed that Pakistan plans to hold a next meeting of the former ministers and also members of the Parliament of Afghanistan, and at that stage, they may also invite the former military generals and officers of Afghanistan. So, what has happened? And you defended the change of nomenclature from Afghan Government to Afghan regime. Now is it the duty of Pakistan that it will initiate regime change in Afghanistan and how this thinking took place after 4 and a half years of Taliban Government in power and will Pakistan take Afghan nation's decision?

Spokesperson: About the last question, no, it is for the Afghan people to decide, and not for Pakistan to decide. In terms of interacting, I mean having diplomatic relations with the Afghan regime, by having an Embassy, maintaining a working relationship does not forestall our interaction with any other Afghans, which we should have. But what I want to emphasize is that the meeting you have alluded to, was not at the behest of the Government of Pakistan. It was not the Government of Pakistan formally inviting a group. It was a track-two meeting, which is again something unexceptionable, that there is nothing wrong in it. But specifically, I just want to repeat that we are not into the business of any regime change. It is for the Afghan people to decide their own fate themselves. It is for them to take the decision. But in the earlier question, I explained to you the context of why this change of phraseology. It is just a change in emphasis, but there is no fundamental change in our policy of not getting into the affairs of the Afghan people.

(Zeeshan Yousafzai, Dunya TV): Sir, Afghan Taliban have claimed that Defence Minister Khawaja Asif and our NSA General Asim Malik requested for Afghan visas and they were rejected. Can you please confirm it. Please tells us the authenticity of this claim? Secondly, we upgraded our diplomatic relations with Afghanistan. DPM Ishaq Dar visited Afghanistan. Various visits were undertaken to Afghanistan. Then Ishaq Dar on this very podium stated that all the promises that Afghan Government made had been fulfilled and we will construct a road from Peshawar to Kabul. So, at that time, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Government of Pakistan were unaware that threat of terrorism was emanating from Afghanistan or what changes have occurred now? Lastly, is any border crossing open through which Afghan immigrants are going to Afghanistan?

Spokesperson: What I said earlier in response to Anas Sahab's question was that our policy premised on good faith. There were definite, serious, concerted diplomatic efforts since Deputy Prime Minister / Foreign Minister Dar Sahab's visit in April, and there have been successive visits after that. What he told you was, Pakistan is living up to its side of the bargain. Whatever we committed, we fulfilled it. There were complaints or issues raised by the Afghan side on a range of areas including trade, repatriation, down to the smallest detail. Everything was worked out. So, our hope was that the Afghan side will live up to its side of the bargain also, the commitments they had made to international community and to Pakistan. But actually, I am sorry to note that nothing of that sort has happened. It is often that the explanations you hear from Kabul or the responses you hear are disingenuous. Sophistry cannot be a substitute for policy, and sophistry cannot paper over the actual actions which are happening. And I think, particularly after the attack on Pakistan, there has been crossing of a dangerous threshold, but our policy is still rooted in the fundamental principles of good faith, search for a diplomatic solution, stability, and common prosperity. This is something we will continue to aspire, but we remain determined to defend our interests, defend our sovereignty, territorial integrity, and to stave off terrorist threats against Pakistan.

(Sumaira Khan, Samaa News): Thank you very much. I know today's press briefing is Afghanistan centric, because last week was very happening and active. Sir, we held an important trilateral in Afghanistan involving Pakistan, Afghanistan and China. I want to read your mind. What exactly is China saying about all this hostility from Afghanistan now? If their stance is not a privileged diplomatic conversation, please share with us.

Secondly, Pakistan reiterated many times on intra-Afghan dialogue in the past. If we dig deeper in the records of past, Pakistan always spoke about intra-Afghan dialogue when this Doha accord's process was happening simultaneously. So we cannot say that we just woke up today and started talking about Afghan people's will. First of all, what is our stance now? What if all the other movements, if they ask for Pakistan's support, for instance, NRF, in the given situation, if they seek Pakistan's support to get their due share in representation? What is Pakistan's stance? And third, a very important point, ceasefire is ending today and we did not see any positive statements from Afghanistan. If we can change the nomenclature from Emirate, from interim Afghan government to Afghan regime, the Afghan Taliban regime, are we thinking about degrading our diplomatic ties with the current regime or it is not a necessary thing for now?

Spokesperson: Starting from China, actually, China's position is very clearly articulated in their press statement, but I can just provide you the background of our assessment. China remains a factor of stability in its entire neighborhood through its economic development, its trade, its sophisticated diplomacy. It has created stability. And this is something which China aspires for. This is what our understanding of Chinese position is. And we understand China would always support any initiative which stabilizes the situation, which strengthens the diplomatic track, which improves the relations. This is our objective also.

Secondly, about NRF, intra-Afghan dynamics; I would say this is a speculative question. We will see it when we reach that point. At this point in time, this is purely speculative. Ceasefire, actually what I have said is that it is for 48 hours. Let us see, and so far, there is no degradation of diplomatic ties.

(Aijaz Ahmed, GNN): There are reports that Mullah Yaqoob from Afghanistan and security leadership from Pakistani side will engage in negotiations. Do you have any information about these reports?
Secondly, regarding our policy change from interim government to the Afghan regime. There is criticism that we still got our blue-eyed people in Afghanistan and I also read that Siraj Haqqani has been sidelined and his deputy has been fired from his position. So, is there something going on? There are thousands of Pakistani nationals in Afghanistan and since last night, neither Pakistan Embassy nor Pakistani citizens contacted each other. So, what is their situation? What process is being undertaken to evacuate them?

Spokesperson: About dialogue and Mullah Yaqoob, at this point, I am not in a position to offer you any concrete information on that. But at the same time, what I can say is, this is a very delicate situation. We have agreed to a temporary ceasefire. We are trying to work on the diplomatic track, to make it sustainable and also for long term stability of the relationship. That remains the larger objective for us. So, beyond that, I do not have any information to share with you. About what is happening inside Kabul. You hear about someone being elevated, the other being removed. Frankly, when the pace of events is so fast, social media can be a source of misinformation. The times when you started your career the rigor of editorial checks and all that is not there. So, what I would suggest is that we should be careful of all the speculations which is going on. I am not going to comment on this kind of speculation. About the number of Pakistanis, inside Afghanistan, let me check. I will get back to you. This a good question, but let me check on that.

(Azaz Syed, Geo News): According to the media reports, Pakistan had targeted Noor Wali Masood in Kabul while he was in Kabul. I just want to know whether the Afghan authorities, they contacted Pakistan after that incident.

And second one is also linked to this, that we have seen the pattern that previously TTP, they kept attacking Pakistani people and forces, and we used to engage with Taliban and with the Taliban regime there in Kabul. Now we have seen that whenever we are attacked, we hit back. Will Pakistan continue this policy of hitting back or hot pursuit, whenever Pakistan side is attacked, we will hit back?

And third, also linked to this that the policy formulation, with regards to whatever crisis is going on between the two countries, what level is the policy formulation from Pakistan side? Who decides that this time we need to send drones or attack, or we need to send Ambassador Sadiq or use diplomatic channels?

(Naveed Siddiqui, Business Recorder): Thank you. What prompted Afghan security forces to target Pakistan before Pakistan security forces targeted the terror hideouts in Afghanistan, and second, please tell us about the updates of the Pakistan Afghanistan crossing points and trade activities that have also been halted.

Spokesperson: About Aizaz Sahab's question about the notion of hot pursuit, or what we did, or what we did not, or what are the news, I will just repeat my statement from last time for record that broadly explains our principled position on the issue: Pakistan reaffirms its unwavering commitment to the security and wellbeing of its people. Our security forces and law enforcement agencies conduct targeted operations in border regions to safeguard our citizens from terrorist threats, particularly those posed by groups such as Fitna-al-Khawaraj or the TTP. These operations are meticulously planned based on credible and actionable intelligence and executed with precision. Pakistan respects the sovereignty of Afghanistan and remains steadfast in its commitment to fostering dialogue and cooperation with their neighbor to address the shared challenges of terrorism. Beyond that about your question about what we will do in the future, I will not frame it in terms of so called hot-pursuit, these terms I will not use. But what I can assure you is that we will take all measures to ensure the security of Pakistan and Pakistani people. We will do all what is needed.

And about Naveed Saab's question, transit trade is halted because there is a hot border situation. So, obviously no trade can take place right now. If there is volatility and exchange of fires, there is no question of trade taking place.

On Siddiqui sb's second question, that is something you should check with Afghans. I can offer a number of explanations, but, you know, I cannot really say what prompted them.

Policy formulation: it is well known. There are systems and processes within the government, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, other institutions Inter-Ministerial processes. There are decisions taken at the level of minister. There are some decisions which go up to the Prime Minister. So, this is depending on the issue. So, there is no mechanical configuration available that this will be decided by the Foreign Secretary, or this will go to the Secretary's committee or the Inter-Ministerial committee but this is something which is a dynamic process which keeps evolving and keeps adjusting. But the chain of decision making is well known.

(Khalid Mehmood, Express News): Sir, follow up question. Pakistan conducted air strikes on Kabul and Kandahar. Who was the target and what was achieved? Another follow up question, there is social media speculation that Mullah Abdul Haq, Intelligence Chief of Afghanistan was targeted. Can you confirm? Secondly, Tajik ethnic Afghans NRF with whom Pakistan held talks in the past, is this group being engaged again?

Spokesperson: When there was a flare up across Pak-Afghan border, we responded, but the specifics, I will request you to check with ISPR. I do not have the specifics of what was the exact targeting policy, but I have not seen reports of any senior government official being hit.

About the NRF what I have explained to you, our policy is not to trigger or trying to promote or fan any kind of regime change. That is not our policy. We will continue to hope that there is stability in Afghanistan and all groups are given adequate representation. This is what we can hope for. It is not our policy to support one group or trying to bring down the other. This is for the Afghans to settle themselves.

(Allah Noor Wazir, Mashriq TV): Thank you. Is Afghanistan hub of terrorism? If it is then does Pakistan consider it a threat for itself and the world?

Secondly, in TTP terror activities, some Bengali nationals were also targeted by them. What is Pakistan's stance on this? Did Pakistan contact Bangladesh on this matter? Did Afghanistan, on Indian signal, supported TTP by initiating conflict with Pakistan?

Lastly, Afghan Foreign Minister stated that Afghanistan shares border with 5 other countries and those countries have no complains about terrorism emanating from Afghanistan. So why only Pakistan have this complain?

Spokesperson: I will start from the last question. This is what I refer to as being disingenuous, or sophistry. Sophistry cannot be substitute for policy. The question about the six neighbors, none of them complaining, there are multiple neighbors who have complaints. There are terrorist groups targeting neighbors in the north of Afghanistan, targeting Pakistan. Each country has a set of complaints with Afghanistan. And secondly, you can ask the Afghan side, which country has offered this kind of hospitality and access the way Pakistan has done. Can they enter any of the neighbours in the northern part of their territory, any country? How many Afghan refugees, for example, are there in Central Asian states, can you give me a number? And even in other countries where there were Afghan refugees, in big numbers, they were restricted to the camps. In Pakistan, there was no restriction. They were allowed to carry out business. They were allowed to use our schools. They were allowed to use our hospitals. Has any country has given this kind of hospitality to them? So, if you allow this kind of access, obviously there is a bigger chance of terrorism also being used. If we had sealed off our borders, there were no Afghans; obviously there would not have been any problem. So, this is what I call sophistry and being disingenuous. This does not help dealing with the crisis situation like that. This is my first point.

Secondly, obviously, Afghanistan belying fast the expectations and hopes of the regional countries, has become a central breeding ground for global terrorism. We do not have to wait for a big disaster happening at the global scale before we take remedial action. We have been highlighting the gradual sinking in of Afghanistan, sinking in terms of its commitments on terrorism and related issues and the toll it is taking, particularly in Pakistan. But this fire will spread. This has to be stopped.

(Anwer Abbas, 24 News HD): Sir, I have two questions. Sir, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia signed a strategic mutual defense agreement in which the first article was that attack on one country will be considered an attack on other country. Both countries will defend each other. Article 5 of NATO between France and Germany has a similar clause. Sir, in recent conflict with Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia did not support us militarily. Why first clause of defence treaty was not implemented?

Secondly, did Pakistan register protest to Afghanistan on the violation of temporary ceasefire between them?

Spokesperson: About the first question, what I can tell you, first of all, as a broad principle, the policies do not work on the basis of analogy. This is what NATO does, so why you are not doing this. So, analogy does not help in assessment or analysis of international politics. Pakistan and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are long time close allies and partners who are committed to each other's sovereignty and territorial integrity. In this context, we are fully confident of each other's position. The recently concluded SMDA is a manifestation of this mutual understanding. We also appreciate the kingdom's traditional diplomatic approach, which emphasizes stability and de-escalation in the region. The border situation between Pakistan and Afghanistan is a bilateral issue, and Pakistan has the capacity to deal with it, resolve it and address it. Saudi Arabia's balanced stance complements regional efforts to avoid escalation and promote peace while our strategic partnership endures and continues.

About the violations during the temporary ceasefire, as I said, I do not have specific information. I will request you to check with the ISPR on specifics of operational details.

(Anas Mallick, Capital TV): Thank you so much, Spokesperson. Shifting the topic slightly from Afghanistan to Indus Water Treaty. The Indian government has approved the SavalKot power project on the Chenab River, which had been pending since 1993. This move comes as India has held it says, IWT in abeyance. This project, as I said, had been pending since 1993. Your comments on this particular project, because Pakistan has at time and again, said that any act of stopping water, constructing any projects would be considered as an act of war. Thank you.

Spokesperson: Broad position on Indus Water Treaty, we have articulated. This is a specific question. I will check for the details, and I will get back to you.

Thank you very much.

**