Pakistan claims to kill 70 terrorists in strikes on Afghanistan
Islamabad (PTI): Pakistan on Sunday claimed to kill 70 terrorists in the military strikes targeting at least seven militant hideouts in Afghanistan in retaliation for the recent rebel attacks in the country.
"Afghanistan has long been exporting terrorism. Pakistan is taking all actions to secure the life and property of its citizens," Pakistan State Minister for Interior Talal Chaudhry said while speaking on Geo News' programme.
Earlier, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting confirmed the strikes in retaliation to the recent suicide bombings in Islamabad, Bajaur and Bannu, even as Kabul warned of a “necessary and measured response” to the strikes.
In the latest terrorist incident, an army lieutenant colonel and a soldier were killed in a suicide attack in the Bannu area of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province on Saturday.
According to a statement by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Pakistan has conclusive evidence that these acts of terrorism, including at a Shiite mosque in Islamabad, one each in Bajaur and Bannu, followed by another incident in Bannu on Saturday, were allegedly perpetrated by Khwarij on the behest of their Afghanistan-based leadership and handlers.
“Responsibilities for these attacks were also claimed by Afghanistan-based Pakistani Taliban belonging to Fitna-al-Khwarij (FAK) and their affiliates, and Islamic State of Khorsan Province (ISKP),” the ministry said.
Fitna-al-Khawarij is a term that the state uses for the banned Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).
It said that despite repeated efforts by Pakistan to urge the Afghan Taliban regime to take verifiable measures to prevent the use of Afghan territory by terrorist groups and foreign proxies to carry out terrorist activities in Pakistan, it “failed” to undertake any substantive action against them.
“In this backdrop, Pakistan, in a retributive response, has carried out intelligence-based selective targeting of seven terrorist camps and hideouts belonging to Pakistani Taliban of FAK and its affiliates and ISKP at the border region of Pakistan-Afghan border with precision and accuracy,” it said.
Chaudhry said that most of the 70 terrorists killed were Pakistani nationals. "There is ample evidence suggesting that most of the slain terrorists were Pakistanis," he said.
He emphasised that during the 2020 Doha accords, the Afghan Taliban had promised the world that they would not allow their soil to be used for terrorism, but the Kabul interim government had failed to live up to their promise to stop terrorism.
Pakistan on Sunday said that it expects and reiterates that the interim Afghan government fulfil its obligations.
Pakistan also expects the international community to play a positive and constructive role by urging the Taliban regime to stand by its commitments as part of the Doha Agreement to deny use of its soil against other countries; an act vital for regional and global peace and security, the ministry stated.
It further said that Pakistan has always strived to maintain peace and stability in the region, but at the same time, the “safety and security of our citizens remains our top priority”.
Following the attacks, the Taliban Foreign Ministry summoned Pakistan's ambassador to Kabul, Ubaid ur Rehman Nizamani, and handed him a protest note over the attacks, according to sources.
Afghanistan, in a statement, warned that the Pakistani strikes on the provinces of Paktika and Nangarhar will be met with a “necessary and measured response”.
“Our borders and the security of our people is our sacred religious and national duty,” Afghanistan’s Defence Ministry said, adding that “at the appropriate time, a necessary and measured response will be delivered to these aggressions”.
It termed the strikes as a “clear violation” of Afghanistan’s national sovereignty, international law, principles of good neighbourliness, and Islamic values, adding that the attacks targeted civilian and religious centres, calling them “clear evidence” of intelligence and security failures within Pakistan.
The statement said that Afghanistan will not remain silent in the face of continued cross-border violations and reaffirmed the country’s right to defend its territorial integrity.
Relations between Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban have deteriorated due to the alleged failure of Kabul to stop terrorists from using its soil to attack Pakistan.
Last year in October, the two sides were briefly engaged in an armed conflict in which 23 Pakistan soldiers and over 200 Afghan Taliban soldiers were killed, according to the Pakistan army.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Stalin alleges Centre's 3-language formula 'covert' mechanism to impose Hindi
Chennai (PTI): Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M K Stalin, referring to the CBSE's recently unveiled curriculum framework, on Saturday alleged the "so-called three-language formula" is in reality a "covert" mechanism to expand Hindi into non-Hindi speaking regions.
Stalin, also the president of the ruling DMK, alleged the curriculum framework by the CBSE, aligned with the National Education Policy 2020, was not an innocent academic reform. It was a calculated and deeply concerning attempt at linguistic imposition that vindicates our long-standing apprehensions.
The chief minister alleged that under the guise of promoting "Indian languages", the BJP-led NDA government was aggressively advancing a centralising agenda that privileges Hindi while systematically marginalising India’s rich and diverse linguistic heritage.
"The so-called three-language formula is, in reality, a covert mechanism to expand Hindi into non-Hindi speaking regions," he alleged in a statement.
For students in southern states, this framework effectively translates into "compulsory Hindi learning." He alleged: "Yet, where is the reciprocity? Will students in Hindi-speaking states be mandated to learn Tamil, Telugu, Kannada, Malayalam—or even languages like Bengali and Marathi? The complete absence of such clarity exposes the one-sided and discriminatory nature of this policy. The irony is stark and unacceptable."
The same Union government that has "failed" to make Tamil a mandatory language in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan schools—and has consistently failed to appoint adequate Tamil teachers, now seeks to lecture states on promoting Indian languages. "This is not commitment, this is rank hypocrisy."
Stalin wondered if the Union government had any understanding of ground realities; of availability of teachers, training capacity, and infrastructure? He asked: "Where are the qualified teachers to implement this sweeping exercise. And crucially, where is the funding to support this enormous burden on the education system? Hence, this appears to be yet another ill-conceived policy announced without planning, resources, or accountability. This was not merely a question of language, it was a question of fairness, federalism, and equal opportunity."
By structurally privileging Hindi-speaking students, this policy risks creating entrenched advantages in higher education and employment, further widening regional disparities.
At a time when the world is moving forward at an unprecedented pace, our children must be prepared for the future. The priority should be to equip them with skills in emerging sectors like artificial intelligence, AVGC (Animation, Visual Effects, Gaming, and Comics), and to strengthen scientific temper and critical thinking. Instead, this regressive and rigid language burden threatens to derail their progress, the CM claimed.
The Union government appears determined to impose Hindi, brushing aside the legitimate, consistent, and democratic concerns raised by Tamil Nadu and several other states. This approach is a direct affront to the principles of cooperative federalism and an insult to the linguistic identity of millions of Indians. India’s strength lies in its diversity and not in "enforced uniformity."
Any attempt to disturb this delicate balance is not just misguided, it is dangerous. "Such policies strike at the very foundation of our pluralistic nation and will be firmly opposed."
Further, he asked: Does the Edapadi Palaniswami-led AIADMK and its NDA allies in Tamil Nadu subscribe to this imposition? Or will they, for once, stand up for the rights, identity, and future of our students?
