The statement did not specify Pakistan by name or Afpak by region; it specified the terror groups of concern in Asia.
Of course. But everyone knows where these groups are drawing support from. The statement did not mention, for example, Al-Gama'a Al-Islamiyya, a terror group active in Brazil but which I don't think has any Pakistan connections.
(That said, there have been not-fully-justified insinuations against Pakistan in the past. For example, the book The Arabs at War in Afghanistan recounts that Osama bin Laden's group, which eventually became Al Qaeda, escaped Pakistani control in the late 1980s when OBL set up his training camps in Afghanistan rather than Pakistan.)
The BRICS statement is the latest, yes? What is your source? Is it more recent? You should realize by now that an uncorroborated statement by a Pakistani official means nothing.
Mmm. How do you judge the difference between "wild" guessing and "wise" guessing? And please, be specific. Thank you.
Exactly, which disproves your earlier argument that the statement was specific, when in fact, it is anything but such. Had it been specific, it would have listed groups that are specific to Afghanistan/Pakistan region and suspected of operating from these countries. It clearly doesn't. The only thing you are basing all these theories on, is the name of militant groups included in the joint statement which operate in Pakistan and have been involved in the most violent terrorist attacks in the country on Pakistani people. Now, unless of course, someone can establish that Pakistani state is irrational to the point of insanity, arguing that it supports the same militant groups involved in attacks on its own people and security forces, is severely ridiculous.
No, not everyone knows this. Please, try not to paint allegations and your own theories as "facts". If there is sufficient and convincing evidence that Pakistan is supporting militant groups in Afghanistan, it must be brought to light. The Taliban problem in Afghanistan is just that, an Afghan problem. It isn't our fault that the trillion dollar war machine and Afghan Govt can't tackle the militant problem, establish the writ of the Govt and actually get the country together. The militants in that country heavily draw support from the local populace and have a fully functional self-funding mechanism in place, which includes drugs/weapons/extortion/taxing and what-not. There's a reason why the cited strength of Taliban is relatively very low, but they can't be taken care of completely, because replacements and/or new recruitment aren't difficult to find. Think of it, that they actually control a significant portion of Afghanistan, even to this day. They don't exactly need to rely on support from the other side of Durand Line, for their existence. If the ISAF and the Afghan Govt can't secure the Durand Line - an International border and the Afghan land, we are not to blame, because that isn't our area of responsibility. Even if I accept for the sake of argument, that militants find refuge and help in Pakistan's territory and they can freely move across the border, the question arises as to what the forces are doing on the other side of the border. Why can't they take care of it when they cross back? How does it happen that ISAF officials can arrive in Waziristan, FATA but can't go to Helmund because it is under Taliban control? If Pakistan is supporting them for argument's sake, why is it that Taliban control isn't significant in areas near Pakistani border?
Former US military commander Gen (R) David Petraeus has said that during his long association with his Pakistani counterparts and interaction with ISI as head of CIA, he could never find a convincing piece of evidence which supported the alleged double game by ISI or its explicit support to elements associated with terrorism.
No Pak role in fomenting trouble in Afghanistan, says Petraeus
The BRICs statement is latest, sure. But the ones that I am talking about were given recently too. And nothing drastic has happened in the short time-frame which can signal a dramatic shift in mood in Moscow or Beijing. Not to mention, they were very clear and specific.
Earlier in a phone call to US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, China's top diplomat Yang Jiechi urged the US to value Pakistan's role in Afghanistan.
“We must value Pakistan's important role on the Afghanistan issue, and respect Pakistan's sovereignty and reasonable security concerns,” the diplomat said.
Russian Presidential Envoy to Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov slammed Trump’s Pakistan strategy and insisted that Islamabad is “a key regional player to negotiate with.” “Putting pressure [on Pakistan] may seriously destabilise the region-wide security situation and result in negative consequences for Afghanistan,” the presidential envoy to Kabul told Russia’s ‘Afghanistan’ daily.
After China, Russia defends Pakistan against Trump’s criticism
It would remain a "guess" either way.
I actually took you seriously and read it again and also looked for your FMs statement. And reconfirmed my comment is indeed true. China did indeed agree with the declaration and your FM did indeed made the 'we reject' message thus accepting that the declaration is directed at Pakistan.
Find me that part. The actual quoted words of the defense minister or the foreign minister and not what the journalists made out of it.
Many terrorist groups in South Asia responsible for extreme acts: FO on BRICS' security concern
Terror threat in S Asia: Pakistan ‘shares BRICS nations concerns’
And China supporting the message has never been under question, it is called the joint statement, for a reason.
