Evidence Against Indian Terrorism: Now You See It, Now You Don’t

In January, government sources reported that Chief of Army Staff Gen. Raheel “presented evidence to the United States (US) which shows India’s involvement in the various terrorist incidents that have occurred in Pakistan”. However when asked by reporters about this evidence, the US appeared puzzled and said they were unaware of any delivery.

Now questions about the reality of evidence are not coming from Washington, they are coming from Islamabad.

The Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs was told on Thursday that dossiers given to the United States and United Nations Secretary General on India’s alleged involvement in terrorism in Pakistan did not contain ‘material evidence’.

Testifying before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, which met with Senator Nuzhat Sadiq in the chair, Adviser on Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz said the dossiers instead contained the “pattern and narrative” of Indian involvement.

Sadly, this report did not surprise anyone. When official photos were released of the dossiers being delivered, many commented that it didn’t look like there was much there.

Maleeha Lodhi delivers dossiers on Indian involvement

Creating more confusion, though, was that the same day that media reported Sartaj Aziz’s statement about lack of material evidence, the same media also reported a statement by Foreign Office Spokesman Qazi Khalilullah that “the dossiers contain ‘hard’ and ‘irrefutable’ evidence”.

Which is the truth? Which is a lie? Both Sartaj Aziz and Qazi Khalilullah cannot both be correct. Either there is irrefutable evidence or there isn’t. Both are government officials of the same government, and both are singing a different tune. It is sadly something that we have become immune to. We know we are being misled, but we allow it as long as we are being misled to believe what we want to believe instead of having to face any reality that we don’t like.

The reality of the mysterious dossiers is known only to government high ups in Pakistan and US. The only thing we can know of them is what we are told. In Pakistan, what we are told is contradictory. Maybe to find the truth we should look at what the reaction has been from Washington…which is nothing.

Can you untangle FO’s statement on ISIS?

Foreign Office spokesperson Qazi Khalilullah

Earlier this year, Foreign Secretary Azaz Ahmed Chaudhry admitted that Islamic State poses a “serious threat” to Pakistan. What seems obvious is newsworthy because it contradicted the long standing position of the Foreign Office that there is “no evidence” of ISIS presence in the country despite all evidence to the contrary. This week, the government returned to previous denials, but with a bit of a twist. Speaking at the weekly media briefing, Foreign Office spokesperson Qazi Khalilullah gave the following statement:

“There is no footprint of ISIL in Pakistan. The people of Pakistan have no ideological, ethnic or linguistic affinities with the organisation and its members. However, we have seen some pamphlets and wall-chalking. That is no proof of the presence of ISIL in Pakistan. Nevertheless, we are cognizant of the threat the ISIL poses. Our security agencies are aware of this threat and will take appropriate measures, if needed.”

This statement is an amazingly twisted web of contradictions that leaves little confidence in the government. How can the government say that no one in Pakistan has ideological affinities with the organisation? Has the FO spokesperson not seen the video of Jamia Hafsa students?


The FO even admits in its statement that “we have seen some pamphlets and wall-chalking“, but then terms all of this as “no proof.” Actually, pamphlets have been distributed since months demanding cooperation of people and recruiting supporters.

This is not “proof” for the government? Are they waiting for the self-described Khalifa to open its Embassy?

Then there is the claim that “our security agencies are aware of this threat and will take appropriate measures”. If there is no Islamic State presence in Pakistan, how can it be a threat that our security agencies are aware of?

Trying to unravel this web of doublespeak has only given me a headache. I am left with this question, how can we be expected to trust that the state to take the jihadi threat seriously when it continues to issue blatant denials that contradict obvious reality?