Washington / New Delhi – June 11, 2025:
In a striking endorsement, U.S. Central Command chief General Michael Kurilla described Pakistan as a “phenomenal partner in the counter-terrorism world”—a notable statement given Pakistan’s longstanding reputation as a “motherlode of terrorism.” (m.thewire.in)
🎯 Context & Counter-Terrorism Success
-
General Kurilla told the House Armed Services Committee that Pakistani forces, with U.S. intelligence support, have captured at least five high-value ISIS‑K individuals and killed multiple others in tribal regions along the Afghan border (m.economictimes.com).
-
Among the detainees was Mohammad Sharifullah (‘Jafar’), linked to the August 2021 Kabul airport bombing that claimed 13 American lives. Pakistani authorities promptly extradited him to the U.S.—a move praised by U.S. military leadership (m.economictimes.com).
-
Kurilla also noted over 1,000 terrorist incidents in Pakistani western provinces since early 2024, underscoring Islamabad’s internal security challenges and counter-terrorism efforts (m.thewire.in).
🤝 Strategic Balancing
-
Emphasizing diplomacy, Kurilla asserted, “We have to have a relationship with Pakistan and with India. I do not believe it is a binary switch...” suggesting Washington’s pursuit of balanced ties with both nations (hindustantimes.com).
-
His remarks come amid ongoing criticism from Indian leaders, including External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, who has labeled Pakistan a hub of terrorism—a stance highlighted during post-Pahalgam diplomatic efforts (m.thewire.in).
📌 Reactions & Regional Implications
-
Indian government sources have emphasized Pakistan’s historic support to militant groups, citing entities like Lashkar-e-Taiba, Haqqani Network, and Taliban-linked factions (en.wikipedia.org).
-
The U.S. characterization reflects a cautious strategic shift—cooperation driven by immediate counter-terror priorities rather than a full strategic realignment.
⚠️ Disclaimer
This article draws from statements made by General Kurilla on June 11, 2025, and incorporates historical and political context. It does not represent an official policy judgment. All claims are based on public testimony and media analysis; definitive conclusions await further validation.
0 Comments