Imtiaz Gul’s Claims Ignite Firestorm in Pakistani
Media
In a stunning disclosure, renowned Pakistani
security analyst Imtiaz Gul has claimed that the Nur
Khan Airbase, one of the most strategic airbases in Pakistan, is
under de facto US control. This statement, made during a
televised interview, has sent shockwaves through media and political circles,
triggering intense debate over military sovereignty and transparency.
Gul stated that not only do American aircraft
regularly operate from the base, but even senior Pakistan Army
officials are allegedly denied access to specific zones within the
airbase. If proven, such a claim would signal an extraordinary
breach of national security protocols.
Why Nur Khan Airbase Matters
Located in Rawalpindi, the Nur Khan
Airbase serves as a vital hub for the Pakistan Air Force (PAF). It
houses:
- Strategic airlift operations
- VIP transport
- Intelligence coordination
- Nuclear defense oversight (proximity to
Strategic Plans Division)
Its close proximity to GHQ (General
Headquarters) and Islamabad International Airport makes
it a linchpin in national security. Control of such an asset by any
foreign entity, especially a military power like the United States,
raises alarming red flags.
Tracing US-Pakistan Military
Collaborations
The U.S. has long maintained military and
intelligence operations within Pakistan, particularly during the War on
Terror. Key developments include:
- Shamsi Airbase was used by the CIA for drone strikes before being returned
to Pakistan in 2011.
- PAF Base Shahbaz saw joint operations involving surveillance and logistics.
But these collaborations were often secretive,
rarely acknowledged by either side, leading to persistent public
distrust.
If Gul’s claims about Nur Khan are true, it would
mark a continuation of this opaque pattern, where military
arrangements are kept outside public or parliamentary oversight.
Red Flags: Restricted Access for Pakistani
Officers?
One of the most shocking elements of Imtiaz Gul’s
claim is that senior Pakistani military officers are reportedly barred
from certain parts of the airbase. This is unprecedented and unconstitutional—Pakistan’s
military structure places ultimate authority within its own command.
If verified, this would mean the US has operational
veto within a Pakistani defense installation, which could:
- Undermine the chain of command
- Disrupt intelligence autonomy
- Create conflicts of interest in
regional strategy, especially vis-à-vis India, China, and Afghanistan
Are US Aircraft Conducting Covert
Operations from Pakistani Soil?
Several reports and satellite images have allegedly
revealed the movement of US-origin aircraft at Nur Khan
Airbase. The lack of official explanation has fueled suspicion of:
- Drone coordination
- Afghan surveillance
- SIGINT operations (Signals Intelligence)
- Evacuation logistics post-Afghan
withdrawal
The question arises: What is being hidden,
and why?
Public calls for transparency are growing louder, especially in the wake of past incidents like
the Osama bin Laden raid in Abbottabad, which was carried out without
prior Pakistani approval or awareness.
India’s Strike and the Base’s Military
Importance
During Operation Sindoor, India
reportedly launched precision strikes on several Pakistani military sites,
including Nur Khan Airbase. While the scale and damage remain contested, the
strike underscores the base’s perceived operational relevance.
If the base is truly under foreign control, it
presents a clear vulnerability in regional security, where sovereignty
breaches can turn into tactical disadvantages.
Political and Public Backlash Within
Pakistan
The reaction to Imtiaz Gul’s claims has been
fierce. Opposition leaders and civil society members have called for:
- A parliamentary inquiry
- Freedom of information requests
- Clarifications from the Ministry of
Defense
- Reassessment of strategic
partnerships with the US
Citizens demand answers—why wasn’t this base’s status disclosed publicly?
What kind of agreement has permitted this setup? And who benefits from this
level of secrecy?
The Strategic Trade-Off: Aid vs. Autonomy
Pakistan has, historically, received significant
military and financial aid from the US. Some argue that such arrangements may
be quid pro quo—aid in exchange for operational leverage.
However, critics maintain that no amount
of foreign assistance justifies the ceding of core national infrastructure,
especially when it threatens:
- Nuclear security
- Military independence
- Public trust
The balancing act between geopolitical
alliances and internal sovereignty is now more
precarious than ever.
Global and Regional Implications of the
Alleged Control
The controversy may not be confined to Pakistan
alone. Regional players, including China and Iran, are likely
observing developments with caution. If a NATO ally is operating within
Pakistan, it could:
- Strain Pakistan-China defense
relations
- Disrupt regional power dynamics
- Intensify proxy politics in South
Asia
On a global scale, it could also weaken
Pakistan’s negotiating leverage in forums like the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the OIC.
What Happens Next: Scenarios and Outcomes
Three possibilities may emerge from the ongoing uproar:
- Denial and Deflection: The government may dismiss the claim as conspiracy, avoiding
accountability.
- Admission with Conditions: Some form of partial truth may be
acknowledged, possibly rebranded as “joint operations.”
- Policy Reformation: Intense pressure could lead to a restructuring of foreign
military access protocols.
Conclusion: The Need for Bold Transparency
in Defense Affairs
The alleged US control of Nur Khan Airbase is
not just a military concern—it is a litmus test for Pakistan’s
sovereignty, public accountability, and political maturity. As global
and regional tensions evolve, it is imperative that national assets
remain under national command, and that the people of
Pakistan are informed, not blindsided, by arrangements that affect
their sovereignty and security.
No comments:
Post a Comment