A televised statement by Rana Sanaullah has intensified scrutiny of Pakistan’s past support for armed groups after the prime minister’s political adviser said fighters once trained as “mujahideen” had become a serious domestic burden.
The remarks surfaced in a widely circulated video as violence disrupted Legislative Assembly elections in Pakistan-administered Jammu and Kashmir, which New Delhi refers to as Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir. Sanaullah was discussing armed elements allegedly involved in unrest when he said they were the same people Pakistan had trained and sent to fight.
“These are the same people we once trained as mujahideen. We sent them to fight, and today they are hanging around our necks,” Sanaullah said during a television discussion hosted by journalist Hamid Mir.
Social media posts described the statement as an acknowledgement that militants had been prepared to “bleed India” before turning their weapons against Pakistan. The wording used in many viral captions, however, appears stronger than the quotation available from the televised exchange. The authenticated portion shows Sanaullah referring to fighters trained and deployed in the past, without clearly establishing that he used the precise phrase “bleed India”.
The distinction is important because edited clips and translated excerpts have circulated without the full discussion. Sanaullah’s central point nevertheless represented a rare public admission by a senior political figure that state-supported militant mobilisation had produced long-term security consequences for Pakistan.
Pakistan has faced mounting violence from organisations that emerged from, split from or interacted with militant networks encouraged during earlier regional conflicts. Armed groups were cultivated during the war against Soviet forces in Afghanistan, while organisations focused on Kashmir later developed extensive recruitment, financing and training structures.
Islamabad has repeatedly said it no longer supports militant proxies and has taken action against banned organisations. Pakistan also argues that it is itself a major victim of terrorism, pointing to tens of thousands of deaths among civilians and security personnel. Its authorities routinely accuse hostile foreign actors of exploiting domestic separatist and extremist movements.
Sanaullah’s comments came during a disputed electoral process overshadowed by protests, communications restrictions and deadly clashes. Voting was divided into phases because of security concerns, while polling in some areas was delayed. The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz secured nine of 13 seats contested in Mirpur, Kotli and Bhimber during one phase of the election.
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf boycotted the process, alleging manipulation and an absence of conditions for a credible vote. The Joint Awami Action Committee, a protest coalition banned by the authorities in June, has challenged the electoral structure and Islamabad’s influence over the territory.
A central dispute concerns 12 assembly seats reserved for refugees and their descendants from Jammu and Kashmir living elsewhere in Pakistan. Protest leaders say those seats allow governments in Islamabad to shape the regional legislature and weaken the voting power of residents. Authorities maintain that the arrangement represents displaced Kashmiris and forms part of the territory’s constitutional system.
The committee has also mobilised support around electricity tariffs, subsidised flour, unemployment, public spending and privileges enjoyed by officials. Demonstrations expanded after negotiations failed, with large groups attempting to march towards Muzaffarabad.
Casualty figures remain contested because access to affected areas has been restricted and mobile and internet services have faced disruption. Protest organisers have claimed that more than 30 people were killed during confrontations, particularly around Rawalakot and Mirpur. Authorities have confirmed fewer civilian deaths and said one security officer was killed and several personnel were wounded.
Officials accuse armed individuals of infiltrating the protests and say masked gunmen used sophisticated weapons against security forces. They have also alleged links between some participants and the Pakistani Taliban. Protest representatives reject the characterisation of their movement as militant and accuse the authorities of using such claims to justify lethal force.
The viral video has therefore become part of a broader contest over how the unrest is defined. Government representatives portray it as a legitimate political grievance exploited by armed actors, while their critics see the violence as the result of disenfranchisement, economic hardship and heavy-handed security measures.
Sanaullah, a senior figure in the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and a former interior minister, has served as adviser to Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on political affairs since 2024. His intervention carries weight because the interior ministry plays a central role in coordinating counterterrorism policy and relations between civilian authorities and security agencies.
The episode has also revived questions about whether militant infrastructure can be dismantled after receiving years of political legitimacy, operational assistance or tolerance. Groups developed for external objectives can fragment, change allegiances and redirect violence towards their former sponsors when strategic priorities shift.
