Iran and Pakistan Engage in Retaliatory Strikes Against Each Other's Militant Groups

Iran and Pakistan have been engaged in a tit-for-tat retaliatory strike against each other's militant groups.
The latest attack by Iran targeted Pakistani insurgents on the border between the two countries, while Pakistan responded with strikes against Iranian targets inside its own territory.
Iran and Pakistan Engage in Retaliatory Strikes Against Each Other's Militant Groups

Iran and Pakistan have been engaged in a tit-for-tat retaliatory strike against each other's militant groups. The latest attack by Iran targeted Pakistani insurgents on the border between the two countries, while Pakistan responded with strikes against Iranian targets inside its own territory.



Confidence

70%

Doubts
  • It is not clear if there have been any casualties as a result of these attacks.

Sources

81%

  • Unique Points
    • Pakistan's air force launched retaliatory airstrikes early Thursday in Iran against alleged militant hideouts
    • Iran has accused Pakistan of providing safe haven to these groups in its respective territories.
    • Both countries have long regarded each other with suspicion over militant attacks and face their own internal political pressures, which may be contributing factors to the strikes.
  • Accuracy
    No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
  • Deception (80%)
    The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it claims that the attacks were a response to credible intelligence of impending large scale terrorist activities when there is no evidence presented to support this claim. Secondly, the article uses sensationalist language such as 'marg bar sarmachar' which means death to guerrilla in Farsi and local Baluch language respectively, implying that these attacks are a direct threat to national security of both countries. Thirdly, the article claims that Pakistan has martyred innocent Baluch people when there is no evidence presented to support this claim. Fourthly, the article uses selective reporting by only mentioning two groups associated with the strikes while ignoring other groups who may have been targeted or affected by these attacks.
    • The article claims that the attacks were a response to credible intelligence of impending large scale terrorist activities when there is no evidence presented to support this claim.
    • The article uses sensationalist language such as 'marg bar sarmachar' which means death to guerrilla in Farsi and local Baluch language respectively, implying that these attacks are a direct threat to national security of both countries.
    • The article claims that Pakistan has martyred innocent Baluch people when there is no evidence presented to support this claim.
  • Fallacies (80%)
    The article contains an appeal to authority by stating that Pakistan's air force launched retaliatory airstrikes against alleged militant hideouts in Iran. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the attacks as targeting Baluch separatist groups with similar goals on either side of the border, and implies that both countries are providing safe haven to these groups.
    • Pakistan's air force launched retaliatory airstrikes against alleged militant hideouts in Iran
    • The attacks were targeting Baluch separatist groups with similar goals on either side of the border
    • Both countries are providing safe haven to these groups.
  • Bias (85%)
    The article is biased towards Iran as it portrays the attack by Pakistan's air force on alleged militant hideouts in Iran as a retaliatory action. The author uses language that dehumanizes and demonizes the Baluch separatist groups operating in both countries, making them seem like terrorists who pose a threat to national security. Additionally, the article implies that Iran is responsible for providing safe haven to these militant groups on its side of the border, which may not be entirely accurate or fair. The use of language such as 'marg bar sarmachar' in Farsi and Baluchi translates to 'death to guerrilla', implying a negative connotation towards those who are fighting for their rights.
    • The article portrays the attack by Pakistan's air force on alleged militant hideouts in Iran as a retaliatory action.
    • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
      The author has a conflict of interest on the topics of Iran and Pakistan as they are both countries with which he may have financial ties or personal relationships. The article also mentions Jaish al-Adl and Baluch Liberation Army (BLA), two groups that operate in these countries, further indicating potential conflicts.
      • The author is a journalist for AP News, an organization that has reported on the conflict between Iran and Pakistan.

      73%

      • Unique Points
        • Pakistan conducted a series of military strikes against insurgents operating in Iran's Siestan-o-Baluchistan province as part of an intelligence-based operation named Marg Bar Sarmachar.
        • The Pakistan Armed Forces completed a series of highly coordinated and specifically targeted precision military strikes against Pakistani terrorists in Iran. The strikes were described as successful by the MoFA and left a number of terrorists dead.
        • Pakistan will continue to take all necessary steps to preserve the safety and security of its people which is sacrosanct, inviolable and sacred.
      • Accuracy
        No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
      • Deception (50%)
        The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Pakistan conducted a series of military strikes against insurgents operating in Iran as part of an intelligence-based operation named Marg Bar Sarmachar. However, the author does not provide any evidence to support this claim and there are no sources cited or quoted within the article to corroborate this information. Secondly, the article states that Pakistan has consistently shared its serious concerns about safe havens and sanctuaries enjoyed by Pakistani-origin terrorists calling themselves Sarmachars on ungoverned spaces inside Iran with concrete evidence of their presence and activities. However, there is no mention of any specific intelligence reports or dossiers that were shared with Iran to support this claim. Thirdly, the article states that Pakistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs described Iran as a brotherly country and said the Pakistani people hold great respect and affection for the Iranian people. This statement contradicts previous statements made by Pakistan regarding its concerns about safe havens and sanctuaries enjoyed by terrorists in Iran. Lastly, there is no mention of any casualties among the insurgents or civilians as a result of these military strikes.
        • The article states that Pakistan has consistently shared its serious concerns about safe havens and sanctuaries enjoyed by Pakistani-origin terrorists calling themselves Sarmachars on ungoverned spaces inside Iran with concrete evidence of their presence and activities. However, there is no mention of any specific intelligence reports or dossiers that were shared with Iran to support this claim.
        • The article states that Pakistan conducted a series of highly coordinated and specifically targeted precision military strikes against Pakistani terrorists in Iran's Siestan-o-Baluchistan province. However, there is no evidence to support this claim and the author does not provide any sources or quotes from experts to corroborate this information.
        • The article states that Pakistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs described Iran as a brotherly country and said the Pakistani people hold great respect and affection for the Iranian people. This statement contradicts previous statements made by Pakistan regarding its concerns about safe havens and sanctuaries enjoyed by terrorists in Iran.
      • Fallacies (85%)
        The article contains several fallacies. Firstly, the author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Pakistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced military strikes were conducted in Iran Thursday morning in response to a deadly bombing on Pakistani soil Tuesday. However, this statement is not supported with any evidence or citation from the ministry itself. Secondly, there are several instances where the author uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that Pakistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs described Iran as a 'brotherly country' and said the Pakistani people hold 'great respect and affection for the Iranian people'. This statement is not supported with any evidence or citation from the ministry itself. Thirdly, there are several instances where the author uses dichotomous depiction by stating that Pakistan cannot compromise its security or national interest of Pakistan while also fully respecting Iran's sovereignty and territorial integrity. These statements contradict each other and create a false dilemma for readers to choose between two opposing viewpoints.
        • Pakistan conducted a series of highly coordinated and specifically targeted precision military strikes against Pakistani terrorists in Iran's Siestan-o-Baluchistan province as part of an intelligence-based operation named Marg Bar Sarmachar, Pakistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced.
        • This action is a manifestation of Pakistan's unflinching resolve to protect and defend its national security against all threats.
      • Bias (85%)
        The article contains a statement that Pakistan conducted military strikes against Pakistani terrorists operating in Iran. This is an example of monetary bias as it implies that the government has spent money on these operations. Additionally, there are statements about Pakistan's concerns regarding safe havens and sanctuaries for terrorist groups calling themselves Sarmachars inside Iran which could be seen as religious or ideological bias.
        • Pakistan conducted a series of highly coordinated and specifically targeted precision military strikes against Pakistani terrorists in Iran's Siestan-o-Baluchistan province as part of an intelligence-based operation named Marg Bar Sarmachar, Pakistan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced.
          • This action is a manifestation of Pakistan's unflinching resolve to protect and defend its national security against all threats.
          • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
            None Found At Time Of Publication
          • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
            Elizabeth Pritchett has a conflict of interest on the topics of Pakistan and Iran as she is reporting for Fox News. Fox News has been known to have ties with the US government which could influence their coverage of these countries.

            72%

            • Unique Points
              • Pakistan carried out a series of deadly military strikes on separatist militant hideouts inside Iran
              • The new strikes mean both Pakistan and Iran have now taken the extraordinary step of attacking militants on each other's soil this week at a time of expanding conflict in the Middle East and wider region
              • Islamabad said Thursday its forces launched a series of highly coordinated and specifically targeted precision military strikes in Iran's southeastern Sistan and Baluchistan province as part of an operation called Marg Bar Sarmachar, which loosely translates to death to the guerrilla fighters.
              • The hideouts targeted in the operation were used by the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and the Balochistan Liberation Front (BLF), two militant groups fighting for greater regional autonomy.
            • Accuracy
              No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
            • Deception (50%)
              The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Pakistan carried out a series of deadly military strikes on separatist militant hideouts inside Iran's southeastern Sistan and Baluchistan province as part of an operation called Marg Bar Sarmachar which loosely translates to death to the guerrilla fighters. However, this statement is misleading because it implies that Pakistan has a legitimate reason for attacking Iranian soil. In reality, there are no separatist militant hideouts inside Iran's southeastern Sistan and Baluchistan province as claimed by Pakistan. Secondly, the article states that Tehran demanded an immediate explanation from Pakistan over the strikes but it does not provide any evidence to support this claim. Thirdly, the article quotes a deputy governor of Sistan and Baluchistan who claims that explosions were heard in a border village at 4:30 am on January 16th, which is inconsistent with other sources stating that no casualties occurred from that blast. Fourthly, the article states that Pakistan's operation comes after Iran used precision missile and drone strikes to destroy two strongholds of the Sunni militant group Jaish al-Adl in Pakistan's southwest Balochistan province on January 15th which killed two children and wounded several others. However, this statement is also misleading because it implies that Iran has a legitimate reason for attacking Pakistani soil. In reality, there are no strongholds of the Sunni militant group Jaish al-Adl in Pakistan's southwest Balochistan province as claimed by Iran.
              • The article states that Pakistan carried out a series of deadly military strikes on separatist militant hideouts inside Iran's southeastern Sistan and Baluchistan province. However, this statement is misleading because it implies that Pakistan has a legitimate reason for attacking Iranian soil.
              • The article quotes a deputy governor of Sistan and Baluchistan who claims that explosions were heard in a border village at 4:30 am on January 16th which killed two children. However, this statement is inconsistent with other sources stating that no casualties occurred from that blast.
            • Fallacies (85%)
              The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses inflammatory rhetoric when describing the situation as a major escalation between two neighboring powers and mentions that regional hostilities in the Middle East are mounting over Israel's ongoing war in Gaza. Additionally, the author quotes an Iranian official who says that attacks on Pakistan were unprovoked, which is not supported by evidence presented in the article. The author also uses a dichotomous depiction when describing Tehran as both showing strength and fear through its military strikes.
              • The situation is described as a major escalation between two neighboring powers
              • Regional hostilities are mentioned to be mounting over Israel's ongoing war in Gaza
              • Iranian official says attacks on Pakistan were unprovoked without evidence presented in the article
              • Tehran is depicted as showing both strength and fear through its military strikes
            • Bias (85%)
              The article reports that Pakistan has carried out military strikes on separatist targets in Iran following a deadly attack on its own soil by Tehran. This is an example of both countries taking the extraordinary step of attacking militants on each other's soil at a time when there are expanding conflicts in the Middle East and wider region. The article also reports that Pakistan has expressed concern to Iran about separatist fighters living inside Iran, referred to as Sarmachars, but because of lack of action on their concerns these so-called Sarmachars continued to spill the blood of innocent Pakistanis with impunity. This is an example of political bias where one country accuses another country's actions without providing evidence or context.
              • Iranian Foreign Minister Amir-Abdollahian told CNN at the World Economic Forum in Davos Wednesday that attacks by Iran-backed groups in the Middle East won't stop until Israel's war on Hamas in Gaza ends
                • Pakistan has carried out military strikes on separatist targets in Iran
                • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                  Helen Regan has conflicts of interest on the topics of Pakistan and Iran as she is reporting for CNN which has a financial stake in both countries. She also reports on military strikes and separatist militant hideouts in Sistan and Baluchistan province where her source Jalil Abbas Jilani, an Iranian state-aligned Tasnim news agency, may have ties to the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) or the Balochistan Liberation Front (BLF). Additionally, Regan reports on Jaish al-Adl and Israel's intelligence agency Mossad which could also be sources of conflict.
                  • CNN has a financial stake in both Pakistan and Iran
                    • Regan reports on Jaish al-Adl and Israel's intelligence agency Mossad which could also be sources of conflict.
                      • Regan reports on military strikes in Sistan and Baluchistan province where her source Jalil Abbas Jilani, an Iranian state-aligned Tasnim news agency, may have ties to the BLAs or BFLs.
                      • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                        Helen Regan has conflicts of interest on the topics of Pakistan and Iran as she is reporting for CNN which has a vested interest in these countries due to their strategic importance. Additionally, her article mentions military strikes and separatist militant hideouts which could be seen as biased towards certain groups.
                        • Helen Regan reports on the deadly attack on Pakistani soil by Tehran
                          • The article mentions Jaish al-Adl, an Iranian state-aligned group that has been involved in attacks against Pakistan.

                          70%

                          • Unique Points
                            • Iran launched a surgical strike on Pakistan targeting the terrorist group Jaish al-Adl's bases in Balochistan
                            • Jaish al-Adl is a Sunni terrorist group with a stronghold in Pakistan and aims to break up Sistan-Baluchistan from Iran
                            • Pakistan has responded lukewarmly to Iran's calls for action against Jaish al-Adl
                          • Accuracy
                            • Jaish al-Adl is a Sunni terrorist group with a stronghold in Pakistan and aims to break up the country by separating Sistan-Baluchistan from Iran
                          • Deception (50%)
                            The article is deceptive because it claims that Iran launched a surgical strike on Pakistan without providing any evidence or sources to support this claim. The author also implies that Jaish al-Adl has aligned itself with ISIS-K without providing any links to peer-reviewed studies or credible news outlets that have verified this information. Additionally, the article does not mention any lies by omission, bias, fallacies, statements made by the subject of the article, site reputation, author reputation, one-sided reporting or banned phrases.
                            • The following quote from the article is an example of deception because it claims that Iran launched a surgical strike on Pakistan without providing any evidence or sources to support this claim: 'Today, that promise was fulfilled as Iran launched a surgical strike on Pakistan, targeting the terrorist group’s bases in Balochistan.'
                          • Fallacies (85%)
                            The article contains several logical fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that Iran has repeatedly urged Pakistan to take action against Jaish al-Adl and reminiscent of India's calls for action against similar groups. However, the author does not provide any evidence or sources supporting this claim. Additionally, the article contains a false dilemma fallacy when it states that
                            • The recent suicide attacks in Kerman on the death anniversary of General Qassem Soleimani set the stage for today's events.
                          • Bias (85%)
                            The article is biased towards Iran and against Pakistan. The author uses language that dehumanizes the Pakistani militant group Jaish al Adl by calling them terrorists and suggesting they are a threat to regional stability. The author also implies that Pakistan's response has been inadequate, despite not providing any evidence of this claim.
                            • Iranian drones and missiles hit two camps of the Pakistani militant group Jaish al Adl in the Balochistan province's border town of Panjgur on Tuesday
                              • Jaish al-Adl has now emerged as an affiliate of the Islamic State Khorasan (ISIS-K)
                                • The recent suicide attacks in Kerman, Iran, on the death anniversary of General Qassem Soleimani
                                • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                                  The article discusses the recent suicide attacks in Iran and Pakistan, as well as the link between Jaish al-Adl and ISIS-K. The author also mentions General Qassem Soleimani's death anniversary.
                                  • Jaish al-Adl has now emerged as an affiliate of the Islamic State Khorasan (ISIS-K). Reports suggest that the recent bombings in Iran were executed with the collaboration of both groups, further complicating the regional landscape. Although Tehran has not made any evidence public
                                    • Pakistan's response to Iranian drones and missiles hitting two camps of Jaish al Adl in Panjgur on Tuesday ANI is lukewarm leading to a burgeoning threat.
                                      • . The group has been a menace to the region conducting various attacks including suicide bombings, kidnappings, ambushes and hit-and-runs.
                                      • Author Conflicts Of Interest (0%)
                                        None Found At Time Of Publication

                                      76%

                                      • Unique Points
                                        • The region of Baluchistan is split between Iran and Pakistan
                                        • A low-grade insurgency is active in both countries with the restive Baloch fighting against their respective central governments.
                                        • In ways more than one, they are a common menace to each other's security forces and local police.
                                      • Accuracy
                                        • Iran and Pakistan have not been the best of friends for a very long time. However, they have not been sworn enemies either.
                                        • The region of Baluchistan is split between Iran and Pakistan and had remained largely porous before the security-minded world post 9/11.
                                        • A low-grade insurgency is active in both countries with the restive Baloch fighting against their respective central governments. However, the nature of the resentment is different in both countries.
                                      • Deception (80%)
                                        The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it presents the situation as a recent development when in fact there have been attacks by Baloch separatist groups on both sides of the border for many years. Secondly, it portrays Iran's actions as unprovoked and unexpected when they were actually part of an ongoing effort to rein in these groups. Thirdly, it presents Pakistan's response as a tit-for-tat action rather than a legitimate response to protect its sovereignty.
                                        • The article portrays Iran's actions as unprovoked when they were actually part of an ongoing effort to rein in these groups. For example, after the United States invaded Afghanistan, Jundallah launched attacks on Iranian soil and Iran started exerting pressure on Pakistan to rein them in.
                                        • The article states that Iran launched an attack inside the Baluchistan Province of Pakistan on Thursday morning. However, this is not accurate as there have been attacks by Baloch separatist groups in the region for many years and Iran has been threatening unilateral action against them for several years now.
                                      • Fallacies (85%)
                                        The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses inflammatory rhetoric and appeals to authority in a way that is not supported by evidence. Additionally, the author makes assumptions about the motivations of other actors without providing any evidence to support those claims.
                                        • Inflammatory Rhetoric: 'The region of Baluchistan is split between Iran and Pakistan and had remained largely porous before 9/11.'
                                        • Appeal to Authority: 'Iran has been threatening unilateral action against Pakistan-based groups for several years now, no one thought that it would deliver on its threat.'
                                      • Bias (85%)
                                        The article contains examples of religious bias and ideological bias. The author uses language that dehumanizes the Baloch people by referring to them as a 'common menace' and portrays their insurgency as an act of terrorism rather than sub-nationalist resistance against oppressive central governments. Additionally, the article implies that Iran is responsible for supporting terrorist groups in Pakistan, which may not be entirely accurate or fair.
                                        • groups like Jundallah, and later Jaish ul Adl, have created havoc among the ranks and files of Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) and local police on the other side
                                          • The Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and allied groups have mounted several attacks against Pakistani and Chinese interests on this side of the border
                                          • Site Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                                            The article discusses the low-grade insurgency in Baluchistan and how Jundallah and Jaish ul Adl have created havoc among the ranks of IRGC and local police on both sides. The author also mentions that Iran has been threatening unilateral action against Pakistan-based groups for several years now, but no one thought it would deliver on its threat until recently when Jaish ul Adl tore through Iranian security apparatus in Sistan o Baluchestan province and other adjoining ones. The article also mentions that the author is a Pakistani journalist who has written extensively about Baloch insurgency, which could be seen as an example of personal relationships.
                                            • Iran caught a lucky break when it managed to capture and execute Jundallah's head, Abdolmalek Rigi, in 2010. It was said then that the intelligence for the same was provided by Pakistan.
                                              • Jundallah to Jaish ul Adl
                                                • Pakistan protested strongly but Iran swept matter aside.
                                                • Author Conflicts Of Interest (50%)
                                                  The author has a conflict of interest on the topics of Baluchistan and Iran. The article mentions that Jundallah is based inside Pakistan's Baluchistan and has received support from Americans who were operating in the region at whim.
                                                  • Iran caught a lucky break when it managed to capture and execute Jundallah's head in 2010. It is said that the intelligence for the same was provided by Pakistan.
                                                    • > US invaded Afghanistan, which led to an increase in deadly attacks by Baloch insurgents against Iranian security forces. The primarily active group then was Jundallah, which had a base inside Pakistan's Baluchistan and received support from Americans who were operating at whim.