Does Pakistan minister’s comment on Ghazni signal foreign policy shift? – Times of India

NEW DELHI: Pakistan’s old antic to taunt India by naming its missiles after Afghan invaders has taken an unexpected turn in the wake of a new conflict with Afghanistan.
The controversy ignited when Pakistan defence minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif described Mahmud of Ghazni – a figure celebrated in Pakistan’s historical narrative – as “merely a plunderer”. His remark, delivered during a televised interview, stunned many in a country where school textbooks have long celebrated Mahmud for his raid on the Somnath temple in India in 1026. This dispute put the spotlight on naming of missiles after figures who invaded India to rile the country.
Pakistan has named its missiles after Ghazni who raided and destroyed the legendary Shiv Mandir at Somnath, after Ahmad Shah Abdali who won the third battle of Panipat after defeating the Marathas and massacring thousands of them, and after Muhammad Ghori who defeated Prithviraj Chauhan.
The choices of invaders from Afghanistan were deliberately meant to not only rile India but also leave no doubt that Pakistan’s ballistic missile programme was India-centric, a narrative that resonated domestically, while deflecting international scrutiny.
Asif is a hardliner himself. This time, however, he seemed to target a different audience. His comment came amid escalating tensions between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pakistan recently conducted airstrikes in Afghanistan, claiming it targeted Pakistani Taliban operatives allegedly harboured by the Afghan Taliban. Analysts suggest Asif’s critique of Mahmud was less about historical revisionism and more an attempt to antagonize the Afghan Taliban.
The Afghan govt promptly denounced Asif’s statements as reckless. Within Pakistan, the remarks sparked a polarizing debate. Some welcomed the re-evaluation of Mahmud’s legacy, while others, including members of Asif’s own political party, rebuked him. Senator Mushahid Hussain Syed, a former information minister, urged Asif to consult Romila Thapar’s work on Somnath. Thapar, a respected Indian historian, posits that Mahmud’s attack was motivated by economic and political factors rather than religious zeal, challenging the colonial-era framing of it as a Hindu-Muslim conflict.
As the controversy lingers, it raises a provocative question: If Mahmud of Ghazni is no longer regarded as a hero, should the Ghaznavi missile be renamed? This debate transcends mere symbolism, hinting at broader shifts in Pakistan’s foreign policy, historical narratives, and regional positioning, amid growing international and domestic pressures.