Pakistan’s recently launched Operation Azm-e-Istekam is a counter-terrorism operation aimed at quelling the surge in terrorist activities in the country. The strategically designed operation is aimed at targeting various terrorist organisations, especially those that have infiltrated from Afghanistan, and restoring stability in the country.
Pakistan’s counterterrorism efforts date back 10 years to the Peshawar school attack, which prompted the implementation of the National Action Plan. Although initially promising, doubts have been cast on the effectiveness of these measures, with critics describing them as more symbolic than substantive, aimed at easing public fears rather than bringing about real change.
Three important questions remain about Pakistan’s new counterterrorism strategy: first, why do these efforts seem so superficial? second, why does it appear to prioritize tactical flexibility over wholehearted commitment? And third, and perhaps most important, why has the country sometimes been reluctant to rein in groups it has traditionally supported?
Geostrategic imperatives and extremist elements
Pakistan’s national security strategy is deeply rooted in its rivalry with India and is often expressed in terms of escalating nuclear war if certain thresholds are violated. Kashmir is at the center of this strategy, with Pakistan acting as a deterrent against India through unconventional means such as supporting insurgency activities. However, its involvement in terrorism, especially with regard to India, is more than just strategic.
The historical backdrop from Operation Zia-ul-Haq’s “Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts” to more recent operations like “Operation Tupac” highlights how militants within the Pakistani military have nurtured and leveraged terrorist cells against India. This strategic use of terror is deeply ingrained in Pakistan’s national security doctrine and poses a persistent challenge in efforts to completely eradicate the influence of militants.
The selective approach to counterterrorism highlights the country’s complicated relationship with extremist groups. Despite occasional crackdowns and operations, certain factions like the Tehreek-e-Taliban remain powerful, aided by strategic engagement in Afghanistan and a proxy war with India. The country’s reluctance to completely dismantle these groups has been heavily criticized, undermining the effectiveness of initiatives like the National Action Plan.
To navigate its security environment, Pakistan has resorted to periodic and selective measures to cut overgrown grass rather than tackling the root causes of extremism. This approach, driven by strategic necessity and geopolitical imperatives, perpetuates a vicious cycle in which terrorism remains a persistent, albeit managed, component of the country’s national security strategy.
Strategic moves amid global pressure
Pakistan’s counter-terrorism efforts have often been scrutinized for their dual nature of balancing international obligations with strategic imperatives rooted in regional geopolitics. In the aftermath of 9/11, Pakistan found itself at a critical crossroads when the US launched the global war on terror. Former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and then ISI chief Lt. Gen. Mahmood were given a direct ultimatum by the US, symbolized by Secretary of State Colin Powell’s stark declaration: “Be with us or against us.”
The gravity of the situation was underscored by threats of severe consequences, including from Richard Armitage, who warned of “pushing Pakistan back to the Stone Age” if US interests were not met. President Musharraf, acutely aware of the delicate balance his country faces between maintaining ties with the Taliban and defending against US retaliation, steered carefully. His decision to covertly send key players and Taliban operatives into the country’s tribal areas while ostensibly cooperating with the US, is emblematic of the country’s strategic maneuverings.
This nuanced approach was intended to maintain the country’s strategic depth in Afghanistan, maintain covert ties with Taliban allies, and ensure tactical flexibility in future operations. But the dual strategy has been criticized for undermining international credibility and perpetuating the country’s ambivalent stance on terrorism.
The complexities of how Pakistan is responding to global pressures highlight a broader story of strategic pragmatism intertwined with regional security dynamics. As Pakistan continues to explore its counterterrorism policy, its intentions and actions remain subject to scrutiny, reflecting the enduring challenge of balancing international alliances and domestic security objectives.
Musharraf’s strategic vision and unintended consequences
In the early 2000s, former President Musharraf recognized the existential threat posed by the Taliban’s ideological agenda and foresaw its potential impact on Pakistan. Efforts such as Operation Sher-e-Dil and Operation Zarzala were launched to counter this growing threat, especially in tribal areas such as South Waziristan. However, while these operations addressed the ostensible immediate threat, they did not eradicate terrorism.
Instead, the social, economic and political impacts of these military operations intensified local grievances and pushed tribal communities towards extremism, leading them to see the Taliban as a protector against injustice. The state’s selective counterterrorism approach, which often protected and manipulated extremist elements for strategic and tactical gains intertwined with radical motivations, only heightened the threat landscape.
The aftermath of the Taliban’s resurgence after the Afghan occupation illustrates this complexity: a group that Pakistan once nurtured has turned its back on its former benefactor. Pakistan’s long-standing pursuit of strategic depth in Afghanistan has inadvertently turned the Afghanistan-Pakistan region into a volatile terrorist battlefield, with Pakistan itself bearing the consequences.
President Musharraf’s strategic calculations, aimed at balancing regional dynamics and safeguarding his country’s interests, inadvertently contributed to the entrenchment of terrorism in the region. His relentless strategic calculation of instrumentalizing extremism without addressing its root causes has only perpetuated instability in Pakistan.
A terrifying love triangle
Over the past year, Pakistan has been besieged by a relentless wave of terrorism orchestrated by groups such as the Tehrik-e-Jihadist-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and its affiliates. In 2023 alone, seven attacks have been recorded in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan provinces in a worrying development of the emergence of a new jihadist faction, Tehrik-e-Jihad. These attacks, which have featured suicide bombings targeting military installations and security personnel, have raised concerns over the security of the entire country.
The seriousness of these threats was underscored by a suicide bombing in March 2023 that killed nine police officers and injured 11, and a subsequent attack on a military installation that claimed further casualties. In particular, the TTP’s attack on Chinese workers a few months ago has strained relations between China and Pakistan, particularly the security of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).
Pakistan’s internal security situation currently faces three powerful terrorist organisations – the al-Qaida-backed TTP and the Islamic State in Khorasan Province (ISKP) – each of which poses different but significant threats to Pakistan’s stability and security, calling for urgent and decisive action.
However, Pakistan’s response has been marred by inconsistent and inflexible policies towards various terrorist groups, often motivated by short-term tactical gains. This approach, characterized by half-hearted counterterrorism efforts and selective engagement with extremists, has inadvertently emboldened these groups and pushed Pakistan to the brink of escalating violence and instability.
The looming danger makes it clear that Pakistan needs to urgently recalibrate its counterterrorism strategy, moving from tactical operations to a robust and comprehensive response that addresses the root causes and ideological underpinnings. Failure to do so risks further deteriorating internal security and jeopardizing Pakistan’s long-term stability.
