Terrorism in Pakistan has seen a sharp resurgence, with violence escalating in recent years. What lies beneath this uptick? Many point to deeper socio-political issues that have simmered for years. At the heart of the matter, cuts in support for Pakistan’s military establishment—or what is often referred to simply as “the establishment”—may provide key insights into the current rise in terrorism. Equally, the legacy of former Prime Minister Imran Khan has stirred the national conversation on the role of the establishment, further exposing the power dynamics at play.
A series of violent attacks have rocked critical regions such as Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Baluchistan, areas long plagued by unrest. The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), in particular, has regrouped, leveraging the growing dissatisfaction within the population. But why now? What has precipitated this resurgence? And more provocatively, is the establishment feeling threatened by the exposure of its dual role in both protecting and undermining the state?
One major factor behind the surge in violence is the growing public disillusionment with the military’s role in politics. For decades, the military has wielded immense influence, often justifying its interventions under the guise of national security. But now, its grip seems to be loosening, with many Pakistanis—especially the youth—becoming more skeptical of its motivations. This erosion of trust has created a political vacuum, ripe for exploitation by extremist groups like the TTP.
Enter Imran Khan, who, during his tenure, positioned himself as the champion of the people, vowing to break the stranglehold of the establishment. His promises of transparency and holding the powerful accountable resonated deeply with a public weary of traditional political elites. But Khan’s populist approach also made him a thorn in the side of the establishment, sparking a tug-of-war that culminated in his ouster in 2022.
Khan’s dismissal laid bare the extent of the military’s control over civilian political institutions. His downfall wasn’t just a political setback; it sent a clear message that even a leader with widespread public support could not challenge the establishment’s dominance. The aftermath has been fraught, with terrorism rising as political instability deepened.
It’s not hard to see the connection between the political turmoil and the resurgence of extremist violence. As public protests against the military’s influence have grown, so too has the presence of radical groups. These groups thrive in societies where trust in government and traditional leadership has crumbled. In such environments, they seek to provoke violence and chaos, further destabilizing the state and carving out space for their own agendas.
This interplay between instability and extremism forms a vicious cycle: instability fuels extremism, which in turn can be manipulated by the establishment to reclaim its narrative as the nation’s savior. Terrorist incidents become convenient justifications for the military to reassert its control, under the pretext of restoring order and security. But is the establishment really trying to save the state, or is it simply saving itself?
The role of civil society and the media in this complex nexus is critical, yet often overlooked. Activists and journalists who speak out against both the military and extremist groups face significant risks. The unsolved murder of journalist Arshad Sharif, an outspoken critic of the establishment, continues to cast a long shadow, raising suspicions about the real forces at play.
Terrorism in Pakistan is not a standalone issue. It is deeply intertwined with the ongoing power struggle between civilian and military leadership, particularly as it relates to populist figures like Imran Khan. This struggle exposes the population to the dual threats of terrorism and state repression. And while the solution may lie in addressing the root causes of terrorism—fostering a more inclusive, accountable political system—the question remains: is terrorism truly rising, or is it simply a manifestation of the establishment’s fear of losing its grip on power?
Dear reader,
Opinions expressed in the op-ed section are solely those of the individual author and do not represent the official stance of our newspaper. We believe in providing a platform for a wide range of voices and perspectives, even those that may challenge or differ from our own. We remain committed to providing our readers with high-quality, fair, and balanced journalism. Thank you for your continued support.
