Compassion and violence, two terms that appear oxymoronic in nature, were the title of a talk to be given by the globally renowned Karen Armstrong at my university. This was not going to be a lecture on euthanasia or being philanthropic towards the victims; it focused on the need for compassion in the global fight against the spectre of terrorism. But how could this virtue, often placed at the periphery of contemporary society, fit into the paraphernalia of military operations, geopolitics and extremism? How can a nation as traumatised and psychologically battered as Pakistan exhibit compassion towards the enemy? Compassion means recognising the forces that breed extremism and neutralising them rather than simply trying to eliminate the extremists. The recent recurrence of violence in Karachi is just another symptom of the rampant menace of radicalisation that has permeated into our urban centres and become ossified in our society. There has been no shortage of brutalities in recent years that should have, ideally, forced us to turn away from our blissful ignorance and recognise the threat at hand. The knee-jerk reactions of the state such as the military courts and executions, along with an impotent National Action Plan (NAP), are nothing more than political gimmicks, designed to sedate the masses by offering them heads on a platter. Retributive justice — albeit a weak and arbitrary form of it — seems to be the state’s course of action, if indeed it has one. More than representing the state’s inability to counter extremism, it portrays a much more significant failure: a misinterpretation of the problem. No amount of violence can quell the ideological threat posed by the increasing radicalisation in society. A more successful counterterrorism policy would have education at the heart of it. Though there have been calls from numerous quarters over the need to reform the broken education system of the country there needs to be a concurrent effort that focuses on deradicalisation and rehabilitation. Every other day news reports boast about the scores of terrorists being caught from all over Pakistan, courtesy operations in the north and in Karachi, with thousands of them already languishing in prison. It is simply not feasible, morally or otherwise, to tie the noose around their necks and claim to be rid of the problem. These individuals must go through a programme in which their extremist ideologies are neutralised and they are rehabilitated to become beneficial members of society. We must recognise that these extremists were not born this way; they are simply the victims of a vicious cycle of socialisation that resulted in their radicalisation. Their birth is not only confined to the misplaced doctrine of ‘strategic depth’; decades of indoctrination via the education system that has preached intolerance is also a major cause of this. Therefore, this process can only be countered through education that focuses on tolerance and respect, with the aim of reinventing their outlook towards society, religion and the state. For this to be effective, there needs to a comprehensive, multidimensional and tailor-made policy that recognises and adapts to the various social and cultural contexts of the different strands of extremism. It must also not be a short term facade that is content with disengagement, defined as the process of simply convincing terrorists to lay down their arms rather than changing their beliefs. It must emphasise on the completion of the deradicalisation process. The benefits of commitment to this policy would be manifold. Individuals who have successfully completed this programme would be able to carry the message forward and positively contribute to their hometowns, which would have a ripple effect at the grass roots level, a phenomenon potentially more efficient than any state level initiative. But is it simply enough to reform minds and let them re-enter the very system that corrupted them? To do so would be an egregious oversight because society will continue to churn out more and more extremists. Poverty, instability, political oppression and social exclusion will provide a steady stream of vulnerable minds forced by circumstances towards the seductive path of radicalism. Therefore, all efforts would be incomplete if not coupled with a rehabilitation programme that successfully reintegrates them into society and grants them the opportunity to constructively contribute. Although this simply seems to be political rhetoric, the creation of jobs, protection of basic human rights and reaching out to ostracised communities is imperative, without which any counterterrorism policy is doomed to fail. The role of education here is paramount, as without it individuals cannot become economically, socially and politically viable. It can allow communities to foster harmony and learn the benefits of cooperation. But, most importantly, it will serve as a counter-narrative to what is being currently dissipated to the masses. Poor management of the education system and even its absence in certain places has left a gaping hole in society that is being used by radicals to create an enticing, though deluding, narrative. It is only through education that we can even begin to counter this indoctrination by providing the masses with a prosperous and secure alternative. Despite the reignited vigour following the Army Public School (APS) attack, at a state and social level, Pakistan still finds itself immersed in a crescendo of violence that seems to have expanded its targets. Despite all the vociferous calls from the public and civil society to rise against this threat, our policy remains phantasmagoric in nature, largely unsuccessful in translating those tall claims into substantial social reform. Our narrative of creating the ‘other’ — disassociating ourselves from extremists — is an unfortunate result of the failure to recognise the social roots of radicalism. A deradicalisation and rehabilitation based counterterrorism policy can only materialise if the masses are willing to accept their stake in this phenomenon and replace apathy with compassion. Without our active involvement in these programmes, through civil society and otherwise, the state will continue to remain inept in dealing with this issue. Not only is financial and technical support necessary, we must also create a society that allows the beneficiaries of the programmes to be reintegrated into society. When vengeance gives way to compassion, peace will follow. The writer is a freelance columnist