There is no accepted definition of terrorism but different countries and think tanks define it in conformity with the effects of local exploitation from it. Terrorism has increased acutely in recent years. New strategic challenges are being faced by the world in the wake of 9/11. The study of terrorism is multidisciplinary, spanning a number of fields, including political science, psychology, criminology, sociology, history and many others. Terrorism is generally raising more questions than the answers being provided. It is true that various aspects of terrorism have been tackled in recent years, including radical group affiliation, civil violence and suicide terrorism. There have been many discussions calling for a closer look at the root causes but there has been no substantial improvement in this area.
Generally, a lack of democracy, lessening civil liberties and absence of the rule of law are preconditions for many forms of domestic terrorism. Pakistan is stuck in a plethora of domestic as well as external issues, and has attracted considerable local and global attention regarding terrorism. Failed or weak states lack the capacity or sometimes the will to exercise territorial control. Extremist ideologies of a religious nature are at least an intermediate cause of terrorism, although people usually adopt such extremist ideologies as a consequence of more fundamental political or personal reasons.
The existence of a dissatisfied minority or majority is a necessary or even a sufficient cause for terrorism in terms of social injustices and poverty. Another motivation for terrorism is the lack of opportunity for political participation along with situational factors involving the concept of a precipitated event that immediately precedes outbreaks of terrorism. Repression by foreign occupation like drone strikes in the tribal belt has domestically triggered the tendency of terrorism.
Historically, several factors have heightened terrorism in Pakistan from Ziaul Haq toppling and arresting an elected prime minister to the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. In between that period of three decades, a number of other political and strategic developments occurred. The stepping in of Zia forcefully into the political corridors devised certain policies in which jihad was officially a part of the country’s foreign policy. The Iranian Revolution (1979) established its influence in the Shia community of Pakistan. Many scholars have agreed to the view that for countering Shia ascendance, General Zia helped the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP), an anti-Shia Deobandi religious organisation. The SSP was further supported by the Iraq-Iran war of the 1980s, while Saudi Arabia was its financial supporter, as the parties to the war made Pakistan a proxy theatre.
Tim Weiner, a New York Times reporter, wrote that the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (1979) prompted the US and Saudi Arabia to invest nearly six billion dollars in the region to organise, train and arm fighters against the Soviets. Thousands of Muslim fighters were brought to Afghanistan and Pakistan in the name of jihad. US and Saudi money pushed the mullahs (clerics) in both Pakistan and Afghanistan to prominence, established madrassas (seminaries) as sanctuaries of jihad culture and made carrying a Kalashnikov an honour symbol in society. In addition, it strengthened General Zia against the People’s Party and Shias.
After the end of the Afghan jihad against the Soviets in 1989, the US left the region with thousands of battle-hardened, mobilised mujahideen, 80,000 of them in Pakistan. This void was created by the US leaving the region without demobilising the mujahideen, leaving it to its own fate. Later, they were strengthened by the establishment forces of Pakistan in two directions: to create strategic depth in Afghanistan and to support the struggle in Indian-held Kashmir.
The US invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 and the government of Pakistan assisted in the operation. Pakistan, as a result, bought the enmity of the Arab mujahideen and the Taliban. Terrorism nowadays is breeding mainly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, FATA and in every nook and cranny of the country. This is emphatically a direct result of Pakistan’s confrontation with the Arab mujahideen and the Taliban. To further aggravate the situation, drone attacks inside Pakistani territory have created a backlash among the tribesmen and even among the general population of Pakistan.
Terrorism is a complex issue with many diverse implications. The constant fluctuation in governance between civilian and military powers has resulted in the diminution of socio-economic structures. Pakistan can no longer afford to provide safe haven for militant groups. We should move forward with the international community by focusing on the changing dynamics of governance to overcome chronic domestic weaknesses that may take time to heal. Firm and stiff decisions in terms of foreign policy can end the jilted lover drama, which has often happened time and again between Pakistan and the US. Despite these conflicts, life in Pakistan goes on as usual, but the end of terrorism does not mean the beginning of peace.
The writer is a freelance columnist and independently conducting research on the partition of 1947. He can be reached at [email protected] and on twitter @JanjuaHaroon