Pakistan has once again seen a rise in militant activities in the recent days. In the space of only three months, spectacles of terrorism have rocked Peshawar, Charsadda, Sehwan and Lahore among other cities across the country. The latest in the string of these deadly attacks struck a women’s mosque in Parachinar, Kurram Agency last week; claiming 24 lives while injuring around 70 others.
Given the geostrategic importance of Kurram Agency, especially with reference to the tribal belt and the Afghan provinces, the Parachinar tragedy might have several implications.
As was evident in this instance, its location renders it vulnerable to terrorist networks. While the region has borne the brunt of sectarian violence in the past, the recent attack holds particular significance because of its alleged perpetrator, Jamaat ul Ahraar (JuA). Soon after it split away from Tehreek-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) in 2014, the group joined hands with the IS.
Having extensively deliberated upon extremist literature and audio lectures, the discourse pattern of militant outfits operating worldwide can be juxtaposed with great ease. Their narrative was found to be intricately woven around the central premise of a homogenised world view. Theirs is the world where all living species speak the same language, think the same way, and operate through a similar social and cultural organisation. Such categorisation strengthens their resolve to eliminate all forms of socio-cultural diversity as they embark upon a crusade to bring back history using concepts like ‘Khilafat’. Thus, both indigenous wisdom and modern human civilisation have quite unexpectedly become their first victims. This militant narrative, consequently, does away with every object related to the aesthetic pleasure, which, otherwise, is one of the hallmarks of human creativity.
This discourse uses Aristotelian deductive logic in which language is manipulated to sound esoteric. The figurative expression is usually employed to deny factuality of existence; resulting in a shift in religious authority. For example, Jihad has been decreed to be equal to Qital; propagated as the only way left for the struggle. The concept of Khilafat is nestled in the concept of Jihad while the concept of Jihad is, in turn, nestled in the concept of ‘Shahadat’. This triangle, coupled with ‘otherization’, justifies a highly lethal approach in their war against the whole world. Militant organisations in Pakistan and elsewhere can, thus, be seen employing effective techniques to create ‘human bombs’ in the shape of suicide bombers.
Nevertheless, the IS still distinguishes itself for its severe sectarian bias, its proclivity to bring areas under its direct control and its substantial resourcefulness. JuA is said to be inspired by its tactics employed in Syria and Iraq. It should be a matter of grave concern for both Pakistan and Afghanistan that IS Khorasan and its affiliates hold the ability to launch lethal attacks to bring strategic areas like Kurram Agency under their control. The administrations should also consider the prevalent sectarian divide present in the Agency, which could be used in this regard.
It is quite unfortunate that Saudi Arabia and Iran continue to fight its proxy wars in this region. According to press reports, both countries have now started vying for their influence in South Asia. This competition should be looked upon in the light of their previous support for various private militias in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Though no credible evidence has yet been found to substantiate these claims, the history of rivalry between Iran and Saudi Arabia does, however, provide a solid basis for this assumption. Their rivalry is another fault line, which might be used by both local and international terrorist networks.
In 2015, Saudi Arabia cobbled 34 Muslim-majority countries together to fight terrorist outfits, especially the IS. Iran was kept out of this alliance. The recent governmental issuance of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) to a retired Pakistani army chief has, however, indulged the country in these power games. Iran has since then raised serious reservations on Pakistan’s decision.
To respond to such a precarious situation, both Afghanistan and Pakistan should form a strategic alliance. It is to be emphasised that sealed borders might create more distrust between the two republics. As history tells us, closing borders do not significantly help in their management. The closure of only 12 links across the Durand Line has adversely impacted people living on both sides; a situation that might be used by the terrorist networks to establish their support base. Both Afghanistan and Pakistan need to take confidence-building measures to develop a joint strategy against all types of terrorism, drug trafficking, kidnapping and human trafficking. Mutual trust can only be restored if both countries stop their soil from being used by networks, which perpetrate terrorism. The IS, Haqqani Network and Afghan Taliban might also be dealt by a joint strategy developed through dialogue between the two political leaderships. Other states of the region might soon follow suit.
The writer is a political analyst based in Peshawar. He can be reached at [email protected]. He tweets @khadimhussain4