By Muhammad Mohsin Iqbal
History reminds us that even hostility between states has traditionally been restrained by certain moral and strategic conventions. A worthy adversary confronts openly, declares intent, and accepts the consequences. There is an austere dignity in such conflict, however regrettable. In stark contrast stands the conduct of a cowardly enemy—one that avoids direct engagement, shuns accountability, and wages war through deception, proxies, and terror. It is this degraded and dangerous form of hostility that Pakistan faces today. Following its unmistakable setback in May 2025, India appears to have abandoned any remaining commitment to responsible statecraft. Unable to absorb defeat or recalibrate its approach, it has reverted to indirect warfare, employing subversive tactics designed to destabilize Pakistan from within.
Sponsorship of separatist violence in Balochistan and facilitation of terrorist infiltration across Pakistan’s western borders are not isolated incidents but elements of a coherent strategy rooted in frustration and desperation. Such conduct does not reflect strength; it betrays strategic exhaustion. Pakistan’s assertions in this regard are grounded in evidence, not rhetoric. Detailed intelligence, material links, and operational trails pointing to Indian involvement have repeatedly been presented to the international community. The use of Afghan territory by terrorist elements targeting Pakistan is equally well-documented. These militants neither operate independently nor represent spontaneous local resistance. They function within a broader architecture of proxy warfare, nurtured, guided, and sustained by external handlers pursuing objectives alien to regional peace.
While India occupies a central position in this hostile design, it has not acted in isolation. Certain external actors who aligned with India during the events of May 2025, and whose technological capabilities were displayed before a global audience, cannot dissociate themselves from responsibility. Yet that episode also reaffirmed a deeper reality. Under the resolute command of Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir, the Pakistan Army demonstrated not only operational superiority but also strategic maturity. Hostile designs were decisively crushed, deterrence was restored, and the nation’s defensive credibility reinforced. The challenge confronting Pakistan today is not conventional war but a form of cowardly terrorism that deliberately avoids military confrontation and instead targets civilians.
Laborers, passengers, and unarmed citizens have become preferred victims, revealing the moral emptiness of those who claim political purpose yet resort to indiscriminate violence. Such tactics are not born of ideology but of fear and failure. They are designed to sow panic, provoke reaction, and create an illusion of relevance where none exists. Against this threat, Pakistan’s response has been firm, coordinated, and measured. The armed forces, law enforcement agencies, and intelligence services remain vigilant and proactive, while the people have shown remarkable resilience. The sacrifices of soldiers and civilians alike stand as solemn testimony to a nation’s refusal to be coerced. There is a collective understanding that compromise on national security is neither prudent nor permissible.
At the center of this proxy architecture lies the so-called Balochistan Liberation Army. Claiming to act in the name of Baloch rights, it has in reality become an instrument of external manipulation. Misguided by distant handlers and driven by agendas detached from the genuine aspirations of the Baloch people, the group has steadily degenerated into criminality. In the vast and sparsely populated terrain of Balochistan, its militants increasingly resemble bandits rather than insurgents, relying on ambushes, extortion, and attacks on soft targets to mask their strategic irrelevance. Recent security operations have exposed the hollowness of the group’s planning and execution. Poor coordination, lack of popular support, and growing operational pressure have resulted in rapid attrition.
Their ranks are thinning, their networks unraveling, and their leadership increasingly isolated. These outcomes reflect not only the incompetence of the terrorists but also the professional excellence of Pakistan’s law enforcement agencies, who have once again demonstrated discipline, precision, and resolve in upholding the writ of the state. The message for the handlers of such proxies is unambiguous. Continued investment in these entities is futile. Their consistent failure delivers no strategic gain, only exposure, embarrassment, and eventual collapse. Proxy warfare may generate temporary disruption, but it cannot alter realities shaped by geography, history, and national will.
(The writer is a seasoned parliamentary expert with over two decades of experience in legislative research and media affairs, leading policy support initiatives for lawmakers on complex national and international issues, and can be reached at editorial@metro-Morning.com)
