Pakistan is once again grappling with a familiar and painful reality: a renewed wave of terrorism that has left its deepest scars on Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. In recent months, attacks on security forces, state infrastructure, laborers and civilians have intensified, reviving memories of a conflict many believed had been pushed to the margins. This resurgence is not accidental, nor does it appear spontaneous. Its pattern, timing and targets suggest a deliberate strategy, one that thrives on instability and feeds on the vulnerabilities of a region already burdened by poverty, underdevelopment and long-standing grievances. To treat this violence as a purely domestic failure would be to ignore the wider forces that have shaped it.
Pakistan’s officials have repeatedly pointed to evidence indicating that the terrorism unfolding in its western provinces is being sustained from beyond its borders. Such claims are not new, but they have gained urgency amid the scale of recent attacks and the intensity of counterterrorism operations. In Balochistan, security forces have been engaged in what can only be described as a relentless campaign to dismantle terrorist networks. According to official statements, scores of terrorists linked to what the authorities call “Fitna-e-Hindustan” have been killed in recent days alone, with hundreds more neutralized over the past year. The language is stark, but so too is the reality on the ground, where violence has targeted not just soldiers and police officers, but also ordinary citizens whose only misfortune is to live or work in contested spaces.
The chief minister of Balochistan, Sarfraz Bugti, has spoken with unusual bluntness about the nature of the threat. He has accused hostile elements of using Afghan territory to plan and launch attacks inside Pakistan, and has claimed that Afghan nationals have been found among those involved. Intelligence warnings, he has said, pointed to an escalation in terrorist activity, yet even so the state would not cede “an inch of land”. His words reflect a broader mood within the Pakistani establishment: that the struggle in Balochistan is existential, a contest between the authority of the state and armed groups determined to impose their will through fear.
Similar sentiments have been echoed by the defence minister, Khawaja Muhammad Asif, who has described recent attacks as part of a coordinated assault aimed at destabilizing the province. He has alleged that banned organizations such as the Balochistan Liberation Army receive external funding, particularly from India, and that they deliberately target civilian areas to maximize fear and media attention. Such groups, he argues, often wrap themselves in the language of rights and resistance, masking acts of terror as political struggle. For Pakistan’s leadership, this is not merely a security challenge but a test of national resolve at a moment when the country is trying to steady its economy and restore investor confidence.
Condemnation has also come from political leaders outside the immediate conflict zones. Punjab’s chief minister, Maryam Nawaz, has denounced the attacks in uncompromising terms, praising the security forces and insisting that any assault on Balochistan is an assault on Pakistan itself. Her rhetoric, though severe, underscores a critical point: the violence in Balochistan is not a provincial issue to be managed at the margins, but a national crisis with implications for the federation as a whole. Fragmentation, whether territorial or political, is precisely what terrorist groups seek to exploit.
These developments unfold against a wider regional backdrop that Pakistan views with growing unease. India’s announcement of a sharply increased defence budget for the 2026 financial year has been read in Islamabad as more than routine military planning. With defence spending set to rise by nearly 15 per cent, the timing has fueled suspicions that New Delhi is doubling down on an aggressive security posture following its military setback against Pakistan during Operation Sindoor in May 2025. Pakistani officials argue that India’s history of interference, including the arrest and confession of Indian national Kulbhushan Jadhav, offers a clear precedent for the use of proxies to destabilize neighboring states. In this narrative, the violence in Balochistan is part of a broader continuum rather than an isolated phenomenon.
Balochistan’s strategic significance only sharpens these concerns. As Pakistan’s largest province, rich in minerals and blessed with a long coastline, it sits at the heart of the country’s economic aspirations. Projects such as Gwadar port and the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor promise connectivity, investment and growth, not just for Pakistan but for the wider region. It is precisely this potential that makes the province a target. Attacks on development projects, engineers and non-local workers are designed to send a clear message: that Balochistan is unsafe, that progress is fragile, and that instability can be manufactured at will.
In this context, intelligence-based operations by the state are presented as a necessity rather than a choice. The government insists these actions are directed solely against terrorists, not against any community or province. Yet criticism persists, both domestically and internationally, questioning the human cost of such campaigns and warning against the alienation of local populations. These concerns cannot be dismissed lightly. Pakistan’s long war on terror has claimed more than 80,000 lives and inflicted enormous economic damage. Trust between citizens and the state has been strained, particularly in regions that feel historically neglected. Any sustainable response to terrorism must therefore balance force with political engagement and development.
What troubles Pakistan most, however, is what it sees as the indifference of the international community. Global institutions, from the United Nations to the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, have largely confined themselves to statements of concern, even as evidence of proxy warfare and regional militarization mounts. Pakistan argues that ignoring India’s expanding defence posture and alleged external interference risks emboldening destabilizing behavior, with consequences that could spill far beyond south Asia. Afghanistan, too, is urged to prevent its territory from being used by terrorist groups, a responsibility enshrined in international law but unevenly enforced.
The challenges Pakistan faces are formidable, but they are not beyond resolution. What is required is a renewed commitment to national unity, a clear-eyed recognition of the external and internal dimensions of terrorism, and a willingness to address the root causes that allow violence to take hold. Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa are not peripheral spaces; they are integral to Pakistan’s future. Without peace and stability in these provinces, economic recovery and regional integration will remain distant goals. The international community, meanwhile, must decide whether it will remain a spectator or play a constructive role in preventing yet another cycle of conflict in a region that can ill afford it.
