Arshad Mahmood Awan
Pakistan’s relentless, grinding battle against militancy continues to extract an unacceptable and heavy toll, marked by the frequent loss of highly trained security personnel in confrontations with terrorists. The alarming frequency of these attacks forces a national reckoning, specifically concerning the persistent and lethal use of foreign soil—most prominently Afghan territory—by anti-Pakistan militant groups who treat it as a safe haven. This past week alone brought brutal reminders: eleven personnel, including two officers, were martyred in the Orakzai tribal district of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) during an Intelligence-Based Operation (IBO) against TTP terrorists. Furthermore, the Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) confirmed the martyrdom of a Major in a counterterrorism operation in Dera Ismail Khan (D.I. Khan), while a policeman was simultaneously killed in a separate TTP attack on a checkpoint in the same district. These losses underscore the acute and ongoing nature of the threat.
Follow republicpolicy.com on Twitter
The Murky Nexus of Terror, Crime, and Politics Responding to this significant uptick in violence, the crucial Corps Commanders’ Conference recently convened and pledged to maintain counterterrorism (CT) operations “across all domains” with the explicit aim of crushing the banned TTP and various Baloch separatist insurgencies. Crucially, the country’s top generals highlighted a newly emphasized, dark phenomenon: a “nexus between terror and crime with vested political patronage,” while vowing to comprehensively dismantle it. This specific reference demands immediate and thorough public clarification. While past evidence has pointed to political parties maintaining militant wings, such as those that plagued Karachi, the public needs to know if this statement refers to the revival of old threats or the emergence of a fresh, more dangerous hybrid of criminal-terrorist activity shielded by contemporary political patrons. Without absolute clarity on this “nexus,” the state cannot effectively target the root cause, allowing vested interests to continue undermining national security from within the political system.
Follow republicpolicy.com on Facebook
Adjusting Tactics to Stem Security Losses The high and unsustainable rate of losses among security personnel necessitates an urgent and critical review of current operational strategies. Pakistan simply cannot afford to bleed personnel at this rate, especially since the majority of troop losses are routinely reported during Intelligence-Based Operations (IBOs). While IBOs are essential for precision and targeting, the frequency of casualties suggests a vital need to change tactics and upgrade equipment, intelligence gathering, or operational security protocols to stay ahead of increasingly adaptive and well-armed terrorist groups. Counterterrorism operations must evolve faster than the threat itself. This requires investing heavily in new technologies, enhancing battlefield intelligence to mitigate risks to ground forces, and potentially restructuring the nature of these confrontations to minimize direct, prolonged exposure for specialized units. Protecting the lives of security forces is paramount to maintaining the long-term effectiveness and morale of the nation’s entire counterterrorism effort.
Follow republicpolicy.com on Instagram
Isolating Afghanistan and Enforcing Regional Consensus The problem of Afghan soil being exploited as a sanctuary and launchpad by militant groups is not merely a bilateral issue; it is a regional security imperative. This issue was recently pushed into the international spotlight during the Moscow Format Consultations—a key regional dialogue—where Pakistan’s special representative for Afghanistan vehemently reiterated the need to “dismantle all terrorist groups operating from Afghanistan.” The joint statement issued by the participating countries, which notably included Russia, China, and Iran, alongside a representative from Afghanistan, unequivocally reminded the Afghan Taliban regime that continued terrorism originating from their country “constitutes a serious threat to… the region and the wider world.”
Follow republicpolicy.com on Twitter
This international consensus provides Pakistan with the diplomatic leverage required to intensify pressure on the interim Afghan government. Therefore, the strategy must be twofold: while shoring up domestic defences and reviewing counter-insurgency tactics at home, Pakistan must simultaneously work with its powerful partners in the region to ensure that a unified, unambiguous message is forcefully communicated to the Afghan Taliban regime. The message must be simple, direct, and non-negotiable: regional integration, economic cooperation, and international legitimacy cannot go hand in hand with hosting bloodthirsty terrorist groups who destabilize neighboring countries and the broader region. The choice for Kabul is clear: either fully renounce and evict the militant groups using its territory or face sustained diplomatic, economic, and security isolation from the regional powers that matter most.
Follow republicpolicy.com on Facebook
The current situation is untenable. Pakistan cannot continue to sustain these losses while an international partner, however unstable, provides operational space for the killers. The time for nuanced diplomacy is over; Pakistan requires a firm, dual-track policy that prioritizes the lives of its security personnel through tactical adjustments and demands genuine, verifiable action from Afghanistan to terminate the militant safe zones on its soil. National security demands nothing less than absolute clarity on the political nexus and absolute compliance from Kabul.
