Two separate incidents—one in Wana, another in Islamabad—have made clear the Pakistani state’s inability to counter resurgent terrorism, negating the ceaseless claims of national progress trumpeted by the incumbent government.
For months, the government has pointed to rising reserves, a stable rupee and renewed investor confidence as signs of economic recovery. Yet these numbers ring hollow when parents send their children to school under the shadow of fear, and when the federal capital itself is once again in the crosshairs of bombers. A country perpetually under threat cannot build sustainable prosperity. No investor, no reform, no market confidence can survive instability and bloodshed.
The recent surge in attacks did not emerge out of nowhere. Rather, it is the result of a long neglect of counterterrorism, including porous border management and an inability—or unwillingness—to tackle extremist networks reconstituting across the northwest. Most alarming is the persistent political paralysis that greets every act of terror. The Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa government continues to resist the idea of renewed military operations, citing political expediency and local sensitivities, even as its own people are the primary victims of violence. This posture may play well to certain constituencies, but has effectively left any state response in limbo.
The federal government is no better, hamstringing its foreign policy with mediation of “brotherly countries” and “diplomatic engagement” as militants continue to train and shelter across the border, slaughtering Pakistanis with impunity. Diplomacy has its place and responsible states must always seek it, but it cannot substitute for decisive security action when a neighboring country is directly complicit in cross-border terrorism. By catering to external sensitivities, Pakistan is trying its own hands and undermining its sovereignty.
The pattern is depressingly familiar: every fresh atrocity prompts condemnations, promises of inquiry, and vague commitments to a “comprehensive strategy” that never materializes. Committees form and fade. Civil and military authorities blame each other. In their jockeying for power, ordinary Pakistanis pay the price in lives lost, communities shattered, and futures dimmed.
The government must now choose. Either it acts decisively, undertaking genuine counterterrorism coordination, asserting the state’s writ, and putting national security above diplomatic niceties—or it must step aside for those willing to confront the threat head-on. There is no room left for rhetorical condemnations or half-hearted measures.
Pakistan’s enemies are emboldened because they see hesitation, fragmentation, and misplaced priorities in Islamabad. Our leaders can either continue to chase applause for economic milestones while the country burns or restore the basic security without which no success can endure. The time for ambiguity has long passed. The state must reclaim its authority—or risk losing not just peace, but also the very coherence that binds it together.