By: Musawir Qureshi
There was a time when a person leaving home in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa in the morning could not be certain that he would return home safely in the evening. A mother would bid farewell to her son, a wife to her husband, and children to their father, silently praying that Allah would bring their loved ones back home safely and under His protection. Markets, mosques, schools, government offices, police checkpoints, and even the privacy of homes were no longer safe.
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa went through one of the worst waves of terrorism, particularly between 2008 and 2011. Suicide attacks, bomb blasts, targeted killings, kidnappings, and attacks on security personnel had become almost routine. An atmosphere of fear had taken hold, placing not only ordinary citizens but also the police, administration, and political leadership under immense pressure.
During that period, funerals were leaving homes almost every day. In some places, fathers lost their sons; in others, brothers lost brothers, mothers lost their children, and entire families were destroyed. In many cases, the sole breadwinner of a family became a victim of terrorism, leaving behind widows and children struggling with severe economic hardships.
The loss was not limited to human lives. Terrorism affected the psychology of an entire generation. Even today, some people become frightened when they hear the sound of an explosion. For those who witnessed their loved ones being killed before their own eyes, the chapter of terrorism has never truly ended. The incident may be over, but its pain remains for a lifetime.
Pakistan’s security forces, police, and people fought a long and difficult battle against terrorism. Thousands of civilians and security personnel sacrificed their lives. As a result of state operations, public resistance, and various security measures, there came a time when the people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa were finally able to breathe somewhat more peacefully.
Markets became active again, schools reopened, businesses recovered, and people began to hope that perhaps the future of their children had finally emerged from the shadow of violence and explosives.
But for some time now, a series of incidents has once again been reopening those old wounds.
The difference, however, is that terrorists now appear to be focusing largely on the police and other law-enforcement agencies.
The question, therefore, is: Why is the police being targeted?
In any state, the police are the first line of defence between the people and the law. For terrorists, targeting the police is not merely about killing a few officers; it is also about creating fear throughout society.
In many southern districts, police personnel are reportedly threatened with messages such as: leave your job, otherwise you and your family will be targeted. If a police station itself is not safe, the issue is no longer limited to the security of the police; it becomes a question of the writ of the state.
That is why every attack on the police is, in fact, an attack on the protection of ordinary citizens.
For some time, incidents targeting police personnel, checkpoints, police stations, and patrol teams have been reported from different parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The suicide attack on the Kabal Police Station in Swat was also a deeply tragic incident in which precious lives, including those of police personnel, were lost and several people were injured.
Similarly, incidents in Bannu and other parts of the province targeting police and security personnel have once again raised the question: Why has terrorism not been completely eliminated?
Immediately after any terrorist incident, government statements usually follow:
“We strongly condemn the incident.”
“The terrorists will be brought to justice.”
“A report has been sought.”
“The culprits will be arrested soon.”
Such statements have their place, but this is where the public’s questions actually begin.
What happened to the report?
Who were the attackers?
Who planned the attack?
Where did the terrorists come from?
Who provided them with logistical support?
Who were their local facilitators?
Where did the resources used for the attack come from?
And, most importantly:
If a terrorist was arrested, what punishment did he receive under the law?
These are the questions the public wants answered.
Terrorism cannot be eliminated through condemnations and requests for reports alone. People need to know what the state did after an incident, how many people were arrested, how far the investigation progressed, and what happened to the cases in the courts.
Another important and highly sensitive question is: Who are the terrorists?
After every attack, the name of a banned organisation often emerges. But the reality is that when terrorists carry out an attack, they require planning, financial resources, intelligence, transportation, weapons, communication, and local facilitation.
Therefore, arresting the person who physically carries out an attack is not enough. Real success will come only when the entire network behind the attack is exposed and dismantled.
But the question remains: When?
The state must determine who provides terrorists with information, where they receive shelter, where their financial assistance comes from, who facilitates their movement, and who helps them escape after an attack.
This cannot be achieved through emotional statements. It requires modern intelligence capabilities, forensic investigations, financial monitoring, digital evidence, inter-agency cooperation, and strong prosecution.
It is also a reality that the police cannot be expected to confront terrorism simply by being given guns. Terrorism cannot be defeated with conventional weapons alone. Police personnel must be equipped with modern weapons and appropriate security equipment.
The police need modern technology, secure police stations, bulletproof vehicles, effective surveillance systems, advanced communication equipment, forensic facilities, intelligence-sharing mechanisms, and proper training.
At the same time, the safety and security of police officers and their families must also be given priority.
If a police officer knows that terrorists could also target his family, he will remain under constant psychological pressure. In such circumstances, it is the responsibility of the state to assure its protectors that those who risk their lives for the safety of the public will not have their families abandoned by the state.
When the sole breadwinner of a family becomes a victim of terrorism, the problems of education, healthcare, housing, and employment for his children can continue for decades.
There is therefore a need for the government to establish a comprehensive and permanent database of terrorism victims and provide their families with long-term support in education, healthcare, employment, and financial assistance.
The families of martyrs should not be remembered only when media cameras are present. The state must continue to look after these families years after the tragedy.
Here, another point deserves serious consideration:
The people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have paid an enormous price in the fight against terrorism. Therefore, no one should be allowed to push the people of this province back into the same era of fear.
If the police are being targeted today, it would be dangerous to treat these incidents as isolated or insignificant events. Terrorism rarely returns suddenly on a large scale. It often begins with smaller incidents, threats, targeted killings, attacks on checkpoints, and attempts to spread fear in specific areas.
The state must take these warning signs seriously.
Today, the ordinary citizen of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is justified in asking:
What is our policy against terrorism?
How effectively are terrorist networks being dismantled?
Who is pursuing those continuously targeting the police?
How far have the cases against arrested suspects progressed?
What action has been taken against the facilitators of terrorists?
And why are complete investigation reports of major terrorist attacks not made public?
These questions are not intended to weaken any government or institution. They are questions aimed at strengthening the state.
Because when people do not receive information, rumours begin to spread, doubts emerge, and public trust in state institutions is affected.
There is now a need for a clear system of investigation after every major terrorist incident. Those responsible, along with their facilitators, must be brought before the law. Progress in cases must be ensured, and wherever national security considerations permit, the findings of investigations should be shared with the public.
The people of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa have already given enough blood.
Now they need peace, not more funerals.
They need action, not more condolence statements.
They need results, not more promises.
Above all, they need the assurance that when they leave their homes in the morning, their hope of returning safely in the evening should depend not only on Allah’s protection but also on the strength and effectiveness of the state’s security system.
Because when the police themselves live in fear and citizens feel unsafe, the problem is no longer simply about a handful of terrorists. It becomes a question of the security of the state, public confidence, and the future of coming generations.
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa has witnessed the devastating consequences of terrorism on a massive scale. The time has come for the state to learn from the sacrifices of the past, understand the current threat with seriousness, and this time adopt a comprehensive and sustainable strategy against terrorism one whose objective is not merely another operation, but lasting peace.
