By Sehr Rushmeen

The recent demand from the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) during the Grand Jirga for all weapon holders to vacate Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) within 60 days has sparked significant debate about security and governance in the region. This request emerges from a complex backdrop of violence, insurgency, and the ongoing influence of militant groups that have operated with impunity. While the PTM’s intentions may appear rooted in peace and nonviolence, a closer examination reveals the multifaceted implications of such demands amid persistent threats to stability in KP.

For over two decades, KP has endured the ramifications of conflict, with militant groups operating under the influence of foreign entities. These groups are unlikely to relinquish their sources of income and power voluntarily. Historical evidence from the region indicates that such entities thrive on chaos, manipulating local populations for their agendas. This underlines the critical role of the Pakistan Army, which serves as a guarantor of the Pashtunwali Code, aiming to liberate local communities from the grip of mafias intent on using them for nefarious activities. The Army's mission goes beyond mere military operations; it encompasses a broader strategy to dismantle the nexus between foreign-funded militants and local sympathizers.

The PTM's aspirations for a Gandhian approach to conflict resolution have repeatedly faltered, as evidenced by two decades of failed attempts in Afghanistan, despite significant support from India. This historical precedent serves as a cautionary tale, underscoring the futility of relying solely on nonviolent principles in a landscape rife with armed conflict and radical ideologies. The PTM’s stance not only undermines the realities of the region but also exposes its disconnection from the actual needs of the Pashtun people.

The assertion that the Army’s presence is a detriment to local security overlooks a fundamental truth: the Army and the nation are united in their fight against terrorism. The Pakistan Army actively engages with terrorists, working tirelessly to maintain peace and stability. This comprehensive and reinvigorated counter-terrorism strategy is essential for protecting the lives of civilians and restoring normalcy in KP. By positioning the Army as the enemy, the PTM inadvertently perpetuates a narrative that endangers the very communities it claims to represent.

Furthermore, the PTM's dual rhetoric of opposing military operations while simultaneously acknowledging security threats within the region exposes a significant inconsistency. The local population often provides protection and support to terrorists, a reality the PTM neglects to confront. This unwillingness to condemn such behavior only complicates efforts to achieve genuine peace. Without a concerted effort to disarm militant groups and address the local complicity in terrorism, how can one expect to foster a peaceful environment? Military operations are not merely an option but a necessity in dismantling the threat posed by groups identified as Khawarij.

The question then arises: what framework does the PTM propose for establishing lasting peace in KP? The absence of a clear modus operandi renders its demands vague and impractical. Achieving durable peace in the region requires cooperation between local communities, law enforcement agencies (LEAs), the Pakistan Army, and the KP Police. Mere slogans and rallies against terrorism will not stabilize a region so deeply affected by conflict. It necessitates actionable plans and collaborative efforts to address the root causes of violence.

Moreover, the existence of criminal mafias earning billions of rupees daily from a state of insecurity underscores the stakes involved in this struggle. These entities benefit from a weak state, thriving in an environment where law enforcement is undermined. The PTM’s calls for withdrawal serve to reinforce the status quo that allows these mafias to flourish, ultimately undermining the sovereignty and stability of Pakistan. By allowing these groups to persist, the PTM inadvertently supports an agenda that seeks to weaken the state's authority and control.

In conclusion, the demand for the removal of weapon holders within a limited timeframe is not only unrealistic but also dangerously misinformed. The complexities of the situation in KP necessitate a robust and sustained military presence to counteract the threats posed by both foreign-funded militants and local criminal organizations. The Pakistan Army's role is crucial, serving as a protector of both the state and the Pashtun people. The PTM's narrative, while appealing on the surface, fails to address the intricate realities of security, governance, and the collective responsibility required to ensure a peaceful future for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Only through a united front against terrorism, coupled with genuine community engagement, can the region hope to overcome its challenges and secure a lasting peace.

About Author
Sehr Rushmeen, an Islamabad based freelance researcher, did her MPhil from National Defence University (NDU) in Strategic Studies and her BSc from University of London (UOL) in International Relations. Her area of research interest is Strategic Nuclear Studies, Artificial Intelligence in Warfare, Conflict Zone in Middle East, South China Sea and South Asian Politics. Has several publications in renowned regional and international newspapers and magazines. She tweets by the handle @rushmeentweets and can be reached on [email protected]

*Opinions expressed in this article are the writer's own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of The South Asia Times