Politics of destabilisation

Pakistan remains under assault from enemies within, working hand in glove with external sponsors. But to frame Quetta's latest tragedy purely as terrorism is to miss the wider point, since this was a political act designed to exploit the fault lines of a fragile state.

The bombing outside the Frontier Corps headquarters, which killed 10 and wounded dozens, was about optics. It was meant to symbolise a direct challenge to state authority in a province that has long been a battleground of competing interests, signalled both reach and intent. Militancy in Balochistan is rarely divorced from geopolitics. The TTP and its splinters are violent actors, but they are also proxies in a wider contest. External powers have long viewed Pakistan's internal instability as an opportunity to advance their agendas. Yet the external hand thrives because of internal weakness.

Islamabad has failed to build political trust with the people of Balochistan, and the result is a vacuum in which militant groups can cloak themselves in the language of resistance, even when acting as proxies for hostile actors. The state's failure to address these grievances creates the conditions in which every attack resonates far beyond the immediate damage. The danger now is not just violence but erosion. Each such incident chips away at the perception of a strong, coherent Pakistani state. It deepens public disillusionment and provides ammunition to those who argue that the federation is fractured.

While swift operations to neutralise militants are essential, they must be accompanied by action against financing networks and safe havens. Beyond the immediate security response, the state must also deliver governance in Balochistan so that militants are denied local sympathy. Equally vital is political unity in Islamabad as divisions at the top only embolden those who seek to destabilise the country.