Mounting terrorism challenge and governance crisis

September's figures released by the Pakistan Institute for Conflict and Security Studies (PICSS) paint a grim portrayal of Pakistan's deteriorating security landscape. The report establishes what ordinary citizens already sense: a sharp increase in terrorist incidents, while the state appears to be ill-prepared to address the challenge. According to PICSS, the country witnessed a 27 per cent increase in terror attacks in September 2025 compared to the previous month. These attacks left 77 people dead and 124 injured, with 71 militant operations recorded across the country. While militant losses are reported, the brunt of the violence continues to be borne by security forces and civilians alike.

The report indicates several troubling dimensions. First, the geographic spread of terrorism is widening. Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan provinces remain the epicentres, but incidents in Punjab and Sindh suggest that militancy may engulf other parts. Second, suicide bombings and IED blasts are regaining frequency - tactics that had once been significantly curtailed after Operation Zarb-e-Azb. Third, the targeting of law enforcement agencies remains persistent, eroding both morale and operational capacity.

These figures must not be taken in isolation and as mere statistics. Each incident represents a collapse in the writ of the state, a loss of innocent lives and a signal to hostile actors - domestic or foreign - that Pakistan's counterterrorism architecture has again been weakened.

What is perhaps most concerning is the absence of a coherent state response. The National Action Plan (NAP), unveiled with much fanfare after the 2014 APS tragedy, has been reduced to a ceremonial reference in speeches rather than a framework of action. Successive governments have failed to institutionalise it. Counterterrorism has become episodic rather than strategic, driven by reaction rather than foresight.

The civilian leadership appears too consumed by political infighting to treat terrorism as a priority. The opposition and treasury benches are at loggerheads, leaving little space for a bipartisan security dialogue. Meanwhile, governance failures - from poor policing to lack of border management - have created vacuums that militant groups exploit with ease.

Pakistan's terrorism surge cannot be divorced from regional dynamics. The Afghan Taliban's return to power in 2021 fundamentally altered the landscape. Despite initial assurances, the Taliban regime has not curbed the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). In fact, TTP sanctuaries across the border have emboldened insurgents, allowing them to regroup, recruit and launch cross-border attacks with impunity.

The PICSS report confirms that cross-border terrorism is no longer episodic; it is structural. Unless Pakistan rethinks its Afghan policy, relying less on wishful thinking and more on pragmatic engagement with international stakeholders, this threat will persist. Equally troubling are reports of growing collaboration among militant groups - sectarian outfits, separatists and transnational jihadist networks.

Terrorism thrives in weak states, and Pakistan's economic meltdown has made matters worse. Inflation, unemployment and economic meltdown have not only strained governance capacity but also created fertile ground for extremist narratives. Militants exploit grievances, offering a sense of identity, revenge and even livelihood to marginalised youth. Counterterrorism cannot succeed without addressing this socio-economic underbelly. Yet, the state continues to treat security and economy as separate silos, whereas the two are deeply intertwined.

At the heart of the problem lies an institutional crisis. Policing remains under-resourced, intelligence-sharing mechanisms are fragmented, and judicial processes are weak. Conviction rates in terrorism cases remain abysmally low, partly because of poor investigations and partly because of a lack of witness protection. Instead of reform, governments resort to knee-jerk measures: banning organisations on paper, announcing inquiries that never see the light of day or deploying military force without complementary political strategies.

The PICSS report should serve as a wake-up call: without institutional strengthening, Pakistan will continue to cycle between temporary lulls and fresh waves of violence.

Terrorism is not only fought on battlefields; it is contested in the realm of narratives. Extremist ideologies thrive because the state has ceded intellectual space. Educational institutions, media outlets and religious seminaries remain either neglected or manipulated for short-term political ends. No sustainable counterterrorism effort is possible unless Pakistan invests in counter-narratives rooted in constitutionalism, tolerance and rule of law.

Pakistan stands at a crossroads. The PICSS report is not just an alarm bell; it is an indictment of the state's complacency. Three urgent steps are required.

First, reactivation of the National Action Plan in letter and spirit. This requires not just military input but also parliamentary ownership, civilian capacity-building and provincial buy-in.

Second, resetting Afghan policy through realistic engagement. Islamabad must work with regional and global partners to pressure Kabul into curbing TTP sanctuaries, while also enhancing border management on its own side.

Third, institutional reform - from modernising policing and intelligence coordination to judicial strengthening. Without rule-of-law foundations, no counterterrorism strategy can endure.

Terrorism in Pakistan is not a passing storm; it is a recurring tide that resurfaces whenever the state falters in governance, economy or vision. The September 2025 report should not be dismissed as yet another set of figures for the archives. It should compel policymakers, civil society and citizens to demand accountability and action. Otherwise, Pakistan risks sliding into a perpetual cycle where every lull in violence is followed by another bloody surge.

The choice before us is stark: either confront terrorism with clarity and consistency, or continue drifting until the state itself becomes hostage to non-state actors.