TTP Resurgence-Ajwa Hijazi-MDS

The first nine months of 2023 depict an impoverished internal security landscape inhabited by the revival of terrorism in Pakistan.  According to a recent report by the Islamabad-based Centre for Research and Security Studies (CRSS), 700 security personnel and civilians lost their lives in various militant attacks from January to September 2023, which is a 19% increase in the number of fatalities as compared to 2022. Moreover, the data compiled by the Pakistan Institute for Conflict and Security Studies (PICSS) shows that August alone accounted for the highest number of military attacks in a single month since November 2014. Although the number of attacks was reduced in September by 34% compared to August, the number of casualties increased to 21%. These glaring figures reflect the unfortunate reality of the revival of terrorism in a country that has paid a hefty human and material cost due to it over the years.

The main actor behind most of the attacks this year has been Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and its various splinter groups. Over the last two years, TTP has gradually manifested its return through increased militant activities in Pakistan. While adopting a centralised organisational structure, the group has expanded its network in the country. In June this year, TTP announced the establishment of new ‘wilayat’(administrative units) in Balochistan and Punjab, after which the total count of its administrative units stands at 12. These expansions reflect the groups’ strategy to proliferate operations beyond their traditional strongholds, i.e., erstwhile FATA, Pashtun-dominated districts of Balochistan, and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Similarly, over the past two years, the merger and joining of various extremist groups with TTP indicate its goal to attain more human resources to bolster its insurgency against the state of Pakistan.

Pakistan has been facing the TTP’s insurgency since the group’s formation in 2007. The group aimed to impose their interpretation of sharia in the country. Through Operations Zarb–e–Azb and Radd-ul-Fasad, the security forces successfully diminished its onslaught. Unfortunately, while Pakistan took vigorous kinetic action against the proscribed group, i.e., eliminating several TTP leaders, there was a lack of follow-up measures to nip extremism in the bud. In the same vein, the inconsistent counterterrorism approach of successive governments, along with the inaction of the National Counter Terrorism Authority (NACTA) in the previous years, provided room for TTP to keep its existence intact despite being fragile.

Another factor that stimulated TTP’s resurgence in Pakistan was the return of the Afghan Taliban as the de facto rulers in Kabul in August 2021. TTP is ideologically aligned with the group but maintains its operations, separately. Pakistan’s apprehensions about TTP getting a conducive environment in Afghanistan to conduct militancy in Pakistan have not been mere speculations. A UNSC report also endorsed Pakistan’s concern that the Taliban’s return emboldened TTP. The major brunt of resurgent violence by the TTP has been faced by two provinces that border Afghanistan – the north-western province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan.

Pakistan has been cajoling the Afghan Taliban authorities to take action against TTP’s safe havens in Afghanistan that facilitate cross-border militancy. However, the constant ‘liberty of action’  enjoyed by TTP in Afghanistan indicates that the leadership in Kabul has been unable to rein in the group, even though the former has maintained that they have not allowed any militant group to use their territory to launch operations against any neighbouring state.

While cross-border safe havens have contributed to the current stance of the TTP, it is essential to consider that the lack of a consistent state response over the years may also have inadvertently facilitated the TTP’s resurgence. Persistent challenges in the political, social, and economic arenas have created an environment where groups like the TTP find fertile ground. Addressing these underlying issues is crucial, as they can otherwise lead some individuals to align with militant organisations as a means of voicing their grievances.

Recognising these challenges, Pakistan has recently initiated a series of measures in its counterterrorism efforts. The accelerated performance of apex committees to stop the facilitation of terrorism, NACTA’s decision to start capacity-building reforms in the provincial counterterrorism departments, and the recent deadline for illegal immigrants reflect the state’s current proactive position against militancy. However, the effectiveness of these decisions would depend on the extent to which they are coherently and impartially implemented.

To tackle the growing menace of the TTP, Pakistan needs to devise a multifaceted approach that tackles internal and external factors responsible for enhancing the group’s lethality. There is no denying that the government needs to vehemently ask the Afghan authorities not to let TTP disseminate militancy in Pakistan from its soil. However, it would be naïve to base Pakistan’s counterterrorism strategy solely on the actions of the Afghan interim government. For a robust response to the expansion and operation of TTP, Pakistan must prioritise internal reforms. This includes, among other things, strengthening its intelligence capabilities to pre-empt militant threats and enhancing community-based programmes that address the root causes of extremism. By addressing internal vulnerabilities, Pakistan can build a more resilient state from within.

Ajwa Hijazi is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. She can be reached at [email protected]

Design Credit: Mysha Dua Salman


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »