IT is in Pakistan’s national interest to wage war against terrorist outfits to maintain peace. Terrorists have killed around 84 thousand innocent Pakistanis and more than 6 thousand members of the security forces have sacrificed their lives for the country’s peace. Unfortunately, the Pashtun Tahafuz Movement (PTM) is disrupting the war against terrorism through rhetoric against security forces’ operations and its activities are strengthening Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). The extremism of PTM leaders had impaired their ability to make a distinction between the lawful authority of the state and the unlawful status of terrorists. Additionally, PTM’s support for Afghanistan has come at the expense of Pakistan’s national interest and it has not demonstrated sufficient loyalty to its homeland. State authorities engaged their leaders in negotiations to remove their concerns, but the extremism of the PTM diminished its utility for peace. Manzoor Pashteen frequently incites people against security forces in his speeches and openly threatens to instigate a rebellion against the defence forces. Even in the free world, Europe and America, such behaviour would be unacceptable, and the Government in Pakistan must limit PTM’s activities to maintain social peace.
The PTM’s support for TTP commanders, based on tribal affiliations, and its exploitation of Pashtun ethnic identity to stir up controversy against the war on terrorism are genuine issues. The PTM emerged as the Mehsud Tahafuz Movement and the TTP is also a Mehsud-dominated terrorist outfit. Its current chief, Noor Wali, is a Mehsud who produced TTP’s Charter, “Inquilab-e-Mehsud.” Baitullah Mehsud and Hakimullah Mehsud were the TTP’s slain chiefs and its prominent commanders were always from the Mehsud tribe. Hence, PTM leaders are certainly in a position to mount social pressure on TTP commanders to shun violence; unfortunately, they have made no efforts in this regard. PTM could not confront the Taliban, who oppressed Pashtun’s ethnic identity by relating it to terrorism, as the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban are essentially Pashtun. It should have raised anti-Taliban slogans to free Pashtuns from the grip of violence. To the contrary, PTM did not make any efforts to create awareness about terrorism in society.
The PTM leadership is criticized for its racially driven approach to peace, exploiting Pashtun identity to fragment the country. Their extreme focus on Pashtun ethnicity leads them to demand that Pakistan surrender its sovereignty to the Afghan Taliban. The UN has repeatedly accused the Afghan Taliban of sheltering TTP commanders and supporting terrorist activities in Pakistan, providing substantial evidence of Afghan involvement. Despite these international claims, PTM supports the Taliban’s agenda by opposing Pakistan’s necessary border regulations aimed at stopping the movement of TTP terrorists, their arms, and explosives. This opposition undermines national security and contradicts peace principles. Furthermore, PTM’s positions on identity documents and visa policies clash with international laws and norms, advocating for Pakistan to cede sovereignty to Afghanistan—an unacceptable demand for any sovereign nation. PTM’s foreign ties, including organizing protests in the US and Europe against Pakistan, reveal a potential agenda to weaken Pakistan’s national security institutions and undermine its interests.
PTM has a myopic view of terrorism as a global threat, but its leadership considers it only a Pashtun community problem. Moreover, it does not make a distinction between terrorism and counter-terrorism measures which renders it ineffective in the war against terrorism. The international community took extraordinary measures to deal with terrorism threats and countries like the United States resorted to discriminatory physical searches on airports for homeland security. The PTM leadership, on the other hand, is adamant about the removal of anti-terrorism mechanisms in the KP tribal district and they have joined the TTP in demanding that security forces leave these areas. As a matter of fact, PTM’s use of harsh and derogatory language for security institutions in Pakistan and its soft tone towards the Taliban are dubious, therefore, they are also unacceptable for peace-loving people in the country.
PTM speaks against the operations of security forces and it does not appreciate their sacrifices in the war against terrorism. All civilized states make laws to uphold the sanctity of their national armed forces and Pakistan also has such laws. PTM leaders always violate these laws by engaging in subversive activities and using derogatory language against security forces. They create legal complications and instead of surrendering before the law, they agitate against the arrests and judicial trials of their leaders.
Although PTM leaders present it as an anti-war peace movement, their rhetoric is characterized by undemocratic attitudes, hate speech and racist ideas. A notable symbol of the PTM is the Afghan flag, which criticizes the security forces’ measures against terrorists. Their aim appears to be creating an environment that enables the TTP to operate freely, potentially leading to increased terrorism. Therefore, PTM’s extremism should not be tolerated in the greater interest of national peace.
—The writer is contributing columnist, based in Rawalpindi.
