IN recent days, a coordinated campaign has emerged on social media portraying Dr. Muhammad Usman Qazi as a respected professor, researcher and intellectual.
Networks linked to the banned Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) depict him as a victim of state repression, targeted only for his ideas. Yet the ground realities, official investigations and—most importantly—his own confession expose this narrative as false. These facts are shocking and a stark reminder of how terrorism often hides behind intellectual facades to mislead vulnerable minds. In the war of perception, truths are buried under lies while falsehoods ride alongside half-truths to serve dangerous agendas.
According to credible sources, for the past four to five years Usman Qazi—known within the extremist network Fitna-e-Hindustan by the alias “Amir”—was far more than an academic. He was an active member of the outlawed BLA and served as a facilitator and handler for its suicide wing, the Majid Brigade. His role extended beyond ideology: he was responsible for grooming new recruits, enabling attacks and maintaining direct communication with senior BLA commanders. These facts can no longer be denied, for the evidence has surfaced time and again.
Perhaps the gravest betrayal lies in the corruption of the sacred bond between teacher and student. What should have been a relationship of trust, guidance and nation-building was instead exploited by Qazi and his associates. Using his official position and the university platform, Qazi systematically steered students toward extremist ideology. Classrooms that should have been centres of learning were turned into recruitment hubs for the BLA’s narrative, preparing young minds for armed struggle. When a teacher exploits the unquestioned trust of his students for extremism, the consequences are not just damaging but devastating for the entire society.
Equally striking is that Qazi’s entire academic journey was sustained by state resources. He studied on government scholarships, completed his PhD at Quaid-i-Azam University and later secured a Grade-19 post, while his wife serves in Grade-17. For years, the family enjoyed state privileges, only for Qazi to betray the very state that nurtured him. This glaring contradiction—living off patronage while conspiring against it—marks a grave breach of trust. Yet some groups continue defending him. Who are they and where does this propaganda originate? Investigations revealed that Qazi acted under direct instructions of senior BLA commanders Bashir Zeb, Rehman Gul and Dr. Hebtan Baloch—already known for masterminding lethal operations in Balochistan. His association was operational, encompassing planning, logistics and execution of attacks.
A chilling example was the November 9, 2024 attack at Quetta Railway Station, where acting on Qazi’s orders, terrorist Babar Rafiq carried out a suicide bombing that killed 32 civilians and 22 security personnel, injuring over 55 others. Investigators confirmed Qazi’s role as facilitator behind the carnage, a tragedy no claim of “academic freedom” can whitewash. Nor was this isolated—Qazi had also planned an August 14 attack in Quetta, arranging shelter and support for terrorist Sher Dil alias Bahauddin Marri. Had it succeeded, Independence Day could have turned into mourning, underscoring that Qazi’s role was never intellectual but deeply operational in terrorism.
And yet, on social media, these very groups and their sympathizers attempt to portray Qazi as the “voice of the people.” This is nothing less than a dangerous form of narrative warfare, aimed at presenting a terrorist as an intellectual, thereby luring the youth into sympathy with extremist causes. When a man with blood on his hands is painted as a scholar or a victim, it is nothing short of an attempt to blindfold the public.
The pressing question remains: how do individuals who thrive on state funding, education and government positions ultimately become facilitators of those who take up arms against the same state? This gross abuse of resources is, in its truest sense, treason—no matter how dressed up in rhetoric or propaganda. For journalists and intellectuals, too, this is a moment of reckoning. Before defending figures like Qazi or amplifying their narratives, they must ask whose cause they serve, for such words strengthen networks responsible for innocent deaths. Journalism’s responsibility lies in discerning fact from propaganda; otherwise, the pen becomes an accomplice in narrative terrorism.
The undeniable truth is that the gravest threat facing the nation today is not only kinetic terrorism but the battle of narratives. Extremist groups disguise violence as ideological resistance, seeking to radicalize the younger generation. The pressing question is: whose agenda is served by those who amplify such narratives—is it justice for Pakistan or the facilitation of hostile designs? In this context, the roles of the state, academia and media must be reassessed. When state-funded individuals turn privileges against the nation, it is open rebellion. Portraying them as victims misleads the public; only by rejecting this perilous narrative warfare can truth prevail and the attempt to cloak terrorism in intellectual garb be decisively defeated.
—The writer is contributing columnist.
