Can Pakistan prevent internal disintegration?
By Khaledin Ziaei, Head of the Educational Discourse of the Nation Think Tank – Special for “Sangar”
Original article: نقطهی بازگشتناپذیر و جبهههای درون مرزها
Pakistan is facing growing threats from domestic armed groups such as Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), along with both overt and covert support from transnational forces, most notably the Afghan Taliban. As Pakistan’s political and social stability comes increasingly under threat, it is critical to adopt decisive, strategic, and multifaceted measures to counter extremism. This article, drawing on a comparative analysis of Russia’s experience in Chechnya and Turkey’s struggle with the PKK, highlights the need for fundamental security reforms and a multi-layered counterterrorism approach for Pakistan.
Introduction
Since its inception, Pakistan has grappled with chronic security challenges, including border tensions, ethnic divisions, and the spread of religious extremism. In recent decades, the emergence and expansion of groups like the TTP — with their complex ties to the Afghan Taliban and other regional actors — has posed a serious threat to national security, social cohesion, and territorial integrity. The absence of a strategic and determined response to these threats risks pushing Pakistan down the path of countries like Iraq, Syria, Sudan, or Libya, where state collapse and territorial fragmentation have become real scenarios.
Part I: Internal Threats — TTP and the Ground for Radicalization
1.1 The Origins of Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP)
TTP emerged in reaction to Pakistan Army operations in tribal regions and gradually transformed into a powerful and violent actor. The government’s weak counterterrorism strategy, systemic corruption, ethnic and religious discrimination, and failure to ensure sustainable development in Pashtun areas have all contributed to the group's rise.
1.2 TTP’s Relationship with the Afghan Taliban
After the Taliban’s return to power in Afghanistan in 2021, TTP gained new breathing space. Uncontrolled borders, ideological alignment, and the Afghan Taliban’s tolerance toward TTP have increased instability in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and border regions. This reflects a complex, multilayered geopolitical threat to Pakistan.
Part II: Comparative Analysis — Lessons from Russia and Turkey
2.1 Russia and the Suppression of the Chechen Movement
Following two bloody wars in Chechnya, Russia implemented a policy of strong military suppression combined with economic reconstruction, co-opting local elites, and installing loyal local governments. The “Kadyrovization” of Chechnya — though criticized for human rights violations — produced relative stability. This model offers lessons for Pakistan in re-establishing state authority in unstable regions.
2.2 Turkey and the Fight Against the PKK
In recent decades, Turkey shifted from classic military operations to a combined approach involving counterterrorism, intelligence, cultural engagement, and infrastructure development in Kurdish regions. The firm suppression of PKK bases, both domestically and abroad, along with economic investments in underdeveloped areas, demonstrated an effective mix of hard and soft power — an instructive example for Pakistan.
Part III: Strategic Analysis of Pakistan’s Trajectory
3.1 Lack of a Comprehensive Strategy
Pakistan still lacks a layered and integrated strategy to combat radicalism. A narrow focus on short-term military operations without deep social, educational, and political reforms has failed to ensure lasting security.
3.2 The Threat of Fragmentation
The continuation of current trends — combined with geopolitical rivalry with India, the ambiguous role of the Afghan Taliban, and mounting regional and international pressure (including from Israel) — could lead Pakistan toward state failure and civil war. Scenarios such as an independent Balochistan, a “Greater Pashtunistan,” or a surge in sectarian groups are becoming increasingly plausible.
Recommendations: Strategic Weakness and a Policy of Appeasement
Unlike Russia and Turkey, Pakistan has yet to develop a firm and coherent strategy to address radical groups. This shortfall is partly rooted in the historical alignment of certain state institutions with Islamist forces. The policy of appeasement has not only failed to eliminate threats but also helped spread radical ideology across broader segments of society.
Part IV: Consequences of Strategic Blindness — A Scenario of Collapse
If current trends continue and no substantial security reforms are undertaken, Pakistan could follow in the footsteps of crisis-ridden countries like Iraq, Syria, Libya, or Sudan. A realistic scenario would be the country’s fragmentation into three separate entities:
An independent Balochistan, inspired by Baloch separatist movements;
A Greater Pashtunistan, potentially backed by segments of the Afghan Pashtun population;
A Punjabistan, an ethnic state under Indian influence.
Such a development would result in structural destabilization across the entire South Asian region.
Conclusion and Strategic Recommendations
Redefine National Security Doctrine: Pakistan must shift its security focus from external threats (e.g., India) to internal and transnational challenges like the TTP and the Taliban.
Decisive Suppression of Extremism: Like Russia and Turkey, Pakistan must firmly dismantle domestic terrorist networks — even if that means confrontation with the Afghan Taliban.
Investment in Development and Ethnic Justice: Economic, educational, and political development in tribal and underprivileged regions is vital to eliminate the root causes of extremism.
Security and Intelligence Reform: Better coordination between military, intelligence, and civilian institutions must become a top priority.
Pragmatic Regional Diplomacy: Pakistan must abandon double standards in dealing with the Taliban and similar groups, instead building new regional alliances to counter radicalism.
