...the Pak province bordering Kandahar and Uruzgun provinces in Afghanistan and Sistan Baluchistan in Iran. Its native Baloch propulation is being displaced by Pashtuns and Punjabis and they aren't happy about it...
. Pakistain presently faces broadly three types of terrorism: Taliban-affiliated, Baloch secessionist and sectarian. Pakistain's response to the three has been varied and puzzling.
Before Zarb-e-Azb
..the Pak offensive against Qaeda in Pakistain and the Pak Taliban in North Wazoo. The name refers to the sword of the Prophet (PTUI!)...
, the response to the Taliban had been infrequent major operations, frequent peace deals and endless decision-making delays. With sectarian groups, the response even today is passive tolerance, perhaps even partial protection. With Baloch groups, the main tool has been war. Have these responses been appropriate? I use the principles of the 'just war theory' — an international liberal theory about when war is justified — to answer this question.
Its first principle in recommending counter state violence relates to the justness of the grievances of violent groups. Terrorism is wrong, however justified grievances may be and states must counter it. But the justness of such grievances should influence the level of counter-force and whether states also initiate parallel talks.
The goals of sectarian groups are completely unjust as they kill out of bigotry alone. The Taliban claim pursuing a just system based on Islamic teachings. But their version is harsh and retrogressive, and contradicts both majority interpretations of Islam and prevalent global liberal values.