On July 13th, tribal elders in Bajaur district convened a grand jirga to voice growing frustration over deteriorating law and order, perceived state inaction, and longstanding injustices. The jirga presented a formal list of demands to the government, warning that if authorities failed to act within 70 days, they would not only boycott state institutions but also consider resorting to armed resistance in the name of self-defense.
Grievances and Overreach
A surface-level examination reveals that some demands reflect legitimate and deeply felt grievances. The jirga called for counterterrorism operations that prevent civilian harm and new displacement, urgent measures against rising extortion and theft, and compensation for victims of terrorism. These are not abstract policy preferences, they stem from years of trauma, fear, and a longing for security in a region that has borne the brunt of militancy.
Embedded within these legitimate concerns, however, are troubling propositions that risk destabilizing the foundations of state authority and legal order. One particularly provocative demand calls for a complete halt to mining operations in Bajaur, asserting that all natural resources, such as chromite and marble, belong solely to local tribes. The jirga warned that force would be employed, if necessary, to “protect” these assets. Another disturbing clause pledged tribal protection for any individual who kills a suspected criminal at the scene of a crime, an effective endorsement of mob justice that bypasses courts, police, and due process.
Such demands, if left unchecked, can undermine Pakistan’s constitutional framework. Article 172(3) of the Constitution stipulates that subsoil minerals are the legal property of provincial governments, not of individuals or tribes. While a dialogue on the equitable sharing of resource benefits is both fair and necessary, it must be pursued through legal and political channels, not through threats of armed control. Allowing any group to unilaterally claim ownership over state assets risks setting dangerous precedents that could incite similar demands elsewhere.
Even more dangerous is the call to legitimize extrajudicial killings. Encouraging “on-the-spot justice” not only promotes vigilantism but also threatens the rule of law and creates an opening for sectarian, personal, or tribal vendettas. History has repeatedly shown that mob violence often targets the innocent and subverts the course of justice. While tribal customs can coexist with national law, they must align with constitutional safeguards.
Weaponizing Narrative, Undermining Security
The jirga’s rhetoric, while containing genuine appeals for justice, also echoed dangerous conspiratorial tropes. A recurring theme was the assertion that Pakistan’s counterterror operations are not domestically driven but are conducted on behalf of foreign powers, a narrative often labeled the “Dollar War.” This narrative is not only misleading but also deeply harmful, as it discredits the sacrifice of over 83,000 Pakistanis, civilians, soldiers, and police officers, killed or injured in terrorism-related violence since 2001.
Furthermore, it distorts the economic reality. Major military operations such as Zarb-e-Azb and Radd-ul-Fasaad were overwhelmingly self-financed. Since 2018, Pakistan has not received any foreign military aid for counterterrorism. Even during the height of Coalition Support Funds (CSF), these were reimbursements for logistical cooperation, not for offensive operations. Meanwhile, the country has borne over $150 billion in economic losses, an enormous burden carried largely by domestic resources. To reduce these national sacrifices to foreign interests is not just factually incorrect, it serves to demoralize security forces and embolden terrorist groups like the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which thrive on such narratives.
Successful counterterrorism, by its nature, requires public cooperation. Local support is critical to reducing collateral damage, improving intelligence accuracy, and preventing militants from finding refuge among civilian populations. Militant organizations, including the TTP, are acutely aware of this dynamic. Their propaganda strategy hinges on portraying the state as an external force that targets its own people. Every instance of civilian harm, intentional or not, is weaponized for recruitment, making community trust essential for lasting security. In this context, jirgas that amplify anti-state sentiment and accuse the military of serving foreign interests inadvertently play into the hands of terrorist networks.
While TTP support in Bajaur is limited, it is not non-existent. Certain local elements, motivated by ideology, fear, or economic incentives, have enabled the group’s survival. Anti-state sloganeering from jirgas, particularly those dominated by political factions, inadvertently strengthens these networks by creating pressure on the state and undermining public trust in its legitimacy.
Despite these tensions, the state has demonstrated visible efforts. A consistent pattern of targeted violence, from grenade attacks to extortion, has been documented through First Information Reports (FIRs) and media reporting in key areas like Khar, Nawagai, and Mamund. Follow-up investigations have often led to arrests and the disruption of extremist networks. Surveillance infrastructure is also being upgraded, with modern CCTV systems being installed and repaired in major urban centers. Allegations that cameras were deliberately removed to facilitate criminal acts are under transparent investigation, and authorities have pledged that any misconduct will be dealt with seriously.
On the military front, officials stress that all operations are intelligence-driven, coordinated with district administrations, and designed to minimize civilian casualties. Since 2020, several TTP sleeper cells have been dismantled in Bajaur. Yet the broader challenge remains: addressing the roots of public frustration. Many promises from the 2018 FATA merger remain unfulfilled. Infrastructure remains underdeveloped, justice is slow, and compensation mechanisms are often delayed or inconsistently applied. Nonetheless, a framework for justice exists. Compensation for victims of terrorism is enshrined in law. Following major incidents in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa the state has shown both the responsibility and capacity to provide relief when official mechanisms are followed
Trust, Leadership, and the Road Ahead
At this critical juncture, tribal elders must choose their path with caution. Their leadership is central to preserving peace and cohesion in Bajaur, but that leadership demands responsibility. While protest is a constitutional right and political dissent is a hallmark of democracy, it must not devolve into incitement, vigilante justice, or unconstitutional threats.
There is no viable future for Bajaur in parallel governance or ultimatums. The path forward requires a collaborative approach, where the state continues to listen and act with transparency, while communities engage through legal, political, and constitutional channels. Pakistan’s counterterrorism success, economic recovery, and national unity all hinge on bridging the gap between state authority and local support. The people of Bajaur deserve not just peace, but dignity, justice, and opportunity, a future that can only be secured through mutual trust, institutional reform, and an unwavering commitment to the rule of law.
