The 80th session of the UN General Assembly will convene under the theme “Better together: 80 years and more for peace, development, and human rights.” While a commendable aspiration, this theme stands in stark contrast to the persistent and multifaceted security challenges that plague nations like Pakistan. Despite its long-standing commitment to global counter-terrorism efforts, Pakistan remains a principal victim of state-sponsored terrorism. This analysis will explore how cross-border militancy and external agendas undermine regional stability and Pakistan’s internal peace.
The Economic and Human Cost of Terrorism
The human and economic toll of terrorism on Pakistan is staggering and often underestimated by the international community. The country has tragically lost over 80,000 lives, a figure supported by various independent and governmental sources. This figure highlights the immense sacrifice made by the nation in its fight against an insurgency fueled by both internal and external factors.
Economically, the country has incurred devastating losses. While the figure of over $150 billion in economic damages is a long-standing claim, a study cited in the Pakistan Economic Survey 2014-15 estimated that from 2002 to 2015, the direct and indirect costs of terrorism amounted to $106.98 billion. It is highly probable that in the years following 2015, these losses would have exceeded the 150 billion mark. These losses stem from multiple sources: destruction of infrastructure, plummeting foreign direct investment, disrupted trade routes, and a significant diversion of national resources toward security operations. These economic burdens severely impede Pakistan’s development and its ability to achieve the very development goals championed by the UNGA.
The Threat from the West
A major and ongoing threat to Pakistan’s security is cross-border terrorism from Afghanistan. Following the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021, there has been a significant resurgence of attacks by the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), as noted in a recent article. Reports from the UN and independent research organizations confirm that the TTP is operating from Afghan soil, using the unstable border region as a base to launch attacks into Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and Balochistan. A 2024 UN report estimates that the TTP’s strength in Afghanistan is between 6,000 and 6,500 fighters, and according to Pakistan, the Afghan government is directly supporting them.
This failure to curb militant activity is a direct violation of international law and a key factor in the spike in terrorism-related casualties in Pakistan. The situation has led to escalating tensions, with Pakistan conducting counter-terrorism operations and airstrikes inside Afghan territory to target TTP hideouts. This cycle of violence and retaliation, while a grave security concern for Pakistan, also risks further destabilizing the already fragile Afghan state.
Proxy Wars and Geopolitical Agendas
Pakistan has long maintained, backed by proof, that India is orchestrating a proxy war in Balochistan. The arrest of Indian naval officer Kulbhushan Jadhav in 2016 from Balochistan remains the most prominent piece of evidence presented by Pakistan. Pakistan has long declared him of being a Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) agent tasked with orchestrating terror attacks in the province. While India maintains he was a retired officer kidnapped from Iran, Pakistan has presented detailed dossiers to the UN, confirming extensive Indian financial and logistical support for separatist groups in Balochistan. These proxies, including the BLA and Balochistan Liberation Front (BLF), have targeted security forces, civilians, and Chinese nationals working on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a project seen by India as a strategic threat.
The Balochistan issue is further complicated by broader geopolitical interests. The launch of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)’s Balochistan Studies Project (BSP) in June 2025 is an example of how a Washington, DC-based think tank frames the Baloch struggle to serve an external agenda. The project, as reported by sources like Morningstar, highlights Balochistan as a perfect outpost to counter Iranian and Chinese ambitions. This perspective, as highlighted by other analysts, suggests that the Balochistan issue is being co-opted to serve broader strategic goals of external powers, moving beyond the traditional India-Pakistan rivalry.
Confronting Peace Rhetoric with Security Realities
As the 80th UNGA session begins, Pakistan’s plea for global peace and development must be heard within the context of its very real security vulnerabilities. The country’s narrative of being a victim of state-sponsored terrorism is not merely a political slogan but a reality supported by extensive data on human casualties and economic devastation. The continued threat from Afghan-based terrorists and the Indian proxy war in Balochistan, now complicated by a seemingly broader, geopolitically motivated external agenda, represent a direct affront to the principles of a peaceful and cooperative world order. For the UN’s theme of “Better together” to hold any meaning, it must acknowledge and address the legitimate security concerns of its member states. Ignoring a nation of 240 million people, grappling with externally-supported violence, would be a disservice to the very ideals of peace and human rights that the General Assembly seeks to uphold.
UNGA 80: Pakistan’s Case Against Terrorism, Proxies, and Global Neglect
The 80th session of the UN General Assembly will convene under the theme “Better together: 80 years and more for peace, development, and human rights.” While a commendable aspiration, this theme stands in stark contrast to the persistent and multifaceted security challenges that plague nations like Pakistan. Despite its long-standing commitment to global counter-terrorism efforts, Pakistan remains a principal victim of state-sponsored terrorism. This analysis will explore how cross-border militancy and external agendas undermine regional stability and Pakistan’s internal peace.
The Economic and Human Cost of Terrorism
The human and economic toll of terrorism on Pakistan is staggering and often underestimated by the international community. The country has tragically lost over 80,000 lives, a figure supported by various independent and governmental sources. This figure highlights the immense sacrifice made by the nation in its fight against an insurgency fueled by both internal and external factors.
Economically, the country has incurred devastating losses. While the figure of over $150 billion in economic damages is a long-standing claim, a study cited in the Pakistan Economic Survey 2014-15 estimated that from 2002 to 2015, the direct and indirect costs of terrorism amounted to $106.98 billion. It is highly probable that in the years following 2015, these losses would have exceeded the 150 billion mark. These losses stem from multiple sources: destruction of infrastructure, plummeting foreign direct investment, disrupted trade routes, and a significant diversion of national resources toward security operations. These economic burdens severely impede Pakistan’s development and its ability to achieve the very development goals championed by the UNGA.
The Threat from the West
A major and ongoing threat to Pakistan’s security is cross-border terrorism from Afghanistan. Following the Taliban’s return to power in August 2021, there has been a significant resurgence of attacks by the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), as noted in a recent article. Reports from the UN and independent research organizations confirm that the TTP is operating from Afghan soil, using the unstable border region as a base to launch attacks into Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and Balochistan. A 2024 UN report estimates that the TTP’s strength in Afghanistan is between 6,000 and 6,500 fighters, and according to Pakistan, the Afghan government is directly supporting them.
This failure to curb militant activity is a direct violation of international law and a key factor in the spike in terrorism-related casualties in Pakistan. The situation has led to escalating tensions, with Pakistan conducting counter-terrorism operations and airstrikes inside Afghan territory to target TTP hideouts. This cycle of violence and retaliation, while a grave security concern for Pakistan, also risks further destabilizing the already fragile Afghan state.
Proxy Wars and Geopolitical Agendas
Pakistan has long maintained, backed by proof, that India is orchestrating a proxy war in Balochistan. The arrest of Indian naval officer Kulbhushan Jadhav in 2016 from Balochistan remains the most prominent piece of evidence presented by Pakistan. Pakistan has long declared him of being a Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) agent tasked with orchestrating terror attacks in the province. While India maintains he was a retired officer kidnapped from Iran, Pakistan has presented detailed dossiers to the UN, confirming extensive Indian financial and logistical support for separatist groups in Balochistan. These proxies, including the BLA and Balochistan Liberation Front (BLF), have targeted security forces, civilians, and Chinese nationals working on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a project seen by India as a strategic threat.
The Balochistan issue is further complicated by broader geopolitical interests. The launch of the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI)’s Balochistan Studies Project (BSP) in June 2025 is an example of how a Washington, DC-based think tank frames the Baloch struggle to serve an external agenda. The project, as reported by sources like Morningstar, highlights Balochistan as a perfect outpost to counter Iranian and Chinese ambitions. This perspective, as highlighted by other analysts, suggests that the Balochistan issue is being co-opted to serve broader strategic goals of external powers, moving beyond the traditional India-Pakistan rivalry.
Confronting Peace Rhetoric with Security Realities
As the 80th UNGA session begins, Pakistan’s plea for global peace and development must be heard within the context of its very real security vulnerabilities. The country’s narrative of being a victim of state-sponsored terrorism is not merely a political slogan but a reality supported by extensive data on human casualties and economic devastation. The continued threat from Afghan-based terrorists and the Indian proxy war in Balochistan, now complicated by a seemingly broader, geopolitically motivated external agenda, represent a direct affront to the principles of a peaceful and cooperative world order. For the UN’s theme of “Better together” to hold any meaning, it must acknowledge and address the legitimate security concerns of its member states. Ignoring a nation of 240 million people, grappling with externally-supported violence, would be a disservice to the very ideals of peace and human rights that the General Assembly seeks to uphold.
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentary
SAT Commentaries, a collection of insightful social media threads on current events and social issues, featuring diverse perspectives from various authors.
Recent
After Sheikh Hasina’s Exit, Can India Rebuild Its Strategic Ties with Bangladesh by Pushing Dhaka Towards the Quad?
Sheikh Hasina’s resignation ended India’s golden era of ties with Bangladesh, leaving New Delhi scrambling to counter China’s growing influence. Can Quad engagement offer India a path to rebuild trust and secure the Bay of Bengal?
Between Security and Privacy: Contextualizing Amnesty’s Claims on Pakistan’s Surveillance
Amnesty International’s Shadows of Control paints a bleak picture of Pakistan’s digital surveillance. Yet by sidelining the country’s acute security challenges, dismissing existing legal safeguards, and overlooking its own credibility issues, the report offers a partial and misleading narrative. A more balanced approach requires situating surveillance within Pakistan’s counterterrorism imperatives and recognizing the global double standards at play.
The End of Liberal Internationalism? Trump’s New Realism
Donald Trump’s address to the UN General Assembly marked a sharp break from America’s seven-decade stewardship of the liberal international order. Rooted in realist principles, his speech rejected multilateralism, attacked the UN’s legitimacy, and reframed alliances as transactional bargains. From immigration and climate policy to NATO and Middle East conflicts, Trump outlined a vision of unilateral power and national sovereignty that directly challenges the institutional foundations of global governance.
Colonial Legacies of Bombay and Calcutta
Bombay and Calcutta were more than colonial capitals, they embodied imperial urban planning, economic integration, and cultural hybridity. From segregated ‘white’ and ‘black’ towns to thriving ports, industries, and nationalist thought, these cities reveal how British rule reshaped India’s urban life while leaving enduring legacies still visible today.
The Many Faces of Activism: Symbolism, Lawfare, and Separatist Politics
Mahrang Baloch is hailed as a human rights defender, yet her rhetoric, symbolism, and political positioning reveal alignment with separatist objectives. Her activism reflects the dynamics of narrative warfare, where political fronts provide legitimacy to armed insurgencies.