Executive Summary: The past year continued the trend of declining violence over the last three years, with many outlaws arrested or convicted. Although the drop in violence-related fatalities was countrywide, the change fluctuates regionally, owing to several factors, including geo-political scenario alterations in the militant strategy. Internationally and domestically, terrorism has witnessed a decline. Daish lost territory in Iraq and Syria, while Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) lost its sanctuaries in the tribal regions of Pakistan. However, territorial loss does not translate to complete elimination, as they continued sporadic attacks throughout the year. Domestically, religious parties in favor of the militants either openly supported the Taliban or provided support in elections for the candidates who were considered to be affiliated with some banned outfits. Blasphemy accusations witnessed a sharp rise in the country involving social activists, media persons, and political party leaders like Imran Khan. A sit-in at Faizabad by a newly formed religious party, Tehreek-e-Labbaik Ya Rasool Allah (TLYR) was also in opposition to altering blasphemy laws. The shrinking operational space for militant groups has forced them to change their tactics, thus complicating and testing the security response. Militants also changed their focus to try and inflict damage that would legitimize their presence. Violence along neighboring borders increased significantly. The cross border attacks by the Afghan based militants revealed that a majority of them were Pakistani militants who had crossed borders during the Zarb-e-Azb operation. Additionally, of special consideration is the target killing and battering of media persons in various incidents across the country. To assess and evaluate new challenges and threats being faced by the country, this report makes use of the national print and electronic media sources. Center for Research and Security Studies (CRSS) scrutinizes the...

An American who helped open secret negotiations with the group calls for them to accept a ceasefire and peace talks with the Afghan government. Your February 14, 2018, open letter to the American people asked us to “evaluate the future of American forces in light of the prevailing realities” in Afghanistan. I can answer only for myself, as an academic and former American diplomat who has been trying to understand Afghanistan’s realities for thirty-five years. Many Afghans claim that any answer should go not to you but to the Pakistani generals and intelligence operatives who shelter your movement. I disagree. I have interacted with you directly and indirectly since January, 1997, when I chaired a meeting at Columbia University with a delegation you sent to New York to ask for Afghanistan’s seat at the United Nations. I have concluded that your opponents underestimate your independence and abilities. But you may also underestimate theirs. On Wednesday, the Afghan government will host a second meeting of the Kabul Conference, an effort to begin peace talks, which will be attended by twenty-three countries. The United Nations announced earlier this month that ten thousand Afghan civilians were killed or wounded in Afghanistan in 2017, two-thirds of them in anti-government attacks. You highlight the civilian casualties inflicted by U.S. air power, the shame of Guantánamo, and the losses suffered by American soldiers and their families. I would cite the thousands of Afghan civilian casualties inflicted by your attacks and suicide bombings. The International Criminal Court opened an investigation into war crimes in Afghanistan last fall. In less than three months, Afghans submitted accounts of 1.17 million atrocities. I prefer to respond here to your appeal for dialogue. Few would disagree with your call “to solve the Afghan issue through peaceful dialogues,” if they thought it were possible. On January 29th, after your organization used a car bomb disguised as an...

It is an unfortunate trait of Pakistan’s policies that are mostly reactive, rather than well thought out and in line with national interests. Getting off the hook, temporarily, with a three month reprieve over terrorist financing watch-list at the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) meeting in Paris is a sad reflection on the rudderless state of lack of strategic governance in Pakistan. A motion initiated by the US and backed by other states mainly UK, Germany, France seeks to place Pakistan on the “grey-list”; a list that boasts weak nations that failed to enforce strong regulations against terror financing. USA under Trump has picked out only one reason for her troubles in Afghanistan. That trouble is called Pakistan. The US under Trump through this approach has decided to come after Pakistan. The changing geo-political nexus with the US seen to be siding openly with India and literally foul-mouthing Pakistan publicly is the ‘new US tactic’ (Reference Trump’s tweet on on January 1st 2018). China’s commitment to the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and by extension China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), designed not only to excel its outreach to the world but also to gain a stronger regional foothold, is crystal clear. This rise of China is something the US has feared and would like to delay as much as it can. The ambitious posture of China gives rise to a fundamental question: whether it will be China or the US that determines the rules for trade and investments in the decades to come. Geo-politics aside, the limelight cannot be drawn away from Pakistan’s abject failure at devising policies to any area of domestic or international policies. On September 28, 2016, the White House, Office of the Press Secretary, released Statement by NSC Spokesperson Ned Price on National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice’s call with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval of India that reads as follows: “National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice spoke today by phone with Indian National...

In Pakistan and Afghanistan, democracy can more aptly be described as ‘government off the people, (government) far (from) people and (government to) buy people,’ stated Mr. Jami Chandio. He was speaking at the Center for Research & Security Studies’ (CRSS) seventh Pak-Afghan youth training workshop on Wednesday, February 21, held under its Afghan Studies Center initiative, which was attended by several young Pakistani and Afghan students and professionals. Contrary to the true application of democracy in its real essence, Mr. Chandio stated, that democracy in Pakistan and Afghanistan is confined only to the quantitative representation of the people and neglects its qualitative aspects, depriving the vast populations of their civil, economic and political rights. The workshop comprised of three sections; democracy in theory and practice, democracy in Pakistan and the way forward for Pakistan and Afghanistan. Mr. Jami Chandio, who was invited the Chief Guest and trainer, is a writer, scholar, literary critic, political expert and activist. He is also the Executive Director of a Sindh-based think tank, Center for Peace and Civil Society, Hyderabad. Mr. Chandio explained that the spirit of democracy is not confined to any single geographical entity or civilization. Rather, it is a universal human concept which existed in one form or the other in civilizations all over the world in history, and evolved overtime to take the form it is in today. He stated that human civilization broadly witnessed three major periods of transition, progressing from hunter-gatherers to tribal communities, monarchies and, consequently, empires where humans became subjects to sovereigns and the concept of free people seized to exist. The oppression under such a political order culminated in the age of reason which pushed the thought process towards a system that should represent the wishes of the people, such as the modern democratic system. Fast forward a few centuries; emphasizing on...

In Pakistan and Afghanistan, democracy can more aptly be described as ‘government off the people, (government) far (from) people and (government to) buy people,’ stated Mr. Jami Chandio. He was speaking at the Center for Research & Security Studies’ (CRSS) seventh Pak-Afghan youth training workshop on Wednesday, February 21, held under its Afghan Studies Center initiative, which was attended by several young Pakistani and Afghan students and professionals. Contrary to the true application of democracy in its real essence, Mr. Chandio stated, that democracy in Pakistan and Afghanistan is confined only to the quantitative representation of the people and neglects its qualitative aspects, depriving the vast populations of their civil, economic and political rights. The workshop comprised of three sections; democracy in theory and practice, democracy in Pakistan and the way forward for Pakistan and Afghanistan. Mr. Jami Chandio, who was invited the Chief Guest and trainer, is a writer, scholar, literary critic, political expert and activist. He is also the Executive Director of a Sindh-based think tank, Center for Peace and Civil Society, Hyderabad. Mr. Chandio explained that the spirit of democracy is not confined to any single geographical entity or civilization. Rather, it is a universal human concept which existed in one form or the other in civilizations all over the world in history, and evolved overtime to take the form it is in today. He stated that human civilization broadly witnessed three major periods of transition, progressing from hunter-gatherers to tribal communities, monarchies and, consequently, empires where humans became subjects to sovereigns and the concept of free people seized to exist. The oppression under such a political order culminated in the age of reason which pushed the thought process towards a system that should represent the wishes of the people, such as the modern democratic system. Fast forward a few centuries; emphasizing on...