Defence as a divine duty

2026-02-26 - 22:23

SINCE its emergence upon the map of the world on 14 August 1947, Pakistan has consistently adhered to a policy of restraint rather than aggression. In a region long marked by rivalries and unresolved disputes, it has neither pursued expansionist designs nor sought entanglement beyond the imperatives of its security. History bears witness that whenever Pakistan has taken up arms, it has done so in response to external aggression or in defence of its sovereignty and people. From the wars of 1948, 1965 and 1971 to the recent standoff with India in May 2025, its actions have been reactive, measured and proportionate. This posture is not merely strategic; it is moral. The Holy Qur’an lays down a principle that has guided Muslim conduct in conflict: “Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress. Indeed, Allah does not love the transgressors” (Al-Baqarah 2:190). The command is clear—defence is permitted, aggression is forbidden. Likewise, the Qur’an instructs, “And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah” (Al-Anfal 8:61). These verses establish a balance between vigilance and reconciliation, between preparedness and peace. Pakistan’s security doctrine has consistently reflected this equilibrium. The events of May 2025 offered a contemporary illustration. Following provocations and threats to its security, Pakistan responded with precision and caution, ensuring that civilian life and religious sanctities were respected. It is worth recalling that during armed conflict, the Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) strictly forbade harm to non-combatants and destruction of places of worship. In an authentic Hadith, he instructed armies: “Do not kill women, children, the elderly or monks in their monasteries.” This Prophetic guidance remains a moral compass, rejecting indiscriminate violence and upholding the sanctity of life. Pakistan’s western frontier presents a complex and painful narrative. Since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979, Pakistan has borne immense burdens, hosting millions of Afghan refugees and providing humanitarian assistance in times of famine, conflict and displacement. From supplying flour and essential goods during crises to offering shelter and opportunity, Pakistan acted in the spirit of the Qur’anic injunction: “And cooperate in righteousness and piety” (Al-Ma’idah 5:2), seeking fraternity, not friction. Yet goodwill cannot substitute for security. Sanctuaries for the group identified by Pakistan as Fitna al Khawarij (FAK), along with affiliates and ISKP elements, have operated from across the border, orchestrating attacks on civilians, mosques, Imambargahs and security forces. The Qur’an unequivocally condemns such violence: “Whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land—it is as if he had slain mankind entirely” (Al-Ma’idah 5:32). Those who target innocents violate the core principles of Islam they claim to uphold. After repeated warnings and sharing verifiable intelligence with Afghan authorities, Pakistan conducted intelligence-based, selective precision engagements against identified terrorist camps. These operations targeted terrorist leadership and infrastructure linked to cross-border attacks—not Afghanistan as a state, its civilians or security forces. Allegations of deliberate targeting of civilians or sacred sites are malicious distortions aimed at obscuring extremists’ misuse of religious cover. The abuse of mosques and madrassahs as operational hubs constitutes a desecration. The Qur’an condemns such acts: “And who are more unjust than those who prevent the name of Allah from being mentioned in His mosques and strive toward their destruction?” (Al-Baqarah 2:114). When terrorists convert places of worship into marakiz for planning attacks, they betray faith and humanity. Pakistan’s response remains limited and proportionate, consistent with the international law principle of self-defence and the Qur’anic injunction: “Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged” (Al-Hajj 22:39). Sovereignty cannot shield cross-border terrorism and denying sanctuaries to violent non-state actors is a minimum obligation of responsible statehood. At the same time, Pakistan has not externalized responsibility. In 2025 alone, it conducted 75,175 intelligence-based operations nationwide—an average of 206 per day—eliminating 2,597 terrorists, with hundreds of civilians and security personnel embracing martyrdom. These figures reflect a comprehensive internal counterterrorism effort; the cross-border dimension is an additional factor, not an excuse. Pakistan has repeatedly sought negotiated and verifiable arrangements through diplomatic channels, guided by the Qur’an: “If two groups among the believers fight, make peace between them... and act justly; indeed, Allah loves those who act justly” (Al-Hujurat 49:9). Dialogue, evidence-sharing and cooperation have been pursued, yet justice demands firmness when aggression persists. Pakistan’s political and military clarity, supported by religious scholars declaring these terrorists outside Islamic conduct, must be matched by resolve across the border. Pakistan’s actions target terrorists, not Afghanistan, but any actor enabling such elements risks being complicit in terrorism. De-escalation requires dismantling camps, disrupting facilitation networks and cooperating in transparent verification. Throughout history, Pakistan has neither coveted territory nor pursued confrontation. Its record affirms a principle rooted in statecraft and faith: peace is preferred, reconciliation is desirable and brotherhood is honoured—but protecting life, dignity and sovereignty is a sacred trust. In upholding this trust, Pakistan acts not in defiance of Islam but in faithful adherence to it. —The writer is Director General Research, National Assembly Secretariat, Parliament House, Islamabad. (ememiqbal68@gmail.com)