Baloch Women And The Question Of Terrorism – OpEd
Balochistan’s agony is not an accident of history nor merely the outcome of local grievances spiraling out of control. It is the result of a calculated, externally sponsored proxy war—one in which India has crossed every moral, legal, and humanitarian red line. The most grotesque manifestation of this strategy is the deliberate weaponization of Baloch women, turned from mothers, teachers, and daughters into instruments of terror in an effort to fracture Pakistan from within.
India’s involvement in Balochistan is no longer conjecture. It follows a familiar pattern of covert destabilization: identify social fault lines, exploit political and economic grievances, radicalize vulnerable segments of society, and cloak terrorism in the language of “resistance.” The Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), widely recognized as a terrorist organization, has become the primary vehicle of this campaign, operating not as an indigenous liberation movement but as a proxy force serving Indian strategic objectives.
The emergence of female suicide bombers within BLA ranks marks a disturbing evolution in this proxy war. The 2022 suicide attack by Shari Baloch on Chinese nationals at Karachi University was a grim turning point. It was neither spontaneous nor isolated. It inaugurated a new phase of psychological warfare—one designed to shock society, attract global media attention, and manufacture false narratives of “female empowerment” through violence.
Subsequent attacks exposed the pattern. Sumaiya Qalandrani in Turbat in 2023. Mahal Baloch in Bela in 2024. And most recently, the January 2026 carnage carried out by Asifa Mengal and Hawa Baloch under the chillingly branded “Operation Heroof 2.0.” These attacks collectively martyred 17 security personnel and 31 civilians—Pakistanis whose only crime was living in the path of externally orchestrated terror.
What makes these cases particularly tragic is that these women did not emerge from destitution or social collapse. Many came from relatively stable backgrounds. They were systematically radicalized through emotional manipulation, ideological distortion, and false promises of liberation. Indian proxy handlers, operating through cross-border networks, trained and groomed them as tools of terror. This is not resistance—it is exploitation in its most brutal form.
The information dimension of this campaign is equally insidious. Indian media outlets such as NDTV, News18, Times Now, and Firstpost have played a central role in amplifying terrorist propaganda. BLA “fidayeen” women are glamorized as symbols of defiance, while Pakistan’s counter-terrorism operations are cynically framed as oppression. This coordinated narrative warfare is part of what Pakistani officials have rightly identified as Fitna al Hindustan—a hybrid strategy combining terrorism, propaganda, and psychological operations to destabilize Pakistan, particularly projects of strategic importance like the China–Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).
Defense Minister Khawaja Asif’s assertion that India is backing this psychological and kinetic warfare is grounded in evidence, not rhetoric. The confession of Kulbhushan Jadhav, a serving Indian naval officer and RAW operative captured in Balochistan, laid bare India’s covert infrastructure of sabotage and terror financing. Additional arrests, intercepted communications, and even cultural normalization of RAW operations—glorified in Indian cinema—further corroborate Pakistan’s claims. When a state’s intelligence operations are openly mythologized, denial becomes implausible.
From a legal standpoint, India’s conduct constitutes a clear breach of international law. Under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, UNSC Resolution 1373 (2001) imposes binding obligations on all states to refrain from providing any form of support—active or passive—to terrorist entities. It also mandates preventing the financing, planning, facilitation, or execution of terrorist acts from a state’s territory against another state. India’s alleged support for BLA, coupled with media glorification and diplomatic deflection, directly contravenes these obligations and amounts to state-sponsored terrorism.
The ultimate victims of this strategy are the people of Balochistan themselves. Ordinary Baloch families suffer twice—first at the hands of terrorists who claim to fight in their name, and then through the instability and insecurity that terrorism breeds. Far from “liberating” Balochistan, India’s interference has deepened suffering, delayed development, and poisoned prospects for reconciliation and progress.
Pakistan’s response must therefore be multidimensional: relentless counter-terrorism operations, exposure of Indian proxy networks at international forums, legal accountability through diplomatic channels, and—most importantly—accelerated socio-economic development in Balochistan. Security alone is not enough; justice, inclusion, and opportunity are the true antidotes to externally fueled radicalization.
Balochistan does not need foreign “saviors” armed with bombs and propaganda. It needs peace, dignity, and a future free from manipulation. Freeing Balochistan today means freeing it from India’s grip of proxy warfare—and reclaiming it from those who profit from bloodshed masquerading as liberation. Pakistan, united and resilient, stands firm against these designs, determined to defend its sovereignty and protect its people from a war they never chose.