Terrorism cannot be defeated by force alone, and development cannot succeed where fear prevents people from living and working freely. For Pakistan, particularly the conflict-affected districts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, these two realities are inseparable. Security operations may weaken militant networks, but lasting peace requires something more enduring: a society in which young people have opportunities, communities trust the state, public institutions deliver essential services, and violence no longer appears to offer an alternative to an uncertain future.
The federal government’s recent Apex Committee meeting has brought this fundamental question back into focus. The decisions discussed at the meeting point towards a broader approach to counterterrorism, combining security coordination with development spending, improved access to essential commodities, educational opportunities, vocational training and local participation in governance.
Among the most significant proposals is the allocation of Rs160 billion to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, with approximately 70 per cent of the provincial allocation intended for 12 districts under the prime minister’s direct administrative responsibility. This would represent a substantial development commitment if the funds are released, properly targeted and spent effectively. Additional federal initiatives and proposed support from other institutions could further expand the resources available to these areas.
However, the real measure of success will not be the size of the announced financial package or the number of meetings held in Islamabad. It will be whether ordinary people experience a meaningful improvement in their daily lives and whether the state can establish a durable presence in areas where insecurity, poverty and inadequate public services have reinforced one another for years.
The Apex Committee: Coordination Must Lead to Action
An Apex Committee brings together political leadership, security institutions, civil administration and other relevant stakeholders to assess security challenges and coordinate responses. Its importance lies in the possibility of developing a shared understanding of problems that cannot be solved by any single institution.
The military may identify security threats and operational requirements. The police may highlight weaknesses in investigation, intelligence and law enforcement. Civil administrators may point to gaps in public services, while elected representatives can explain the needs and concerns of local communities.
These perspectives are most valuable when they lead to coordinated decisions, clearly assigned responsibilities and measurable outcomes.
For a long period, strained relations between federal and provincial political leadership complicated cooperation in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Political disagreements should never be allowed to undermine the security or development prospects of citizens. Terrorism does not respect party boundaries, and neither should the state’s response to it.
The renewed engagement between federal leadership and the relevant provincial stakeholders therefore presents an opportunity to move beyond political confrontation. Yet institutional coordination must continue after the meeting ends. Decisions require implementation schedules, dedicated budgets, monitoring mechanisms and public reporting.
Pakistan has repeatedly demonstrated that it can announce ambitious programmes. The more persistent challenge is ensuring that these programmes reach their intended beneficiaries without unnecessary delays, administrative obstacles, political interference or financial leakage.
The Apex Committee’s success should consequently be judged by implementation rather than announcements.
Rs160 Billion: An Opportunity That Must Reach the People
The proposed Rs160 billion allocation to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is particularly significant because it recognises the need to direct additional resources towards districts facing exceptional development and security challenges.
If 70 per cent of the allocation is directed towards the 12 designated districts, the resulting amount would be Rs112 billion. This is a substantial potential investment in areas that need improved roads, schools, healthcare facilities, water supply, agricultural infrastructure and economic opportunities.
But money alone does not produce development. The effectiveness of the allocation will depend on how projects are selected, how quickly funds are released and whether spending produces tangible improvements.
The first priority should be a district-by-district assessment of local needs. Some communities may urgently require safe drinking water, while others may need road connections, functioning health centres, irrigation systems or additional classrooms. Development planning must reflect these differences rather than impose identical projects on every district.
Equally important is the distinction between constructing infrastructure and delivering services. A school building without teachers does not provide education. A health centre without qualified staff, medicines and equipment cannot meet public needs. A road that remains incomplete or is not maintained will not generate sustained economic benefits.
Every major project should therefore have a clear purpose, an implementation schedule, a responsible department and measurable indicators of success.
The public should be able to determine how much money was allocated to a project, how much was spent, when it was completed and what benefits it delivered. Independent audits and accessible progress reports would help prevent corruption while strengthening public confidence.
The allocation should also supplement, rather than obscure, the need for effective use of existing provincial development resources. Citizens deserve to know how federal support, provincial budgets and additional contributions are being combined.
A financial commitment of this scale could help transform neglected districts. But its real value will emerge only when the figures in official documents become visible improvements in people’s lives.
Development Is a Security Strategy, Not a Substitute for Security
One of the most important principles emerging from the proposed approach is that development and counterterrorism should be treated as complementary responsibilities.
Militant organisations thrive in environments where state institutions are weak, legitimate economic opportunities are limited and communities have little confidence that their problems will receive attention. These conditions do not automatically produce extremism, and poverty must never be used to excuse violence. Nevertheless, persistent deprivation can make communities more vulnerable to exploitation, coercion and recruitment.
When young people cannot find work, educational opportunities are inaccessible and local economies remain stagnant, militant recruiters may exploit frustration and uncertainty. They may offer money, status, a sense of belonging or a false promise of influence.
The appropriate response is to create stronger alternatives.
Road construction can connect isolated communities with markets and public services. Agricultural investment can improve productivity and household incomes. Schools and colleges can expand opportunities. Technical training can prepare young people for employment in construction, information technology, mining, agriculture and other industries.
These measures will not eliminate terrorism overnight. Their importance lies in gradually reducing the conditions that militant groups can exploit while strengthening the relationship between citizens and the state.
However, development cannot replace professional policing, intelligence gathering, lawful security operations and the protection of civilians. Militants who attack citizens, intimidate communities or obstruct public services must be confronted through an effective and lawful security framework.
The objective should be to establish an environment in which development can proceed safely and the public can participate in normal economic and social life without intimidation.
Peace and development reinforce one another: security makes investment possible, while visible and fair development gives people a stronger stake in maintaining peace.
The Youth Employment Challenge
The future of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s conflict-affected districts will depend heavily on what happens to their young population.
A large youth population can become an extraordinary national asset, but only if education, skills and employment opportunities keep pace with its needs. Without these opportunities, frustration can grow, skilled individuals may leave their communities and families may remain trapped in economic insecurity.
The proposed emphasis on vocational training, scholarships, digital facilities and information technology projects is therefore welcome.
Yet training programmes must be linked to actual employment opportunities. Providing certificates without ensuring that participants acquire marketable skills or can find work will produce limited results.
District administrations should work with employers, educational institutions, industry representatives and local entrepreneurs to identify the skills most in demand. Training programmes should then be designed around those needs.
Information technology deserves particular attention because digital employment can create opportunities beyond the local economy. With reliable electricity, internet access, training facilities and suitable working spaces, young people can pursue remote employment, software development, digital services and online business activities.
The proposed IT facilities and e-libraries could help narrow the digital divide, provided that they remain operational, affordable and accessible to students from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Scholarships should also be distributed through transparent, merit-based criteria that account for genuine financial need. Special efforts should ensure that girls and young women are not excluded from education and professional development because of distance, insecurity or social barriers.
Women’s participation in the economy is not a secondary concern. It is essential to improving household incomes, strengthening communities and expanding the region’s productive capacity.
The ultimate objective must be to move beyond short-term relief towards a local economy capable of generating sustainable employment.
Food Security and the Cost of Living
The proposed provision of wheat to Khyber Pakhtunkhwa through the Pakistan Agricultural Storage and Services Corporation at federal rates addresses another important issue: the cost of essential food.
When wheat and flour are more expensive in one province than in another, low-income households face an additional burden. This is especially serious in areas where insecurity, weak infrastructure and limited employment already place pressure on family budgets.
Affordable food can provide immediate relief, but the success of the initiative will depend on effective distribution.
Authorities must prevent hoarding, diversion, artificial shortages and the capture of subsidised supplies by influential intermediaries. Wheat should reach flour mills and consumers through a transparent system that tracks quantities, prices and distribution points.
Retail prices must be monitored to ensure that the benefits of federal support reach households rather than disappear within the supply chain.
At the same time, long-term food security requires stronger local agricultural production, better irrigation, improved storage facilities and more efficient transport networks. Farmers need reliable access to inputs, markets and agricultural guidance.
Federal support can address immediate price pressures, while investment in agriculture can strengthen the province’s ability to meet future needs.
These objectives should be pursued together.
Local Communities Must Become Partners in Peace
A central feature of the proposed approach is the involvement of local representatives and village-level committees in identifying development priorities and helping restore peaceful conditions.
This could become one of the programme’s strongest elements.
People who live in a district generally understand its problems more closely than officials who visit occasionally. They know which villages lack clean water, which roads are impassable, which schools need teachers and which communities have been neglected by successive administrations.
Local representatives should therefore have a meaningful role in identifying projects and presenting recommendations to the relevant authorities.
A practical system could allow village committees to prepare prioritised lists of essential needs. District officials could assess their feasibility, while provincial and federal authorities could approve funding through a streamlined process.
This would help ensure that projects respond to genuine public demand rather than political preferences or administrative convenience.
However, local participation must not become a ceremonial exercise. Committees need clear procedures, fair representation, adequate information and protection from intimidation.
Women, young people, farmers, traders and marginalised households should have opportunities to contribute. Otherwise, local decision-making could simply reproduce existing inequalities.
There must also be a clear distinction between community participation in peacebuilding and responsibility for conducting security operations. Local people should not be placed in danger by being expected to confront armed militants themselves.
Community leaders can help communicate public concerns, discourage intimidation, support lawful reporting and advocate for peaceful conditions. The responsibility for protecting citizens and dealing with armed groups must remain with the relevant state institutions.
This is essential because communities already affected by violence should not be asked to carry risks that properly trained and equipped security agencies are responsible for managing.
Natural Resources Must Benefit Local People
Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s conflict-affected districts possess considerable economic potential, including mineral resources, agricultural opportunities, tourism prospects and a young workforce.
Yet natural wealth does not automatically translate into public prosperity. The benefits depend on ownership arrangements, employment policies, revenue distribution, environmental safeguards and the capacity of local communities to participate in economic activity.
Mining provides an important example. Large projects can generate employment, stimulate transport and construction businesses, and create demand for local suppliers. If managed transparently, they can also contribute to public revenues and long-term investment.
But extraction without fair local benefits can deepen resentment rather than strengthen peace.
Mining and other resource-based industries should therefore establish clear local employment targets, publish relevant revenue-sharing arrangements, comply with environmental standards and provide opportunities for local businesses.
Technical training can help residents qualify for skilled positions rather than being confined to temporary or low-paid work. Local suppliers should be encouraged to provide transport, maintenance, food services and other goods and services where they can meet appropriate standards.
Revenue generated by natural resources should also support community priorities, including education, healthcare, clean water and infrastructure.
The example of a successful project should be measured not merely by the volume of minerals extracted or the number of jobs announced, but by the lasting economic value retained by local communities.
The region should not remain a source of raw materials while its people continue to face unemployment and inadequate services.
Learning from Other Conflict-Affected Regions
International experience offers useful lessons for Pakistan, although no foreign model can simply be copied without considering local conditions.
In several conflict-affected regions, peacebuilding has involved a combination of security measures, political engagement, reintegration efforts, infrastructure investment and economic development. Colombia and Northern Ireland offer different examples of how prolonged conflicts can be addressed through broader strategies that extend beyond military action.
These experiences do not suggest that development alone ends insurgencies. Instead, they demonstrate the importance of addressing multiple dimensions of conflict, including political grievances, institutional weaknesses, community relationships and economic exclusion.
Pakistan must develop an approach suited to its own security environment, constitutional framework and social realities.
The immediate priority is to establish dependable public institutions, protect citizens, expand economic opportunities and ensure that communities can participate in decisions affecting their futures.
Any approach must also distinguish between peaceful political disagreement and violent militancy. Democratic participation, lawful criticism and peaceful protest should not be treated as threats to national security. A society in which people can express grievances through legitimate institutions is better equipped to prevent violence from becoming an alternative channel for expressing them.
Trust is not created by public messaging alone. It emerges when the state applies the law fairly, responds to complaints and delivers on its commitments.
The Risks That Could Undermine the Initiative
Despite the promise of the proposed measures, several obstacles could prevent them from producing lasting results.
The first is weak implementation. Delayed releases, administrative bottlenecks and poor project management can turn substantial allocations into years of unfinished work.
The second is corruption and political favouritism. If funds are directed towards influential individuals or poorly designed projects, public confidence will suffer.
The third is insecurity. Contractors may avoid dangerous areas, teachers and health workers may be unable to reach their workplaces, and businesses may hesitate to invest if they cannot operate safely.
The fourth is political discontinuity. Development programmes that depend on a particular government or leadership arrangement may lose momentum after a change in administration.
The fifth is insufficient public participation. Projects designed without consulting residents may fail to address their most urgent needs.
These risks require a practical framework for accountability.
Authorities should publish district-wise allocations, project descriptions, procurement details, implementation schedules and progress updates. Independent audits should be complemented by field inspections and public feedback. Delayed or abandoned projects should be investigated, and officials responsible for mismanagement should face appropriate consequences.
A public dashboard could help residents and journalists monitor expenditure and compare promised results with actual progress.
The government should also establish measurable targets for employment, school attendance, healthcare access, road connectivity, agricultural productivity and project completion.
Security outcomes must be evaluated alongside these development indicators. The aim is not simply to spend more money, but to establish whether public investment is helping communities become safer, more prosper
