EDITORIAL: The suicide bombing at an imambargah in Islamabad during Friday prayers has claimed at least 36 lives and injured nearly 170, underscoring the persistent threat of terrorism in Pakistan. That such an attack could take place in the federal capital – widely regarded as one of the country’s most secure cities – highlights both the resilience and adaptability of militant networks. This being the second major attack in Islamabad within three months makes the incident all the more alarming.
While the swift arrest of four facilitators, including the alleged mastermind, is a welcome development, it also raises troubling questions about how these individuals were able to operate undetected until the atrocity was carried out.
Reports that the suicide bomber had spent time at a training camp in Afghanistan once again bring the issue of cross-border militancy into sharp focus. The claim of responsibility by Islamic State–Khorasan (IS-K) is consistent with the group’s violent track record.
IS-K has repeatedly targeted Shia Muslims in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. Its March 2022 attack on a Shia mosque in Peshawar, which killed dozens during Friday prayers, remains a chilling reminder of its brutality.
Notably, the group’s strength has been aided by the absorption of disgruntled militants from the TTP and other extremist outfits, making IS-K an increasingly lethal threat to regional stability.
President Asif Ali Zardari’s warning about terrorist organisations operating from Afghanistan reaffirms long-standing concerns within Pakistan. Multiple UN monitoring reports have also documented the presence and activities of TTP militants and other violent extremist groups, including IS-K, in Afghan territory. It is in this context that Pakistan has repeatedly raised alarms and taken measures such as the continued closure, at present, of the Pak-Afghan border.
READ MORE: Xi extends condolences over Islamabad blast
The president’s remarks that certain neighbouring countries have effectively become partners in crime by allowing terrorist elements to operate from their soil are grounded in documented realities. His indirect reference to India as a state that finances and provides technical and military support to such groups is likewise consistent with on-ground assessments.
That said, external factors, however significant, must not overshadow Pakistan’s internal responsibilities. The state must also put its own house in order.
Intelligence lapses, surveillance gaps, and inconsistent enforcement against extremist sympathisers continue to create space for terrorist networks to function.
While it may be impossible to intercept a suicide bomber at the moment of attack, it is entirely feasible to identify, monitor, and dismantle the facilitators and support structures that make such attacks possible. This demands sustained, intelligence-led policing rather than action taken in the aftermath of tragedy.
Equally important is a zero-tolerance approach toward sectarian outfits that re-emerge under new identities despite being formally banned.
Even when not directly engaged in violence, these groups spread hate speech and sectarian narratives that radicalise individuals and lay the groundwork for future attacks.
Effective counterterrorism, therefore, must extend beyond kinetic operations to include firm regulation of public discourse and a sustained ideological campaign against violent extremism.
Copyright Business Recorder, 2026