is occupation in the 21st century. >> grief and anger in pakistan after dozens of people are killed in an attack peshawar in peshawar. the pakistani taliban has been blamed. this is inside story. anchor: welcome to the program.

pakistan is morning a hundred people after a bombing of a mosque. the attack was the latest in the series blamed on the pakistani taliban. the group's leadership is distance itself from the bombing saying holy places should not be targeted. however, it has not commented on why one of its commanders initially claimed responsibility. attack took place in a highly fortified police compound, so was there a security failure and what is behind the increase in attacks in pakistan? we will be putting those questions and more to our guests, but first this report from peshawar. reporter: i am standing on what was the roof of the mosque. it was afternoon prayer. the suicide bomber placed himself in the front row of the congregation and that is when he detonated his device. although the main rescue and relief and recovery effort is now over, you can still find the rescue teams there in order to

ensure nobody is under the rubble and unaccounted for. this has been a difficult operation carried out in the dead of the night, but it has left difficult questions for the authorities. what were they doing when they knew there was a security pledge. the intelligence agencies told authorities suicide bombers had penetrated into the city of peshawar and there was a threat of an imminent attack. but they took it lightly. there is a sense of complacency. people have to answer for what happen here. how did the suicide bomber get into such a sensitive place? answers are needed by the people who are angry. they are asking fickle questions but the administration and authorities except for photo opportunities will tell you this is a fight against the terrorists. what the people want is security. hundreds of police were present here.

they are the foot soldiers who ensure peace and security in this country but they are the most vulnerable and we have seen an increasing spate of attacks against policemen who have been complaining they don't have sophisticated equipment, they don't have plaque jackets, they don't have the kind of sophisticated weapons the terrorists are using. people in pakistan have rendered great sacrifices over the past few years. over 80,000 people have lay down their lives in this country and the big question now is is the administration able to cope with the new challenge. people are asking difficult questions. the enemy or adversary is well-equipped and committed and it will be a huge challenge in order to contain this new spike in violence. the pakistani taliban has been able to bring in sophisticated weapons from afghanistan. they are trying to gain a foothold in afghanistan and it will be a huge challenge for the

security apparatus in order to ensure the sacrifices of the people of pakistan do not go in vain. anchor: the pakistani taliban has been fighting the government in islamabad for more than 15 years trying to impose its hard-line interpretation of islamic law. it has its ties with afghanistan's tele-band. the group announced a cease-fire with the government after talks are good by the afghan tele-band. but in november, it ended the cease-fire, accusing the military of increasing attacks on its members. since then, the group expanded its offensive, ambushing police and security patrols. it wants the government to release its members from prison and reduce military presence in former tribal areas. for more on this, i am joined by our guests, all of whom are in islamabad. the executive director of the center for research in security

studies, an independent think tank. the parliamentary correspondent for pakistan's daily english-language newspaper, the nation. and the founder and senior fellow at an advisory firm that focuses on public policy. a warm welcome to you all. thank you for joining us on inside story. i know you have lost a family member, your cousin who was a police officer in this attack. our heartfelt condolences. the suicide bomber, as we heard, struck a mosque frequented by police in a heavily guarded area of peshawar. was there a security failure and if there was, who is responsible for the security failure? guest: i think this certainly was a big security failure. also the question about the suicide bomber, the police officials dealing with the entire episode are still not

sure whether it was just one suicide bomber all by himself or was there any big explosive planted somewhere because the impact, the way the ceiling, the roof caved in does not speak of a suicide jacket have that having been exploded. it usually does not spread to the concrete in a sense that we told the concrete pillars as the roof came down because of the impact of the detonation in this is what caused this more than 100 deaths. it is a big, tough question, big suspicions, allegations, all pointing toward a security lapse as to how it happened. it is still being investigated. anchor: our correspondent

mentioned there were intelligence agencies issued an alert on january 21 saying an attack was likely to happen in peshawar. why were these intelligence reports not taken seriously and who, in your view is to blame for the security failure? guest: let me tackle the second one first. who is to blame for the security failure -- without question, the responsibility for securing freedom and the livelihoods and property of pakistani citizens is the states, the islamic republic of pakistan. this is an islamic republic of pakistan it has defeated the ttp between 2014 and 2016. pakistan and the pakistani military and intelligence services worked hand in glove with civilian law enforcement and all of society for

counterterrorism and pushback against them that essentially ended the ttp. the fact the afghan taliban took over in 2021 is at least partly to blame for this resurgence but principally, the distraction of the pakistani military and intelligence services away from securing the lives and livelihoods -- anchor: what are they distracted by? guest: by domestic politics, by trying to manage the discourse, by trying to make sure only what they approve and sanction is what finds space in the newspapers and on television, by determining who the prime minister is. in 2018, the military decided they wanted a prime minister they could work with. they got one and then they got sick of him and got rid of him in early 2022.

a military that is very good at killing terrorists, that is very good at clearing and holding territory that belongs to the people of pakistan, even when it is so good at it, when it allows itself to be distracted by the mastic politics, the result is what we saw in peshawar yesterday. anchor: do you agree? is the pakistani state or military to blame for the complacency and lapse in security? guest: for the last two decades, we have seen a lack of clarity. we have seen parallel military operations and at the same time, we are seeing these starts going on in other areas. there has been confusion in this

fight against terrorism. we have seen with this administration, we have seen they have engaged in peace talks but they collapsed. our military, we have seen that military operation, i'm talking about successful operation and in 2014, but now it is difficult. anchor: to what extent are the political tensions we have seen in the last year in pakistan, the ouster of the former prime minister in a note confidence vote and the protest, what extent are those put a cult tensions to blame for all the security failures we have seen in the past few months? guest: we are expecting from the

afghan taliban to play their role but we have not seen -- intelligence operations are going on. we have seen they are making efforts against sleeper cells and operations are underway. now, as my colleagues have mentioned, domestic politics is a massive issue. our main players are not on the same page. anchor: bush talked about the afghan taliban and the fact that is perhaps a factor in the rise of attacks in pakistan by the pakistani taliban they feel emboldened now that the

government, the leadership in afghanistan is the tele-, they feel emboldened. interestingly, with this attack, the afghan tele-band with one of their officials have condemned the attack saying places of worship have their sanctity. what do you make of this and the fact that pakistani taliban is trying to distance itself from the attack? what went on and what's the relationship between the ptt and afghan tele-band? guest: that is a very complex issue but let me say the relationship between the afghan and pakistani taliban is symbiotic. both consider themselves as comrades and the pakistani taliban had valid allegiance to the afghan tele-band, so when they try to distance themselves, it doesn't hold any water.

nearly 1800 prisoners fled the jails of afghanistan when the tele-banner turned to power in august of 2021. many were either ttp or i.s. k or al qaeda leaders. that has considerably treated to the surge in violence. however, we must underline pakistan is facing a sort of proxy terrorism. it has been facing this proxy terrorism for more than a decade. and under different franchises, it may be a different name but your objective is the same and that is to create a sense of instability to project pakistan as an unstable, terror stricken country and this is, i would say, being externally driven. when i say this is proxy

terrorism, this is externally driven. anchor: externally driven by whom? guest: i would not name but there is more method to this madness that we see in this country. a few thousand people we cannot really imagine to capture the state of pakistan the way they have been issuing denials in many cases. but these denials don't hold water. this is a perennial conflict regardless of whether the military makes it clear enough having broken their backs but i don't think we have broken their backs. this is a continuous fight we shall have to fight until we have resolved the number of issues connected with china, connected the china and u.s. rivalry and pakistan's relations with india. anchor: are they external factors at play and talk to us

about the rising insurgency in pakistan. what is behind this and why our security forces being targeted? guest: there is no question pakistan is the target of many different adversaries that seek to undermine and damage the pakistani project. this is a fact of life for pakistanis that we have dealt with since the founding of the country in 1947. as some viewers will know and others wouldn't, pakistan was split into two in 1971. pakistan has been the victim of perhaps the most sustained wave of terrorism really anywhere since 2001, since the u.s. mission to free afghanistan of the tele-began in october 2001. while pakistan has done all of this, pakistan has concurrently been tarred and feathered as

being too soft on the tele-band being incapable. what i alluded to earlier -- anchor: there have been reports that the government in islamabad directly supported the afghan tele-band in their insurgency in afghanistan, directly supported them in ousting the government and international forces. guest: those are accusations that only hold water to the extent the pakistani since day one have argued the only way issues in afghanistan would be resolved would be around the table. that was the pakistan position in 2001 and was the consistent incision across military dictator, an elected government of coalition partners, a government of only one party and a government of direct adversaries. no matter who has been in power, pakistan has done the same thing . you have to have a conversation

with the taliban to resolve these issues. unfortunately, that advice was not heated but that does not add salt -- does not absolve pakistan from protecting pakistani civilians and lives. there are those that seek to take advantage of political crises. there has been proxy terrorism since 1947. the argument needs to be focused on is the pakistani government capable of fighting this. but it has proven is it is capable of defending this country, fending pakistani lives and reasserting -- anchor: when you look at the current situation, you have a government having to deal with multiple crises.

as the pakistani government in its state today capable of fighting this insurgency? guest: it is a challenging task. right now, the national assembly session is going on and i believe about this attack, i would say rhetoric and settlement would not solve the real purpose. you can see this is less parliament. they should discuss this issue. they should make a strategy to deal with this menace and i would say opposition should --

to chalk out a strategy -- there is need of unity to deal with this issue. anchor: are we going to see unity in the aftermath of this attack? imran khan has been very much opposed to this government, calling for elections in pakistan. are we going to see more unity in the aftermath of this attack or not? guest: if players are not on the same page. we are seeing that. they peace agreement, these militants in pakistan and they are scattered now. it's difficult to find, but our defense minister has hinted a

military operation would be the option in the near future. anchor: can the pakistani governor -- pakistani government, which is having to deal with a multitude of crises and an economic crisis and energy crisis, is waiting for a bailout from the imf, can it also take on and win this war against the pakistani taliban or is pakistan going to know the same fate of afghanistan and be one day ruled by the taliban? guest: certainly pakistan is not going to take the afghanistan route as far as terrorism is concerned. but unfortunately, pakistan's politicians as well as military leadership as a whole have not risen to the strategic level that is required to fight the multiple crises.

the military has been wanting to reform the country. it has been wanting to take the country out of economic crisis, but it refuses to disengage from political management. that is the dilemma pakistanis have faced. the military is good at fighting terrorism and fighting criminals as it has demonstrated but when it gets into this distraction work, that undermines all the commitment, although valves the military gives helping pakistan move out of economic, social and political crisis. unless it really disengages from the main political discourse and let's the political forces as well as forces of economy handle the project itself, it will be a very difficult job for pakistan -- for pakistan to grapple with these crises.

anchor: you have said the military in pakistan, the government and politicians are distracted. what are going to be depletable consequences of this attack in your view? there are those who have said this could be to delay the elections scheduled for later this year. what are your thoughts? guest: i think the focus of the conversation needs to be on the victims of this attack and how this is going to be prevented in the future. frankly, if you look at the history of how terrorism has been fought in pakistan, politicians have had a very marginal role and the reason for that is the entire national security conversation in pakistan is an and completely dominated by the military and intelligence services. the fact of the matter is until the military learns how to take orders from elected leaders and execute those orders, to the

fullest without leaving they are any better than politicians, any less corrupt than politicians, anymore competent and politicians, pakistan is going to continue to struggle. it's going to be very good at doing things like beating the ttp and then it is invariably going to let the jack back out of the box because the cycle of getting back into political management, the allure of that and the culture that has been established in this country is extremely powerful. we have many other problems in pakistan that contribute to this. we have a calcified series of dinosaurs both politically in the bureaucracy and in the public discourse that dominate the discourse in a country where the median age of 23, a country bursting with useful energy and creativity but one whose creativity and entrepreneurial

spirit is being stuffed and, to top it off, a culture of fear is emanating because these kinds of attacks are allowed. anchor: in the immediate, how do you protect us population? how do you ensure such attacks don't happen again and how do you bring about security in the immediate? guest: in the immediate run, there's no option other than robust counterterrorism operations. in june of last year, there was a lot of conversation about potentially making concessions to the ttp and others all around the country, we were not the only ones, lots and lots of pakistanis who are very patriotic, who love their religion, who are extremely nationalist, they in unison said we have to be insane to be even considering the concession of any kind of suspension of the

constitution, the suspension of any rights of individual pakistanis, groups of pakistanis, but the fact these things were considered and the fact those conversations did not have the approval of our limit, were not scuffed on television shows are written about an op-ed's but were simply conceived and discussed because people in the military thought it was a good idea, that is the kind of thing this country is going to have to forever shut down and never revisit. if it does, today it is the ttp, tomorrow there will be another alphabet soup concoction. anybody that allows the constitution of pakistan or our democracy to be undermined opens the door for terrorism. anchor: i'm going to get you to tell me what you think the media action should be in order to prevent an attack such as the one we saw in peshawar from happening again. how do we protect the pakistani population?

guest: i would say military might is a problem to deal with this terrorism. now the issue is our pakistani government should revisit the national action plan. they have our military operation , when we talk about the military operation -- the military operation was successful. the pakistani government should revisit this action plan. it will prove fruitful to deal with this. anchor: if the security situation were to further deteriorate in pakistan, would the u.s. and pakistan join forces to address these failures and is that likely to happen

anytime soon? guest: i hope not, because the past 20 years have been quite dramatic for the entire pakistani nation. just because of this so-called strategic partnership, so one would hope the u.s. once again does not extend its arm of cooperation. i think the army is robust enough to deal with these issues but the most critical important issue is the empowerment of civilian law enforcement agencies. even in this case, this tragic incident, we have seen the police, the provincial police forces are not given the kind of account -- kind of autonomy they need. in addition to that, we need to be on the alert all the time. we cannot let down our guard's in this situation pakistan finds itself in. it's a continuous, constant

struggle. anchor: thank you for a very interesting discussion. and thank you for watching this edition of inside story. you can watch this program again by visiting our website at al jazeera. come. for further discussion, go to our facebook page. you can also join the conversation on twitter. our handle is a.j. inside story. from me and the team at doha, thank you for watching. goodbye for now.

óçóç

- hey, i'm valerie june. coming uon "reel south." - [verie] this sll town ins a surpsing cla to fa. ♪ a attachéttaché - [valer] the clton high schl show choir has won national champiships ye after year. - beg from a sma wn, i dot think i wod've kno tha perfming cou be a caer. - nepeopleyou're not undetandin whatt's gonntake. we wildo it alnight lo if tt's wh it tas. - [valer] but cathey n big onmore te? - iteally gis you th couragto do anhing in fe.