Terrorism

US designates The Resistance Front as Global Terror Outfit

Context: Recently, the United States has designated The Resistance Front (TRF) as a Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO) and as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT).

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Key facts about The Resistance Front (TRF); 1267 Sanctions Committee.

The Resistance Front

The Resistance Front (TRF) is a proxy of Pakistan-based UN-designated terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT).
Founded by Muhammad Abbas Sheikh (now deceased) in 2019, in the aftermath of the abrogation of Article 370. It is currently headed by designated terrorist Sheikh Sajjad Gul. As per Indian security agencies, the outfit was floated to evade international sanctions against Pakistan.
TRF has carried out several terror attacks in Jammu & Kashmir’s Keran (2020), Handwara, Sopore, Shopian, Anantnag, and Reasi with the latest one in Baisaran meadows of Pahalgam (2025).
TRF usually focused on security forces and political figures, but late 2024 onwards it started to target infrastructure projects and civilians (including non-locals) in J&K.
The Indian government has designated the outfit as a terror organisation under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act in 2023.

The move intensifies global pressure on Pakistan to rein in terror groups operating from its territory.

The designation will help India’s case in designating the TRF under the 1267 Committee for sanctions at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and imposing sanctions and travel bans on its members.

The 1267 Sanctions Committee

The 1267 Sanctions Committee, also known as the ISIS and Al-Qaeda Sanctions Committee, was established under the UNSC Resolution in 1999.
It is one of the most important UN subsidiary bodies working towards combating terrorism, particularly in relation to ISIS, Al-Qaeda, and associated individuals, groups and entities.
The committee decides on sanctions and travel bans for individuals and entities associated with these terror organisations and ensures the enforcement of these measures under UNSC resolutions 1267 (1999), 1989 (2011), and 2253 (2015).

Pakistan, a non-permanent member of the UNSC, has been protecting TRF at UNSC with support from China.

Multi-Pronged Strategy to Counter Terrorism in J&K

Context: In a recent address, the Lieutenant Governor of UT Jammu & Kashmir emphasised the need for a multi-pronged Counter Terrorism Strategy in the region which is focused on Intelligence, Community engagement, Technology, and Inter-Agency collaboration.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: Strategy to Counter Terrorism in J&K.

Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) continues to face a complex security environment, where terrorism is not just a law-and-order problem but also deeply linked to local alienation, external interference, and governance deficits. Hence, a multi-pronged strategy is required.

Multi-Pronged Strategy to Counter Terrorism

Intelligence-based operations.
Community engagement to build trust and gather information.
Use of modern technology like Artificial Intelligence (AI) for threat prediction and surveillance.
Strong inter-agency collaboration between police, armed forces, and central police forces.
Reviving beat policing, which relies on local police officers patrolling and connecting with the community.

Role of State Police in Fighting Terrorism:

The primacy of the local or State police as the fulcrum of counter-terror operations is a well established fact -

Local police understand the terrain, demography, language, and culture better than any outside force.
Connect with the local population facilitates high-grade intelligence of terrorists who operate amidst the population.
The Pahalgam terror attack (April 2025) highlighted a critical gap in human intelligence (HUMINT). Strengthening local police could help prevent such lapses in the future.

Role of Technology in Fighting Terrorism:

Artificial Intelligence (AI), predictive analytics, and real-time data processing help to detect, track, and counter emerging threats.
Balance between Techint (Technical Intelligence) and HUMINT is essential for a responsive and layered security apparatus.

Role of Inter-Agency Collaboration in Counter-Terrorism:

Jammu & Kashmir Police, the Indian Army, and the Central Armed Police Forces (CAPFs) must operate as a cohesive unit to eliminate terrorism and dismantle its support system.
Joint efforts between Police and Central Agencies are vital to intensify targeted strikes on Overground Workers (OGWs) and disrupt networks providing logistical and financial support to terrorists.
Inter-agency cooperation facilitates the pooling of resources, expertise, and jurisdictional powers, making the counter-terror response more agile, adaptive, and comprehensive.

Community Engagement and Participatory Governance

Presently, elected MLAs, sarpanches, and local representatives have been kept out of the security matrix. Jammu and Kashmir Police (JAKP) is kept outside the command of the locally elected government. Excluding elected representatives and local control over J&K Police weakens democratic accountability and hampers community trust in counter-terror efforts.

The local population feel more comfortable to share information with their sarpanch or their MLA than with someone from a central agency.

Restoring the control of the JAKP under the elected government will facilitate better accountability and responsiveness to community needs, ensuring that policing strategies align with the local population’s concerns and aspirations.
Elected officials can play a vital role in bridging the gap between the police and the community, fostering trust and cooperation essential for effective law enforcement and counter terrorism.
Policy makers need to encourage structured dialogue between police forces and local leaders to collaborate and address community concerns, gather information on terror-related activities and enhance public safety initiatives.

A one-size-fits-all approach would not work in J&K, India needs a multi-pronged counter-terrorism strategy rooted in intelligence, trust, governance, and technology. A key step is to empower the local institutions and adapt to regional realities to win both the war and the people's trust.

Also Read: India needs National Security Doctrine

India’s Changing Counter-Terrorism Strategy

Context: Operation Sindoor marks a turning point in India’s counter-terrorism strategy and military posture towards Pakistan. It reflects India’s new assertive doctrine of swift, escalated retaliation against cross-border terrorism.

Relevance of the Topic: Mains: India’s counter-terrorism strategy and military posture toward Pakistan.

Shifts in India’s Response post the Pahagam Terror Attack:

Shift from strategic restraint to Proactive Retaliation: In the past, India often exercised strategic restraint. India's current posture on cross-border terrorism is proactive retaliation, strategic assertiveness, and zero tolerance.
Expanded Military Engagement: The Kargil conflict of 1999 was limited to a small area in Jammu and Kashmir. During Operation Sindoor, India hit targets up to 100 km inside Pakistan and Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK).
Zero Tolerance Doctrine: India’s new posture treats both terrorist groups and their state sponsors as equal threats. Military action now targets infrastructure, command centers, and even state-protected assets.
Establishment of a New Normal: The Indian Prime Minister clearly stated that military action was “suspended, not ended.” India has lowered its threshold for initiating military action in response to terror.
International Message and Narrative Control: By linking Pakistan-based groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed to major terrorist attacks in the US and UK, India framed Operation Sindoor as India’s war on terrorism, similar to what NATO launched in Afghanistan after 9/11. The multi-political party outreach by the Indian government, travelling the world and explaining Pakistan's links to terrorism and India's 'zero-tolerance policy towards such aggression.

Escalation ladder- Controlled Response by India:

The progression of Operation Sindoor can be understood through the framework of the 44-step "escalation ladder" proposed by American military strategist Herman Kahn.

Kahn's step 1: Ostensible Crisis: The Pahalgam terror attack can be described as an ostensible crisis.
Kahn's Step 2: Political, Economic and Diplomatic Gestures: India’s decisions to keep the Indus Waters Treaty in abeyance, cancelling the visas of Pakistani nationals, stopping trade and postal services, closing India’s air space for Pakistan’s aircraft, etc.
Kahn’s Step 3: Solemn and Formal Declarations: India’s top leadership declared the intent to avenge the killings of the tourists at Pahalgam.
Kahn’s Step 4: Hardening of Positions Confrontation of Wills: India blamed Pakistan for not taking action against terrorist groups, while Islamabad asked for evidence of India’s accusation. It also said that India’s position on the IWT would be deemed as an “act of war”.
Kahn's Step 5: Show of Force: Indian Navy carried out multiple anti-ship missile firings, underlining its preparedness for long-range offensive strikes. Pakistan also test-fired Abdali, its surface-to-surface ballistic missile with a 450-km range.
Kahn's Step 6: Significant Mobilisation: Both sides moved military assets stealthily, preparing for confrontation.
The escalation quickly reached rungs 8 (Harassing Acts of Violence) and 9 (Dramatic Military Confrontations).

Also Read: India needs National Security Doctrine

India did strike at nine terror locations in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, and successfully thwarted Pakistani drone attacks along the western border. The conflict de-escalated with a ceasefire on May 10, halting the confrontation at Step 9.

Resurgence of Boko Haram in Nigeria

Context: Boko Haram insurgency is witnessing a resurgence in Nigeria, Africa in 2025 with repeated attacks on military outposts, civilian settlements, and local militia groups.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Key facts related to Boko Haram; Location of Nigeria.

What is Boko Haram?

Boko Haram is a self proclaimed jihadist militant group mainly based in northeastern Nigeria.
Founded by Mohammed Yusuf in 2002, in Borno state, Nigeria.
Boko Haram translates to ‘Western Education is forbidden’.
They took up arms in 2009 to fight Western education, secular governance and modern institutions, and to impose a radical version of Islamic law.
The group is also active in Chad, Niger, northern Cameroon and Mali.

Boko Haram has split into two factions over the years:

Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP): Backed by the Islamic State group, it targets military positions and overrunning outposts across Nigeria’s northeast.
JAS (Jama’atu Ahlis Sunna Lidda’awati wal-Jihad): resorted to attacking civilians and perceived collaborators, and thrives on robberies and abductions for ransom.

Boko Haram insurgency:

Despite earlier gains, Nigeria’s armed forces are struggling to maintain control, particularly in the crisis-ridden Borno state.
Over 2 million people have been displaced and 35,000 civilian deaths have occurred due to the insurgency.

Why is Nigeria losing ground again?

Many military posts are located in isolated areas with limited personnel, making them easy targets. Reinforcements often arrive too late.
ISWAP group uses a decentralised structure to carry out coordinated night attacks with drones and light weapons, making them harder to predict and counter.
Some former militants, despite claiming to have surrendered, continue to aid extremist groups by sharing intelligence and managing logistics.

At the height of its terror in 2013-14, Boko Haram controlled an area nearly the size of Belgium. Though Nigeria’s military reclaimed much of this territory over the past decade, the new wave of attacks has raised fears about a possible return to the gloomy past.

India’s Lawfare Strategy to Combat Terrorism

Context: India should adopt a “lawfare strategy” - using international law and forums like the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to hold Pakistan accountable for sponsoring cross-border terrorism.

Relevance of the topic:

Prelims: SAARC Convention on Suppression of Terrorism, International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, Terrorist Bombing Convention, Jurisdiction of ICJ.

Mains: Lawfare Strategy as a strategic tool to combat Pakistan-sponsored terrorism.

Apart from military actions like Operation Sindoor and diplomatic measures, India should also adopt a "lawfare" strategy to hold Pakistan accountable for sponsoring terrorism.

Lawfare Strategy

Lawfare strategy means utilising laws, especially international laws and judicial platforms like the International Court of Justice (ICJ), as a tool to take action against countries that support terrorism.

International Legal Instruments supporting Lawfare Strategy:

India should identify specific provisions in international terrorism conventions that sanction terrorism, and highlight customary international laws that Pakistan is violating.

SAARC Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism: India and Pakistan are both parties to SAARC Regional Convention on Suppression of Terrorism (1987) and its Additional Protocol. Article 6 of the Additional Protocol mandates states to take all practical measures via domestic legislation to prevent, suppress and eradicate the financing of terrorism, and for effective international cooperation.
International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (ICSFT) is a United Nations treaty (1999) that defines terror financing as a criminal act. Article 2(1) of ICSFT states that any person by any means, directly or indirectly, unlawfully and wilfully, provides or collects funds with the intention that they should be used to carry out terrorist acts, commits an offense. Both India and Pakistan are parties to the convention which obligates them to prevent terror financing.
United Nations Security Council Resolutions: UNSC Resolution 1373 (2001) mandates the member states to undertake measures to deny safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit terrorist attacks.
Using International Court of Justice (ICJ) as Strategic Forum: India can use ICJ as a legal forum to expose Pakistan’s support for terrorism. Many international terrorism treaties allow state parties to bring disputes to be resolved by the ICJ. For example:

Article 20(1) of the Terrorist Bombing Convention
Article 24(1) of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism (ICSFT).

Ukraine used this clause to sue Russia at the ICJ for allegedly financing terrorism in the Donbas region. India can also use the compromissory clauses in these terrorism treaties to take Pakistan to the ICJ, just as it did in the Kulbhushan Jadhav case.

However, there are two significant Challenges:

Pakistan’s Reservation under ICSFT: ICSFT allows disputes to be taken to the ICJ but Pakistan has made a reservation, it has declared that it does not accept the ICJ’s jurisdiction under this treaty. This weakens India’s ability to force Pakistan to face trial under ICSFT. Nevertheless, India can still file a case with the ICJ to draw global attention to the issue.
India’s Reservation under Terrorist Bombing Convention: India has opted out of ICJ jurisdiction under this treaty, while Pakistan has accepted it which prevents India from taking Pakistan to the ICJ using that treaty. This obstacle can be overcome if India withdraws its reservation, allowing it to initiate proceedings against Pakistan at the ICJ.

India should utilise the legal proceedings in ICJ to assiduously promote a global narrative against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism. India should have fool-proof evidence and devise its legal strategy accordingly.

Operation Sindoor: India hits Pakistan’s terror bases

Context: In a swift military action under Operation Sindoor, the Indian armed forces carried out 24 precision strikes on nine different targets against terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan and Pakistan-occupied Kashmir (PoK).

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Locations in News; Operation Sindoor; Operation Abhyaas.

Operation Sindoor

India exercised its right to respond to the Pahalgam terror attack, and the armed forces subsequently launched Operation Sindoor to destroy the camps used to train terrorists in Pakistan and PoK.
9 terrorist camps of Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad and Hizbul Mujahideen were selected based on credible intelligence inputs and targeted to deliver justice to the victims of the Pahalgam attack and their families.

The Indian Air Force, in co-ordination with the Army, executed the attacks without intruding into Pakistan air space, unlike the two previous counter strikes carried out after the terror attacks on the Indian Army’s Brigade headquarters in Uri in 2016 and the CRPF convoy at Pulwama in 2019.

India-Pakistan: History of Wars & Conflicts

Faced with the prospect of an armed conflict with Pakistan, India conducted nationwide civil defence mock drills under ‘Operation Abhyaas.’ The drills were carried out in 244 districts to prepare the country’s readiness to deal with emergencies and terrorist attacks.

Also Read: Civil Defence Mock Drills in India

Baloch insurgents behind Pakistan Train Hijacking

Context: Insurgents of the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) stopped a long-distance train in Quetta region and took passengers hostage on March 11, 2025.

Relevance of the Topic: Prelims: Location: Balochistan; Balochistan Liberation Army (Key Facts)

About Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA):

Who is the BLA?
- It is a Baloch ethnonationalist group advocating for an independent Balochistan.
- It has been banned in Pakistan (2006) and designated as a global terrorist organization by the U.S. (2019).
BLA’s role in the attack:
- The attack was led by BLA’s Majeed Brigade, a suicide squad (Fidayeen unit) active since 2011.
- Other specialised BLA units (STOS, Fatah Squad, and Zirab Units) were also involved.
- Earlier, it has carried out attacks on Pakistani establishments and projects, especially in Baluchistan region.
  - March 2024: Attack on a security complex near Gwadar port.
  - October 2024: Suicide bombing killed two Chinese nationals working on CPEC projects.

Brief background of the Baloch Insurgency

Economic and Political Issues:
- Balochistan is Pakistan’s largest but least developed province, rich in oil, gas, gold, and copper.
- Ethnic Baloch leaders accuse the Federal government (dominated by Punjab) of economic exploitation.
Historical Background:
- Post-Partition (1947-48):
  - Balochistan remained independent until March 1948 under a friendship treaty with Pakistan.
  - The Khan of Kalat initially resisted joining Pakistan but was pressured into signing the accession.
  - Many Baloch continued to support independence, leading to decades of insurgency.
Insurgency and its Impact:
- Tens of thousands have been killed in Baloch insurgencies over the years.
- Pakistan often accuses India of supporting Baloch insurgents, an allegation which India denies.
- Insurgents frequently target Chinese personnel & CPEC projects, fearing they would not benefit.