Abstrict

The government of Pakistan launched its first National Security Policy on January 14, 2022, and there has been no security policy in Pakistan in written form since its inception. However, it is claimed to be the first-ever national security policy (2022-2026) of Pakistan. This policy is called a comprehensive policy because it has combined various policies like economic policy, internal policy, foreign policy defense policy, etc. The policy document has focused on putting together the defense capabilities with social and economic capacities while prioritizing economic security in the document. This study is based on the qualitative method for collecting data and informed through secondary sources. This study aims to check out the reasons that restricted the past governments of Pakistan from framing a national security policy and to examine the main aspects of the National Security Policy recently launched.

Keywords

Policy Formulation, Geo-Political Constraints, Governance Issues, Instability, Economic Security Challenges 

Introduction

The Latin term "Se Cura" (which means "without concern" or "without dread") is where the idea of security first appeared. In terms of objective reality, security is a situation in which no nation's national values are in danger, and in terms of subjective reality, security is when there is no longer any sense of fear in society (Mazhar & Goraya, 2019). It can be described as "the need to preserve state existence by the employment of financial, military, and political influence as well as the use of diplomats," in the words of the Farlex dictionary. Berkowits and Bock define national security as a country's capacity to defend its vision and values from foreign challenges.  In Lipmann's words, "A country is secure when it can defend its vital interests in the event of conflict without having to give up those interests." "Security is always a relative and contextual idea; there is no absolute security. Still, there are some conditions for national security. Economic stability, the expansion of democracy, a strong and independent judiciary, a uniform educational system, a healthy civil society, a clear and constantly updated definition of what constitutes a threat, and a clear understanding of how to tackle the potential and real threats by reducing conflict and overcoming opposition within the national structure (Hassan et al, 2016).

When the security plan suggests defending basic national interests, such as maintaining a political, economic, and cultural identity as well as territorial integrity, foreign policy, and economic growth, states have opportunities to choose their allies and adversaries at will. Security takes into account the potential, goals, and anxieties of collaborating states. It has to do with ensuring the states' survival, defense of their important national interests from external dangers, and freedom from worry, threat, and hazard. If a weaker state feels threatened by a stronger state nearby, it will join forces with a stronger state. The allying nations support the weaker state's security and growth of power. When faced with a serious security danger, the smaller state relies on the strength of its alliance and occasionally, on the outside assistance of the powerful allied states, since it is unable to secure security on its own (Ahmad, 2021). After the Cold War, the term "national security" gained importance on a global scale. Certify comprehensive national security, involves non-security difficulties in addition to relying on hard power methods. These difficulties have prevented the country's economic expansion and brought about political instability. These issues include deteriorating the environment, a growing population, and a lack of resources for water, energy, and food.

Security, according to its origins, refers to the lack of threats, whether they originate from internal turmoil, outside variables, or current economic disparities. In order to effectively cope with such threats, nations seek strength (economic, political, and military) and take the necessary steps to either prevent them or decrease their perceived negative impacts. Quaid-e-Azam is renowned for saying, "In our flawed world, the weak and powerless look for hostility from others." While tactics and methods are developed to deal with threats that can be seen and unfavorable circumstances that are expected, efforts are also made to instill a sense of security among the populace (Cheema, 2012). 

National security has two aspects: protection from external dangers and protection from internal threats. Nations develop as a result of any form of commonality, including geography, culture, dialect, commerce, freedom, or belief. The essential principles of the country are then formed from these unifying forces. Within their sphere of influence, they put these ideals into practice and observe them. At this point, factors related to national power are at play. To defend against foreign threats, economics, technology, armed power, and politics are only a few of the components that are used. Internal threats are those that originate from the state or society. These dangers may manifest as a rebellion against the government, which may be sparked by injustices between the nation's various classes, units, religious groups, ethnic groupings, and linguistic groups. Threats to internal security can also come from a nation's weak economic position, which forces it to rely on foreign help and forces it to accept terms from the donor countries that on occasion may go against the interests of the receiving nation. The state's internal security may occasionally be seriously threatened by terrorist activities committed by non-state actors, to name just one more important factor. When a state is challenged internally, it can be exceedingly challenging to identify the enemy, who is typically one of its own inhabitants (Hassan et al, 2016).

Pakistan Facing Security Constraints

Traditional and non-traditional security concerns pose threats to Pakistan and its citizens from both inside and outside forces. Foreign interference in domestic affairs and influence over the nation's foreign policy are the functional players. Due to both internal and external threats to its security, Pakistan has turned into a security state. 

Geo-Strategic Constraints of the National Security Policy of Pakistan

Traditional security has always dominated non-traditional security in Pakistan because of the Cold War, China-US New Cold War, New Great Game, Global War on Terror, SAARC's unsatisfying role, India's militaristic aspirations, big power politics in the region, and government's strategic, aspects based on culture like history, diplomatic, constitutional, financial, socio-cultural, management conflicts, and army have peculiar geostrategic and international strategic cultural aspects (Yasmin et al., 2017). One of the world's most comprehensive danger analyses is conducted in Pakistan. China, a growing economic power is in the North. India, a nation with a considerably larger population and much superior industrial resources is in the East. Iran and Afghanistan, two unfriendly nations that negatively affect domestic solidity are in the West. There is the Arabian Sea to the south (a doorway to the Central Asian States through Gawadar Port). Pakistan also faces domestic historical, sociocultural, political, and constitutional constraints in addition to regional and global strategic limitations. Both internationally and nationally, Pakistani society is dealing with numerous difficulties. The main issues facing Pakistan at the national level are poverty, an unstable economy, underperforming institutions, Political immaturity and instability, various educational systems and outdated curriculum, an unimaginative foreign policy, an arrogant governing class, and the tug-of-war between conflicting powers centers are all contributing factors.     

A thorough, consensus-based national security strategy has never been given serious consideration since the creation of Pakistan. The geo-strategic politics of the major powers in the South Asian region have historically governed security policy and foreign policy combined. Pakistan's national security priorities have always been considered to be dynamic because of the regional and global geopolitical competition in South Asia. However, Strategic considerations are briefly evaluated at each stage (Akbar, 2011).

Global Strategic Constraints

Pakistan has been seeking security both internally and externally, ever since it gained independence. Being a nation that values peace, it works hard to maintain a stable world order. It has experienced aggression despite its desire to further the policy of peace, which is fundamental in its ideology and orientation. Due to its geostrategic location and worldwide real politics, Pakistan and its population have always had to contend with international strategic restraints. The nation is now dealing with the following strategic challenges.

Pakistan's Security Priorities (Post Cold War till the 9/11 Incident)

The geopolitical conflict between capitalism and communism has captured Pakistan in its claws. With Pakistan's constrained budgetary resources, insufficient defense capabilities, and external challenges from its neighboring states to the east and west. The leaders of the time tended to embrace the previous doctrine and signed a number of defense agreements with America and its allies, notably the Central Treaty Organization and the South East Asia Treaty Organization. External security was still a major topic of discussion in Pakistan's foreign policy throughout that time. Internal security risks went undiscovered, but they were rising and growing more numerous over time. They failed to develop a practical national security plan for the country. Following the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, more than four million Afghan refugees sought refuge in Pakistan, and many stayed there long after the Soviets left (Cheema, 2012).

The US withdrew from Afghanistan after the fall of the Soviet Union. In the midst of the Cold War, Washington abandoned its ally Pakistan and buried its allegiances and collaboration.  After the Cold War, the term "national security" gained importance on a global scale. Certify comprehensive national security, involves non-security difficulties in addition to relying on hard power methods. These difficulties have contributed to political instability as well as slowed economic progress. Environmental deterioration, population growth, water, energy, and food shortages are some of these issues. Terrorism continues to pose the biggest and most important threat to Pakistan's domestic security among the more conventional difficulties (Mazhar & Goraya, 2019). The 9/11 tragedy followed by the Global War on Terror has significantly altered Pakistan's security goals. Residents of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas in particular had to deal with insurgencies; US drone attacks, military operations, murder, suicide bombings, and other issues. The military operations against insurgencies and counterinsurgencies in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and tribal regions have significantly increased the hazards to security and health. After 9/11, Pakistan was given the option of supporting the United States or working against it. Pakistan decided to join the front lines of the global fight against terrorism, despite challenges from other regional, sub-regional, and even international groups. Consequently, as a result of this war, Pakistan continued to suffer losses that eventually led to a security deficit and the deaths of 35,000 civilians. Regarding the loss of human life and the destruction of property, no nation has suffered as much as Pakistan. More than 15,000 soldiers have been injured due to Pakistan's involvement in the fight against terror, and the country has lost more than 6,700 members of its armed forces. The cost of the $78 billion in civilian casualties is also attributable to Pakistan. 

Regional Strategic Challenges

Since its inception, Pakistan has been subject to some strategic challenges in the region. Being sandwiched between India and Afghanistan, the nature of Pakistan's connections with both nations has had a significant impact on its perception of national security. Pakistan's three main threats at the moment are the ongoing threats from India, Afghanistan, and the evolving domestic situation. While there is an unresolved conflict over Jammu and Kashmir's status on the Indian Border, two of Pakistan's populous provinces have well-built ethnic and tribal knots over the border in Afghanistan. As a result, Pakistan's domestic politics continue to be deeply tied to its political interactions with its neighbors.

Kashmir Problem, Militancy, and the Indian Influence

Without question, the fundamental cause of the ongoing hostility between the two countries has been and in many aspects still is the Kashmir conflict. The state of Kashmir has seen bloodshed and a variety of problems since partition. The people of Kashmir have been persistently pushing for independence and speaking out for it. In Kashmir, there have been more than 100,000 fatalities and innumerable injuries. The Indian government has continually refrained from taking the writings on the wall seriously and has chosen to repress the movement through military means. India is investing a significant amount of hard cash in bolstering its armed forces because it considers itself one of the key participants in global politics and has demonstrated excellent economic performance. Pakistan is then under pressure to invest more of its limited resources in defense. The controversial Redcliff Award gave rise to the Kashmir issue between Pakistan and India. Pakistan has supported the local independence fight in Indian-occupied Kashmir, ever since it began in 1989 in response to Indian brutality. Pakistan has long been considered to be under the greatest threat from India. At Pakistan's eastern border and the Line of Control, there are numerous soldiers stationed. Across the LOC, there are frequently border infractions and gunfire exchanges. Also, the recently adopted Cold Start Doctrine by India compelled Pakistan's defense strategists to make appropriate preparations for a potential invasion. The Cold Start Doctrine was created by Chief Padmanabhan of the Indian Army. This strategy's ultimate objective was to use nuclear weapons as justification for offensive or preventative assaults against Pakistan. It was presented by him on April 28, 2004 (Shehzad & Zain, 2021). 

Afghanistan's Uncertainty

The security of Pakistan is significantly impacted by the instability in Afghanistan. In order to fight the Soviet Union, America used Afghanistan as a proxy state. When the Soviet Union fell, Afghanistan was abandoned in ruins with no real plans for reconstruction. It is now used as a battleground for proxy wars with nearby nations. Via its spy organization, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), India is aiming to utilize Afghanistan against Pakistan as a proximate state. Pakistan has been compelled to wage a proxy war against India in Afghanistan through the use of its intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). Up until December 1979, when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, the threat from Afghanistan did not reach alarming proportions. The relationship between Pakistan and Afghanistan has gone through numerous ups and downs since then. Everything changed after 9/11, making the situation much more difficult. There is no doubt that the population of Pakistan and Afghanistan hold a high affection for one another, but the ruling parties determine the policies. Powerful members of the Karzai government are well-recognized for having a great deal of sympathy for Pakistan's eastern neighbor, but they also seem to enjoy upsetting Pakistan. Since Pakistan's declaration of independence, six factors have had a constant negative impact on relations among the two countries. Rumors going unchecked regarding the Taliban's connections to Pakistan and their irregular adventuring are among these issues, as are the Durand Line's current status, Indo-Afghan relations, Afghanistan's geographic landlocked nature, the presence of foreign forces (such as those from the United States and NATO), and the unwelcome critical speeches given by Afghan leaders who unnecessarily denigrate Pakistan. Each of these problems has occasionally contributed negatively. Furthermore, Turkmenistan's gas can only be purchased after the situation in Afghanistan has stabilized. The upheaval in Afghanistan has had a substantial detrimental impact on the stability in FATA in addition to limiting Pakistan's access to Central Asian nations and harming Pakistan's potential as an energy trade corridor (Rumi, 2015). 

Throughout history, regardless of the type of administration in Kabul, Pakistan's relations with Afghanistan have been under a great deal of strain. The Kalashnikov era, drug culture, and smuggling in Pakistan were caused by the eleven-year Afghan war that began in 1979. Following a brief break in the 1990s' second half, the Afghan war continues to have a negative influence on Pakistan's security, particularly given the absence of comprehensive security measures along the Durand Line on both sides. The Kalashnikov culture, which was introduced to the country from Afghanistan in the 1980s, has added to the already existing turmoil. Society is awash in both legal and illicit weaponry as a result of the successive administrations' irresponsible actions. Criminals and ordinary people have access to a wide range of contemporary weaponry at affordable prices, which is clear evidence of this. According to some reports, criminal groups have access to more advanced weapons than the police have (Malik, 2018).

Security of China China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)

Since 1962, there has never been any conflict between Pakistan and China in their military or international relations. One of the best relationships exists between the two nations. One Belt One Road (OBOR) Initiative's multibillion-dollar lead project, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, is expected to deliver Pakistan an economic boom that will ultimately lead to political stability. The CPEC has improved Pakistan's standing internationally. In order to strengthen their commercial and development-related relationships, Pakistan and China must work together to secure CPEC, which is seen as a "game changer and lifeline" for Pakistan. Terrorism and Baluchistan's separatist activities are security risks to this project, but militancy poses the greatest danger. Indian involvement and concern over CPEC represent another threat. The building of CPEC infrastructure close to the Afghan border may be impacted by Pakistan's political unrest and its deteriorating security situation. The proposed CPEC is gravely threatened by the regional actors' fight for influence in Afghanistan in the wake of the US withdrawal (Mazhar & Goraya, 2019). The security of CPEC is currently even more important than concentrating on India. The main thing to keep in mind is that there shouldn't be any hostilities between the two nations. 

Internal Political Instability and Military Involvement

In Third World nations, it is not a new occurrence for the military to intervene in political affairs. Throughout Pakistan's history since its inception, the military has taken part in politics on several occasions. Pakistan has seen four military coups: October 1958, July 1958 (which was followed immediately by a "coup inside a coup"), July 1977, and lastly October 1999. In each instance, the army commander intervened to overthrow the civilian government during a time when political institutions were in disarray, policymaking was adrift, and the army chief was reacting to actions it suspected would be detrimental to the interests of the nation. The military has struggled to manage these institutions as a result of the dysfunction and inefficiency of civil institutions. For instance, the massive Water and Power Development Authority (WAPDA) was completely managed by the army in November 1998, when Nawaz Sharif's democratically elected government was in power. Giving the military control of the civil government would have significant political ramifications in Pakistan due to the country's multi-ethnic makeup. Giving these lucrative positions to military personnel has another detrimental effect that results in animosity, which in turn leads to internal unrest and the erosion of institutional growth (Safdar, 2004). Pakistan appears to struggle on both the governance and security fronts, despite being called a "security state." 

The governmental institutions of Pakistan have suffered as a result of the weak parliamentary democracy and the constantly shifting political landscape. Military rule has gradually evolved as a result of political unrest. There have been four martial laws in Pakistan, three of which were declared by military rulers and the fourth by a civilian ruler. Six of the eleven leaders of the state of Pakistan were either military officers or bureaucrats. Eight of the fifteen prime ministers have been ousted, among the 10 national assemblies, seven have been abolished, and five out of seven political parties have been outlawed during their collective three-dozen-year rule. Every government created its own independent agenda that ultimately resulted in the mutilation of state institutions and the shaking of the political system's foundation. Before serving out their full five-year term as required by the constitution, four successive governments have been deposed, primarily on the grounds of corruption (Safdar, 2004). Without the military and intelligence agencies' interference, which Zia had greatly increased, Benazir and Nawaz were unable to run the country. The army regarded itself as the protector of Pakistan; it thought it knew better than the politicians how to deal with the threat posed by India and how to win over foreign allies, including the United States, Saudi Arabia, and China (Cohen, 2011). 

Islamist Policies that Zia left Behind

To combat the forces that were waging war against Islam, its adherents, and its core values, defensive jihad was conducted. Religious seminaries' status in the country's political system was institutionalized by General Zia-Ul-Haq's inherited and deeply rooted jihad stance against the Soviet Union. This encouraged Kalashnikov (militant or violent) culture, religious extremism, and sectarian terrorism. These militant factions were kept in the dark regarding their long-term objectives other than creating an Islamic state in Afghanistan and throughout the world. These armed factions were reorganized started training facilities, and built an international network. It was determined that those who had received USSR-related training posed a strategic threat to Pakistan and its citizens. Zia's regime is infamous in Pakistani political history for violating human rights (Khan, 2019). Regarding Zia's jihadist and Islamization policies, President Musharraf reversed course. The idea of enlightened moderation was a novel one he offered. Under pressure from the Americans, he began to target terrorist groups and those fighting for freedom in the Afghan conflict. The holding of numerous referenda, emergencies, the weakening of the federation, the targeting of politicians through fascist policy, the deterioration of political institutions, assaults on the independence of the judiciary, and the encouragement of militancy and insurgencies in various parts of the nation are among the legacies of the former General Musharraf's regime. He was unable to create an all-encompassing national security strategy. He forbade various militant organizations. Yet, new names for these terrorist groups have developed.

Deterring Militancy and Military Expenses

The radical factions of political parties, either secular or religious, are one of the main issues for national security. There are 20,000 such seminaries in the state that offer education to the students who attend them. The Jamia Binoria in Karachi, Ganj Madrassah in Peshawar, and Dar ul Uloom Haqqania in Akora Khattak are notorious for housing jihadists for the Afghan-Soviet conflict. They are allegedly shown to be the main sources of militancy in the future. One observer claims that by 2002, Pakistan had 24 armed terrorist groups, or organizations prepared to wage violent jihad to further their goals. In response to the conflict between Pakistan and India over Kashmir, a sizable number emerged, frequently supported by entities connected to the Pakistani military, including its potent Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency (Sohail et al., 2016). Some people have also been inspired by a desire to aid the Afghan Taliban. Fewer people have actively encouraged sectarian bloodshed between Sunnis and Shias. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Pakistani authorities have taken steps to outlaw an increasing number of these organizations, while some analysts assert that some still have military sponsors. Many are banned again after resurfacing under different names. Some people sporadically run their operations under multiple names to try to fool the police. Most of them have "political wings". These groups' combat membership is typically estimated to number little more than a few hundred. Fighters from these organizations have traveled abroad to aid radical Islamic uprisings elsewhere in the world. Others, in turn, have included quite a few "foreign warriors" in their numbers. Most of the groups are said to have connections with al-Qaida, and it also has a few tiny Pakistani affiliates like Jundullah. Many thousands of people live in Pakistan illegally, and most of them continue to engage in criminal activity. Because of this, the country's civil society has been forced to turn its attention inward and does not contribute to the government's efforts to develop a security culture (Shehzad & Zain, 2021).

Pakistan experienced its strongest economic growth in more than ten years in 2005, partly as a result of strong expansion in the manufacturing and agricultural sectors, as well as the government's pro-growth macroeconomic policies. The economy grew by more than 6% in 2006. As a result, over the past few years, military spending has increased. The government allotted Pakistani Rupees (PKR) 250 billion to the defense budget in 2006–07, an increase of 3.7% from the year before; in 2007–08, a further 10% increase is anticipated, bringing the total to PKR 275 billion, or almost 15% of the overall national budget. While Pakistan's defense spending accounts for a bigger proportion of GDP, it is comparable to India's overall defense budget at about one-fifth of Pakistan's total defense spending. It is commonly accepted, however, that Pakistan's official defense budget does not accurately reflect the country's military spending because it leaves out several significant sectors of spending, such as military pensions, international military aid, foreign financial assistance for military procurement, and revenue from the military's own business holdings. For instance, the US agreed to provide Pakistan with a $3 billion package of military and economic aid in 2003, with almost half of the amount designated for military purchases through the US Foreign Military Sales Programme. Because of this lack of transparency, eminent analysts have been unable to reach an understanding of the precise nature of Pakistan's defense spending (Malik, 2018). Nonetheless, this sharp increase has drawn criticism from Pakistan's parliament. Opposition senators in the Upper House, the Senate, demanded a cap be put on the defense budget in response to the government's most recent budget request, citing worries about other domestic spending priorities and the possibility of an "arms spending race" with India Pakistan experienced its strongest economic growth in more than ten years in 2005, partly as a result of strong expansion in the manufacturing and agricultural sectors, as well as the government's pro-growth macroeconomic policies. The economy grew by more than 6% in 2006. As a result, over the past few years, military spending has increased. The government allotted Pakistani Rupees (PKR) 250 billion to the defense budget in 2006–07, an increase of 3.7% from the year before; in 2007–08, a further 10% increase is anticipated, bringing the total to PKR 275 billion, or almost 15% of the overall national budget. While Pakistan's defense spending accounts for a bigger proportion of GDP, it is comparable to India's overall defense budget at about one-fifth of Pakistan's total defense spending. It is commonly accepted, however, that Pakistan's official defense budget does not accurately reflect the country's military spending because it leaves out several significant sectors of spending, such as military pensions, international military aid, foreign financial assistance for military procurement, and revenue from the military's own business holdings. For instance, the US agreed to provide Pakistan with a $3 billion package of military and economic aid in 2003, with almost half of the amount designated for military purchases through the US Foreign Military Sales Programme. Because of this lack of transparency, eminent analysts have been unable to reach an understanding of the precise nature of Pakistan's defense spending. Nonetheless, this sharp increase has drawn criticism from Pakistan's parliament. Opposition senators in the Upper House, the Senate, demanded a cap be put on the defense budget in response to the government's most recent budget request, citing worries about other domestic spending priorities and the possibility of an "arms spending race" with India (Youngs et al, 2007). 

Baluchistan is in a State of Uncertainty

The province with the fewest population Baluchistan, is the largest in Pakistan. Southern Pashtoons and native Balochis make up its population. Afghan refugees, mainly Quetta, make up the majority of the Pushtoon population in north-western Baluchistan, who have grown in power and influence as a result of their population growth. The languages of Balochi and Brahui further split the Baloch group of tribes. Four other sub-groups of Baloch people exist: Marris, Bugtis, Bizonjos, and Mongals. According to some, Baloch society is characterized by "feudal militarism." There has been a fierce power struggle among the tribal chiefs. Tribal disputes and heavy weapon warfare show that to enforce its power in these insurgent territories, the provincial government has utterly failed. In the state, Baluchistan is crucial from a strategic perspective. With the addition of the Gawadar Port, its significance has grown strategically and internationally. There are numerous outside forces working to undermine Baluchistan. When the state is unable to fulfill the people's aspirations, radical groups frequently thrive. The situation in FATA, Karachi, and some areas of Baluchistan is still far from desirable. The situation in Baluchistan is also the result of many factors, including complaints about economic exploitation, underdevelopment, the belief that provincial resources are being used unfairly, the desire for political influence, and covert outside interference. The foreign actors exploit the enmity between local factions. The Baluchistan Liberation Army (BLA) and the Baluchistan Republican Army are the main groups engaged against the security forces. This province is experiencing secessionist militancy, which is an entirely separate dimension of anti-Pakistan militancy (BRA). It is widely held that regional and international actors, namely India, who are present in Afghanistan, are what feed the insurgency in Baluchistan. Baluchistan's secessionists aspire to create a separate state of Baluchistan and achieve total independence from Pakistan (Hassan et al, 2016).

Terrorism

Terrorism and the continuous war against terrorism are two more major sources of security issues. Some people associate terrorism with various connotations. According to American officials, it might refer to extremists using violence against Americans. The Indians might view that as Pakistan funding terrorist incursions into Indian-held Kashmir (IHK). For the Pakistanis, it may pertain to the wrongdoings and excesses committed by the Indian security forces against the Kashmiri population in Indian Held Kashmir, the provocation of anti-Muslim riots and Muslim sectarian massacres in which the state apparatus is directly or indirectly implicated, the undesired terrorist operations of professional foreign agents in Pakistan, and the supporting and promoting of local dissident components by providing money and material support. Every nation's main objective is to safeguard an adequate defense for its homeland. No country enjoys having its security threatened. In terms of its territory and institutions, as well as the security of those claiming to speak for the state territorially and institutionally, states in the Third World (which also includes Pakistan) are cantered in character. Pakistan is being treated as a front-line state in a game that makes it both an ally and an enemy of the United States. Pakistan has evolved into a battleground in a blind war since 9/11. Every day that goes by makes it harder to determine who is opposing who (Muzaffar et al, 2016). 

Radical groups emerged in and around Pakistan throughout the 1980s and beyond as a result of Pakistan's containment of the Soviet Union and the war on terrorism. Subsequently, these extreme organizations that were labeled "terrorists" caused havoc in Pakistan (Khan & Amin, 2017). One frequent accusation leveled against Pakistan is that the Taliban launched their attacks on ISAF and NATO forces from Pakistani soil. It is unavoidable that there may be some Taliban followers in the Pashtun region of Pakistan. In addition to having a sizable deployment of forces, it has also seen the spread of terrorist activity across the country and has been and is now dealing with the detrimental effects of terrorism.

Legal Frameworks Against Terrorism

Since the 1970s, Pakistan has been aware of terrorism and special courts (military courts). Under the General Zia regime, the Prevention of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act of 1975 was changed twice, allowing the special courts to hear cases including crimes. Its statute was utilized by both the military dictatorship under General Zia and the civilian administration of Mr. Bhutto. In order to prevent terrorism and sectarian conflict, and to provide swift justice for terrible crimes, a comprehensive anti-terrorist act was approved in 1997. Government officials published the Anti-Terrorism (Amendment) Ordinance in 1998. The new amendment altered the anti-terrorist court judges' terms of office, methods of appointment, and methods of dismissal. The federal government declared an emergency in the area on October 17, 1998, and published the Pakistan Armed Forces Ordinance as a result of the murder of Hakim Muhammad Saeed, the former governor of Sindh, and the deteriorating law-and-order situation in the provincial capital of Sindh. This edict limited civilians' liberties by giving the army a legitimate reason to re-establish law and order (Cohen, 2011). 

Poor Educational System & Ethnic Issues

The deeply split educational system in Pakistan is a significant contributor to the nation's internal issues. According to reports, Pakistan has four different kinds of academic systems: government-run schools, independent schools connected to Boards of Intermediate and Secondary Education, independent schools connected to the education system based in the United Kingdom, and religious seminaries (Madrassas). These various institutes generate pupils of various categories. Those who receive their education at madrassas view individuals who attend public or private schools as outsiders to Islam, while those who attend public and private schools view Madrassa students as radicals. In Pakistan, much like in many other underdeveloped nations worldwide, education is not essential. Pakistanis only have a literacy rate of 40%, and there are sometimes no public schools in rural areas. Providing free education to underprivileged children is a crucial social service provided by the madrassa system today. Nonetheless, there are some madrassas that offer free accommodation, food, and clothing in addition to free tuition. However, there are two different aspects to the problem with madrasa education: the first is the standard of instruction in giving the students the basic skills they need to support themselves, and the second is the affiliation of some madrasas with radical militant groups that incite their students to fight internationally or in sectarian strife. These are two distinct problems that require two distinct solutions (Safdar, 2004). Water allocation, financial resource allocation, and natural resource management have been the subject of conflict between the provinces in Pakistan. Pakistan's economy has deteriorated as a result of sectarian and ethnic division brought on by this alone. From its founding, ethnicity has posed the biggest threat to Pakistan's integrity. It is also known as "provincialism" or "regionalism" in official Pakistani terminology. Pakistan is still a developing country. In Pakistan, each province has its own history, and culture, which inspires ethnic pride. In the multi-ethnic nation of Pakistan, several ethnic groups have long fought for recognition and recognition of their rights. In comparison to the element "our," the elements "mine" and "yours" are more predominant. Its eastern wing had previously been lost due to political failure, provincial imbalance, ethnic uprising, and insurgency. Even now, there is a comparable level of unrest present throughout the rest of Pakistan. A worrisome situation has resulted from inter-provincial disputes and ethnic clashes inside areas situation.

Developments in Politics Since 2014

The numerous facets of security in Pakistan are now in jeopardy as a result of the post-September 11, 2001, plunge into GWoT. Pakistan's internal security and its exterior security are intertwined. On March 19, 2013, the Anti-Terrorism (amendment) Ordinance, 2013, was presented. This edict was also a result of the anarchic state that Pakistan as a whole had descended into. 

Now, Pakistan has undergone a political transition, making it a potentially stable democratic state. Politically, the nation is more aware, and the people anticipate more from the leaders. The new administration promises to address the external issues in the area. Defense, both internal and foreign, is currently Pakistan's top concern, Apart from the multiple threats to national security that Pakistan faces. The growth of terrorism because of America's invasion of Afghanistan has significantly worsened the nation's security situation. Although the security situation in Pakistan has undeniably improved since 2014 due to the military operation Zarb-e-Azb in Pakistan's Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA)  and North Waziristan. Pakistan has prioritized the peripheral security. Both internal and external threats are present in Pakistan. The first-ever National Security Policy (NSP) 2013, which was torn between military directives and discourse, initially offered the policy recommendations. Military actions in federally administered tribal areas resulted from the breakdown of talks with the Tehreek-e-Taliban (TTP). Following the APS (Army Public School) tragedy on December 16, 2014, a national resolution was revived, and a National Action Plan was created on the 24th of December, 2014 (Latif & Adil, 2022). 

Pakistan's government launched its National Internal Security Policy (NISP) for the years 2018 to 2023 in June. This policy report is the second of its kind to be published during the time that the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) has held power. The NISP began looking at developments throughout the relevant time period, anticipated security challenges, and potential alternatives in 2014. In this report, the highest challenges to Pakistani national security are listed as being the Tehreek-e-Taliban-Pakistan (TTP), the Islamic State (IS) existence in Afghanistan and potential spillover into Pakistan, the return of rebel fighters from Syria and Iraq, fundamentalism in the academic system, and cyber warfare. In addition to these new difficulties, terrorism, sectarianism, extremism, and other conventional and non-traditional security issues were also identified as the most pressing security concerns in NISP 2014, and are still present. The 2018 study names a number of additional factors as important contributors to Pakistan's insecurity, including young alienation and discontent, restrictive identity narratives, a shortage of social fairness and the rule of law, regional inequities, and a failure to hold people accountable. The new policy is more comprehensive than NISP 2014 in scope. The Programme lists numerous strategic aims and targets, including the establishment of the rule of law, the creation of a shared vision, the promotion of social justice, and the preservation of political stability (Nabeel, 2018).            

Regarding threats, security is a requirement for any state, including those that are internal, external, traditional, non-traditional, and changing. As a result, it demands a comprehensive national security strategy, which is a crucial requirement for the existence of the country. Developing national security policies is an ongoing process based on the creation, application, and use of all facets of national power. Every component of national security is equally crucial to both military and economic security. The approach must therefore prioritize human security, which will ultimately result in national security. Pakistan did not have a written National Security Policy, in 2005 until this point. On December 27 and 28, 2021, the Prime Minister of Pakistan presided over both the Federal Cabinet and the National Security Committee. Both bodies have now adopted a draught policy. Dr. Moeed Yusuf, Pakistan's national security advisor, who was in charge of creating and delivering the nation's first national security plan, described it as a "historic success." He claims that Pakistan's NSP is distinguished by being "citizen-centric with economic security at the core." It covers every facet of traditional as well as unconventional security. It will now act as the primary document for all policies pertaining to all aspects of national security (Shamsi, 2022).

Conclusion

Pakistan hasn't been able to develop a thorough national security strategy since its foundation and dealt with a number of issues. These issues turned into roadblocks in the development of state security policy. There were some geostrategic limitations like the Cold War, the commencement of the new Cold War between China and the US, or the New Great Game, major power politics in the region, some global strategic limitations such as the Cold War and Pakistan security priorities, the 9/11 incident and Pakistan security priorities, some regional strategic limitations such as the Indian factor, Kashmir issue, militancy, and instability in Afghanistan, and some national strategic limitations such as military involvement in politics. As a result, governments have always been concerned with solving these issues and have given little thought to developing a national security strategy. With considerable improvement in political stability, the PPP government's five-year mandate ended in 2013. The PTI government has finally finished creating Pakistan's comprehensive national security strategy as of 2022. However, the above-mentioned factors contribute to the hindering of the comprehensive National Security Policy that needs to be addressed with effective policy recommendations. 

References

• Pakistan hasn't been able to develop a thorough national security strategy since its foundation and dealt with a number of issues. These issues turned into roadblocks in the development of state security policy. There were some geostrategic limitations like the Cold War, the commencement of the new Cold War between China and the US, or the New Great Game, major power politics in the region, some global strategic limitations such as the Cold War and Pakistan security priorities, the 9/11 incid

• Akbar, M. (2011). Pakistan's Foreign Policy: Internal Challenges in New Millennium. Berkeley Journal of Social Sciences, 1-11.
• Cheema, P. I. (2012). Security threats confronting Pakistan. In Security outlook of the Asia Pacific countries and its implications for the defence sector (pp. 127-141). National Institute for Defence Studies. https://www.nids.mod.go.jp/english/publication/joint_research/series9/pdf/09.pdf

• Cohen, S. P. (2011). The future of Pakistan. The Brookings Institution.

• Khan, A. F. (2019). Understanding national security: A Pakistani perspective. Margalla Papers, 21, 150-157. https://margallapapers.ndu.edu.pk/site/issue/download/14/98
• Latif, A., & Adil, A. (2022, 2 28). Pakistan's new National Security Policy: Test lies in implementation. Anadolu Agency. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/pakistans-new-national-security-policy-test-lies-in-implementation/2517726
• Malik, S. (2018). Security Sector Reforms in Pakistan: Significance, Challenges and Impediments. Strategic Studies, 1-21.
• Mazhar, M. S., & Goraya, N. S. (2019). External Challenges to Pakistan's National Security. Journal of the Research Society of Pakistan, 117-135. https://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/history/PDF-FILES/12_56_1_19.pdf
• Mazhar, M. S., & Goraya, N. S. (2019). External Challenges to Pakistan's National Security. Journal of the Research Society of Pakistan, 117-135. https://pu.edu.pk/images/journal/history/PDF-FILES/12_56_1_19.pdf
• Nabeel, F. (2018, August 2). National Internal Security Policy 2018-2023_ a critical assessment. Daily times. https://dailytimes.com.pk/276539/national-internal-security-policy-2018-2023-a-critical-assessment/
• National Security Policy. (2005, November). Retrieved from DCAF Backgrounder.
• Rumi, R. (2015). Charting Pakistan's Internal Security Policy. United States Institute of Peace Special Report, 19. https://www.usip.org/sites/default/files/SR368-Charting-Pakistans-Internal-Security-Policy.pdf
• Safdar, N. (2004, December). Internal security threats to Pakistan (Master's thesis). Naval Postgraduate School Monterey.
• Shamsi, Z. U. (2022, January 3). Significance of National Security Policy of Pakistan. Daily Times. https://dailytimes.com.pk/863102/significance-of-national-security-policy-of-pakistan/
• Shehzad, N. K., & Zain, O. F. (2021). Analysis The impact of national security policy and security challenges on the citizens of Pakistan. ANNALS OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND PERSPECTIVE, 2(2), 419–429. https://doi.org/10.52700/assap.v2i2.74
• Sohail, A., Mahwish, B., & Sumbal, H. (2016). Pakistan’s internal security dilemma: strategic dimension. Global Social Sciences Review, I(II), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.31703/gssr.2016(i-ii).01
• Yasmin, S., Khan, A. U., & Jaspal, Z. N. (2017). The national security policy paradox in Pakistan: Strategic constraints, ramifications, and policy recommendations. The Dialogue, 12(1), 15-36.
• Youngs, T., Lunn, J., & Taylor, C. (2007, September 13). Pakistan’s political and security challenges. House of Commons Library.