Policy Intervention in FATA: Why Discourse Matters

Abstract

Despite years of wide-scale counterterrorism measures in Pakistan's FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas), the injection of substantial funds, and the "close" collaboration between the United States and Pakistan, the ugly truth is that the extremism and militancy in FATA continues to recruit members. Moreover, there is little indication that the killing of Usama bin Ladin will have any significant effect on reducing support for militancy. While taking stock of these realities, this article will not seek to rehash the many successes and failures of the counterterrorist operations in FATA. Instead, its purpose will be to argue that while the causes of, and recruitment into, militant organizations are complex, the literature has paid too little attention to the relationship between discourse, social consensus, and terrorism. Arguably, the accommodation of, and sympathy for, terrorist violence emerges from specific discourses that legitimize and normalize these actions. Consequently, part of the solution requires that policies consider the substance of popular perceptions, representations, and discourses. In short, the article is concerned with directing attention away from a crisis-driven and short-term vision in FATA and moving toward acknowledging the value of long-term and sustainable peace.