Why did militants attack Pakistani Christians?

More than 80 people were killed yesterday leaving a Christian church in Pakistan, potentially derailing the new government's plan to hold talks with the Pakistani Taliban.

Anjum Naveed/AP
Pakistani Christians participate in a demonstration to condemn a suicide attack on a church in Peshawar, Pakistan, Monday, Sept. 23, 2013 in Islamabad, Pakistan.

At least 81 people were killed, and 120 were injured, when two suicide bombers detonated their vests as Christian church-goers were leaving Sunday Mass at the All Saints Church in the northern city of Peshawar.

Jandullah and Junood-ul-Hifsa, two militant groups known for their connections to of the Pakistani Taliban, have taken responsibility for the attack, saying that it was retaliation for drone strikes carried out by the United States in the country's northern belt. The Pakistani Taliban has condemned the bombings, leaving observers confused as to who is behind the killings, according to the BBC.

The bombings highlight the militants’ attempt to grab headlines, says Amir Rana, director of the Pakistan Institute of Peace Studies. They want to ensure that they remain a relevant actor in Pakistani and global politics. 

“The data tells us that the number of attacks and casualties has decreased in the second quarter of 2013. If you hold that up against what we have seen in the last few months, there is a clear indication that militant groups are carrying out more sensational operations that will ensure that they get on the front page,” says Mr. Rana.

There were three high profile attacks in June – one against a busload of female students and a medical complex in the southwestern city of Quetta and the other against nine foreign mountain climbers in the northern Gilgit-Baltistan territory. These incidents got international attention. Gilgit-Baltistan has long been considered safe for tourists, and no one was expecting an attack at such a neutral location as a hospital.

“They are picking targets that are more controversial. They want more spectacular, attention-grabbing attacks,” says Rana.

Christians are one of the most poor and vulnerable groups in Pakistan. They have consistently been politically, economically, and socially marginalized, and frequently have been targeted in acts of violence. However, this is the first time in a decade that militant groups have carried out such a large-scale attack against the Christian community.

Analysts say that this attention seeking has succeeded in throwing a wrench in the new government's plans to shore up peace in the country's northern belt.

The latest attack came just two weeks after the prime minister won support from parties across the political divide to open up fresh negotiations with the Pakistani Taliban, known to have 30 militant factions under its wing.

During a stopover in London on his way to the UN General Assembly in New York, Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said that the attack could stall the government's intended negotiations with the Pakistani Taliban.

Some worry that not having talks could backfire, meaning more violence in the northern belt and more attacks against minority groups. 

The fact that the Pakistani Taliban has presented a set of demands, such as release of prisoners, on the basis of which they are willing to start talks, indicated that there might be a way forward say some observers.

But, cautions Cyril Almeida, a political analyst based in Islamabad, “The state has been the one pushing these negotiations. In all of our debates and talk of speaking to the militants, there is no real indication that they are interested.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Why did militants attack Pakistani Christians?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today