The Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP), through two pamphlets and a video released within a week in Urdu, Persian, and Pashto, has declared what it calls a declaration of war against Baloch armed groups, Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), Baloch Liberation Front (BLF), and their sympathizers. But beyond the dramatic rhetoric, ISKP’s campaign appears less like the result of a battlefield confrontation and more like a calculated move in the realm of political messaging.
By branding Baloch armed groups as “apostate proxies” of the United States, the Afghan Taliban, and Pakistan, ISKP appears less focused on engaging insurgents militarily and more interested in seizing the ideological narrative of the region’s conflict.
The alleged trigger, a reported BLA-led ambush on an ISKP camp in Balochistan’s Mastung during Ramadan, remains unverified. No Baloch group has claimed responsibility, and local sources in Mastung, where ISKP claims nearly 30 of its fighters were killed, report no such large-scale incident. If such a bloody attack had occurred, it would have been widely known among locals and authorities.
ISKP has yet to answer critical questions: when and where did the clash happen? Where are the bodies? Where were they buried? If ISKP claims the incident occurred during Ramadan, in March, then why has it remained silent for three months without uttering a word? Why did ISKP choose to attack Akhtar Mengal in Mastung through a failed suicide bombing? What explains this sudden shift in tactics and targets? Could ISKP be pursuing a mission that is very different from what it publicly claims?
While a minor skirmish may have taken place, as Mastung has long been an ISKP stronghold, with at least 13 attacks since 2016, including Pakistan’s deadliest suicide bombing in 2018, the group’s claim of mass casualties is almost certainly exaggerated for propaganda impact.
ISKP has maintained a foothold in Mastung since the collapse of Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ), whose remnants were looking for an umbrella and joined its ranks. In Mastung, Kalat, Bolan, and Sibi, both ISKP and Baloch nationalist groups have historically operated in parallel, targeting state forces without clashing with each other. The abrupt pivot from uneasy coexistence to open confrontation thus raises serious questions.
What stands out even more than the supposed battlefield developments is ISKP’s overtly political signaling. The group has issued direct threats not just against armed Baloch groups but against nonviolent rights activists like Dr. Mahrang Baloch and Manzoor Pashteen, peaceful human rights activists with no militant affiliations. This inclusion suggests that ISKP aims not simply military dominance but ideological control. By lumping peaceful human rights activists in with armed insurgents, ISKP appears to be advancing a narrative that aligns disturbingly with the Pakistani state’s long-standing efforts to blur the line between terrorism and legitimate dissent.
This is not a declaration of war in any conventional sense. It is a narrative assault, an effort to redefine the Baloch and Pashtun struggles for justice, autonomy, and rights as non-Islamic, heretical, and foreign-funded. This narrative assault is a key part of ISKP’s strategy, as it allows the group to present its actions as part of a broader ideological struggle rather than mere acts of violence. In this sense, ISKP’s statements function more as political propaganda than military doctrine.
No response from Baloch groups may be strategic. Responding would provide oxygen to ISKP’s claims and allows group’s visibility. Silence allows them to avoid validating a narrative that casts their nationalist struggle as a front in a global jihad.
ISKP’s admission of its bases in Mastung, ironically, lends some weight to the Afghan Taliban’s long-standing assertion that Islamabad tolerates or shelters ISKP elements. If the group truly operates training camps deep in Balochistan, that raises uncomfortable questions for Pakistan, which continues to deny its presence.
Ultimately, ISKP’s’ war declaration’ is less about retribution than about narrative control. By presenting itself as the ideological gatekeeper of legitimacy in the region, ISKP wants to undermine local movements and reinforce a framework where dissent, whether armed or peaceful, is identical with apostasy and foreign conspiracy. This narrative control could have significant implications for the Baloch and Pashtun struggles, which can potentially underme their legitimacy and complicate their justice, autonomy, and rights struggle.
This is not merely a prelude to more violence. It is the opening salvo of a narrative war, one that threatens to silence legitimate voices under the cover of religious absolutism and extremist distortion. The consequences of this narrative war could be far-reaching, potentially leading to the suppression of legitimate dissent and the reinforcement of a narrative that equates all forms of opposition with terrorism.