Then you can you please provide some insight on the factors on why FATA was a peaceful region before 9/11. I know that Govt. writ was non-existent but there was no militancy and suicide attacks even though I read that there were presence of foreigners as well as a considerable population of Afghan refugees. Therefore don't you think that the point of cultural heritage and customs etc contributing to militancy is not valid here since you can argue that the very same tribals were living peacefully before 9/11.
Well, FATA was never peaceful, this is kind of a lullaby or a folk lore that we are made to listen during all this time (1947-2001). The GoP had no writ in FATA, as you said, and a sole political agent used to represent the Federal government. In essence, FATA, until present operation, was only part of Pakistan in name, and was otherwise governed and ruled by the tribal elders. As I mentioned earlier, FATA has always and exclusively thrived on war economy, if the war was not in Afghanistan, it was fought within FATA, among the tribes on petty issues, land disputes, honor killings and so forth. What was happening in FATA never came out, no media presence, only through the reports by the political agent, and reports were not made public. So it is not correct to assume that FATA was peaceful pre 9/11. It was wild wild west (actually north west) of Pakistan with no law enforcement, no law, no judiciary nothing. This is no secret that all sorts of criminals, murderers, and smugglers would find refuge (of-course in return of some 'favors') in those areas for once in FATA, they were effectively beyond the reach of the state. Motor vehicles were (still) stolen from every part of Pakistan and smuggled into FATA to get the engine and chassis numbers removed, and re-sold either in Afghanistan or Pakistan. Darra Adam Khel was (perhaps till today) the largest illegal weapon manufacturing/smuggling hub. All these are but the signs of a territory where there is no such thing as law. So militancy was always there but suicide attacks was a later phenomena which, again, was devised not to target FATA but rest of Pakistan.
Post 9/11 things got drastically changed and I agree that the influx of Afghan insurgents made things worse but who were these insurgents? were they a mixture of foreign fighters and locals together or only locals...?
Now this is the crucial question. They were foreigners such as Arabs, Tajiks, Uzbeks and there were so-called 'locals'. Now do we really have a definition of 'locals'? Local of where? of Afghanistan or of Pakistan? Problem is, people living across the Durand's line never recognized this line as an international border and continued to consider region across the Durand's line as one land. Hence, they freely moved across the Durand's line, no Passport or visa. Since the families lived in this fashion across the line, they were/are both Afghan and Pakistani and at the same time vice versa. When insurgents moved into FATA, they never thought or considered they were outside Afghanistan, since for them Afghanistan includes all Pakistan. Same is the approach of most of Pakistani Pashtoon who think Pakistan is nothing but Afghanistan that was artificially carved out by the British. They never apposed the influx of Afghans and they never will. Things are very complicate here and unless Pashtoon of Pakistan begin to consider themselves as Pakistanis, and their relatives across the border as Afghans, things wont change for good.
