On July 9, 2025, in the Sur-Dakai area of Duki District in Balochistan, nine innocent civilians were executed after being forcibly removed from a Punjab-bound bus. They were targeted not for what they did, but for who they were, Punjabi laborers. The Balochistan Liberation Front (BLF) is the perpetrator of this terrorist attack.

BLF’s ethnic-targeted violence meets legal thresholds for Foreign Terrorist Organization designation.

In the aftermath of this horrific act, questions arose, not only about the nature of terrorism, but about the selectivity of those who speak on justice. Among them was Imaan Zainab Mazari-Hazir, a lawyer and activist, who used the moment not to condemn the perpetrators, but to suggest that media coverage was ethnically biased. The absence of any reference to the BLF, its tactics, or the lives lost left many deeply troubled. This is not just a debate about one individual’s framing of an incident. It is about how the silence or selective articulation of influential voices is used to legitimize violence.

Who Is the BLF and Why Does It Matter Internationally?

The Balochistan Liberation Front is a banned terrorist organization in Pakistan, with operational methods indistinguishable from those of the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA), already designated as a terrorist organization by the United States, United Kingdom, and others. Both groups have resorted to targeted killings, bombings, assassinations of civilians, and sabotage of infrastructure, with consistent patterns of ethnic targeting. The killing of over thirty passengers of Jaffar Express at Bolan, near Sibi, Balochistan in last March by BLA is yet another grim reminder of terrorist outfits’ brutalities against unarmed citizens.

While BLF remains unlisted by the US, UK, or UN, its tactics, networks, and leadership overlap significantly with those of the BLA. Its ideological positioning, violence against unarmed civilians, and transnational propaganda operations qualify it under the same legal and moral thresholds that led to the BLA’s designation.

Selective silence on BLF’s crimes risks legitimizing terrorism and distorts justice.

In UK law, under the Terrorism Act 2000, proscription applies to organizations involved in serious violence against civilians to influence government or advance political causes. The US State Department applies similar criteria under Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, particularly when attacks threaten regional or international security. By these standards, and based on verified patterns of conduct, BLF meets the definitional threshold of a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).

The Role of Recognition: A Question of Ethical Consistency

What complicates the situation further is that Imaan Mazari was recently awarded the “Young Inspiration Award 2025” by the World Expression Forum (WEXFO) in Norway. This recognition, granted for her advocacy of the rule of law and justice, now faces serious scrutiny. Can silence in the face of mass civilian killings, and the equating of terrorism with counterterrorism, reflect the values this award intends to uphold?

In European legal precedent, such matters are believably not taken lightly. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has held that speech condoning or trivializing terrorism may not fall under the protection of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Leroy v. France, 2008). International recognition mechanisms, such as those operated by WEXFO, have a responsibility to ensure that their awards are not leveraged to reinforce narratives that indirectly shield or excuse non-state violence.

A Diplomatic Imperative: Listing the BLF

Beyond recognition, the international community must also reflect on the legal vacuum that allows the BLF to operate without the stigma of proscription in key jurisdictions. While BLA has been justly sanctioned by US and UK, BLF’s role in ethnic cleansing-style violence, civilian assassinations, and regional destabilization is well-documented.

International awards must avoid empowering narratives that excuse non-state violence.

Given the growing BLF-BLA alignment, especially in operational zones like southern Balochistan and cross-border sanctuaries, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the United Nations Security Council must consider evaluating BLA and BLF for formal designation under their respective counterterrorism frameworks. Such action would not only enhance regional stability, it would signal that terrorism against civilians is condemned in all its forms, regardless of the political or ethnic identity of the perpetrators or victims.

What Cannot Be Overlooked?

“Imaan Mazari’s attempt to equate cold-blooded terrorism with lawful counterterrorism is not only intellectually dishonest, it is a disservice to every innocent life lost at the hands of terrorists. Facts must not be sacrificed at the altar of political activism.” In moments of violence and grief, clarity matters. Activism must not serve as a rhetorical haven for those who wield terror to advance political aims. Silence, when loud enough, can distort justice, and recognition, when misaligned, can tarnish the very ideals it seeks to elevate.

Formal international censure of the BLF and BLA is critical for regional security and ethical consistency.

If we are to take human rights, ethical advocacy, and international security seriously, then individuals who rationalize terrorism cannot be held up as symbols of justice, and organizations like the BLA and BLF must face formal international censure.
Terrorism by any name, in any language, against any people, must be condemned without caveat.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.