The use of drones in the war is no longer new. From the battlefields of Ukraine to the brief confrontation of India-Pakistan in May, unmanned aerial systems have constantly molded the way conflicts are fought. Once confined to the arsenals of the state military, the drones have now become part of the non -state actors tool kits as well. This transformation has been gradual but deliberate, since militant groups learn to adapt commercially available platforms or assemble improvised systems for their tactical needs.
This global evolution has found its echo in the tribal districts of Pakistan, where Islamist militants have begun to move from an occasional experimentation to more consistent and coordinated drones operations. Change is not simply technical. It carries a political tone, pointing to local populations and state actors such as militants are able to match the technological edge of formal security institutions.
Pakistan security forces were already using drones for surveillance, recognition and precision orientation. But the appearance of similar technology in militant hands has complicated the equation of the battlefield. The heavens on the conflict zones now have an ambiguity: an overload of drone birds can belong to both sides, and this blur of lines increases operational and psychological uncertainty.
For residents, the growing presence of drones is disturbing. Many remain insecure if the militants or militants fly the machines they listen. This uncertainty constantly corrodes confidence in the state’s ability to protect them. Fear is not abstract. Farmers delay work in their fields, merchants close their blinds earlier than usual and travel between the Village is restricted. The constant buzz imposes a psychological cost, making life feel precarious even when an attack is not produced. Over time, such conditions expand the social distance between communities and the State.
The appearance of drone technology in militant hands has complicated the battlefield equation.
The last months have seen an intensification of militant violence in KP. According to local monitoring groups, only July registered 28 militant attacks in the province, several of them high profile. The Bannu Miryan Police Station was under repeated aerial assaults. The deadliest incident was in Orakzai, where eight paramilitary staff lost their lives. This was particularly significant because Orakzai had long been considered one of the safest districts compared to the southern belt, a perception that is now eroded as the militant influence extends to the north.
The southern districts remain tense, with touches of imposed on multiple locations. On July 24, Jandola’s subdivision of the Tank district was placed under a closure of one day, while similar restrictions were applied in Birmal Tehsil of the Bajo Waziristán del Sur due to credible threats. In Bajaur, a three -day curfew preceded an important security operation aimed at cleaning militant strengths. These measures underline not only the fragile security environment but also the tension in the state capacity in the content of the threat.
For now, the war of militant drones in Pakistan remains in its formative phase. The precision is inconsistent, and much of the activity still leads to the characteristics of experimentation. However, security officials believe that the trajectory is clear: as militants gain confidence and refine their techniques, both the frequency and lethality of these attacks will probably increase, a pattern already seen in other conflict theaters.
For these groups, drones offer versatility. They can deliver improvised explosive devices or small ammunition with relative precision, using low -cost quadcopters that are easy to obtain or assemble. They can assign control points, record patrol times, identify weak points in security perimeters and detect indirect fire objectives or suicidal attacks, broadcasting live video to real -time command equipment. Drones are also used for logistics purposes, in movement of SIM cards, batteries, medical supplies or technical components between cells in areas where soil movement is too risky. Beyond their functional role, drones serve as psychological war tools, producing aerial images for propaganda, amplifying the perception of militant reach and eroding the sense of state control.
The state’s response is beginning to adapt to this emerging threat. Towards the end of July, the police in KP deployed anti-Drone technology for the first time during an operation in Bannu. An anti-Drone gun sent from Peshawar successfully interrupted UAV’s hostile activity, forcing militants to abort the movements. The authorities now intend to expand the deployment of such systems in the southern districts, integrating them into countermencing operations. Police officers express optimism that this capacity will allow faster and more precise responses and will help mitigate the evolutionary tactics of militant groups.
The responsibility of these attacks is not always simple to establish. In Bannu, most incidents have been attributed to the Hafiz Gul Bahadur group. However, in several cases, perpetrators remain unidentified. The security forces have generally blamed TTP, but the group, in some of its official statements, has denied operational participation, claiming that it is still in the process of acquiring drone technology.
Abdul Sayed, a Sweden -based researcher offers a more nuanced account. He points out that since 2024, the images of drone strikes have been distributed in silence through the unofficial media channels of TTP, while official communications have avoided direct recognition. This changed in 2025, when the TTP Ittehad faction began to openly claim drone attacks. The measure caused criticism of the PRO-TTP voices in Telegram, who argued that public recognition was strategically little solid. However, Ittehad persisted and, finally, TTP leadership did the same, marking a change in propaganda posture.
From discreet experimentation to open statements, the evolution of the use of militant drones indicates that these systems are increasingly rooted in the internal security scene of Pakistan. The country’s security challenges were already complex and multifaceted, and the introduction of drone technology adds a new layer of complication. Although Islamist militants in the tribal districts of KP are the most frequent users, there is also evidence that suggests that Baloch’s insurgents have adopted this technology, as indicated by several video clips and the informed terrorist attacks.
If it is not controlled, the propagation of the use of drones could deepen distrust between state and local populations, further destabilizing fragile districts.
The writer is security analyst.
Posted in Dawn, August 10, 2025
