After a long 80-day road blockade in the troubled district of Kurram, peace committees comprising local and tribal leaders were established under the January 1 peace agreement. With their guarantee, convoys carrying essential supplies were to be allowed to pass. However, things turned ugly soon after the agreement.

On Monday (Feb 17), over 30 trucks carrying food supplies to Kurram were looted, while 19 trucks were set on fire after a convoy came under attack in the Bagan, Charkhel, Ochat, and Mandori areas. This brazen act of violence has once again highlighted the fragile security situation in the region. The growing uncertainty and chaos necessitate an in-depth analysis of the origins of the conflict that has long troubled Kurram.

At the heart of the Kurram conundrum lie unresolved disputes that frequently escalate into sectarian conflicts. Disputes over land, water, and resources have existed for decades, but in recent years, these issues have increasingly been viewed through a sectarian lens. Though tribal conflicts are prevalent in nearly all parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP), the absence of sectarian underpinnings has ensured that they remain localized. Kurram, however, stands apart due to its deep-rooted sectarian tensions, making every local conflict a potential flashpoint for wider violence.

Significant land disputes exist between rival villages like Pewar (Shia) and Gido (Sunni), as well as Ghoz Garhi (Sunni) and Kunj Alizai (Shia). Likewise, Kharoti and Pewar are engaged in a water dispute, while Badama (Shia) and Parachamkani (Sunni) have a longstanding conflict over forest resources. These disputes are further aggravated by the lack of a formalized conflict resolution mechanism, allowing grievances to fester and turn violent.

Kurram’s unique geography and demographic makeup have also played a significant role in exacerbating tensions. The region’s proximity to Afghanistan has made it particularly vulnerable to cross-border influences, including the influx of militants, illegal arms, and foreign funding. Kurram has long been a strategic location, serving as a gateway between Pakistan and Afghanistan. As a result, it has not only been affected by sectarian conflicts but also by broader geopolitical struggles.

Additionally, the region’s demographic composition has fueled tensions. The Shia majority is concentrated in Upper Kurram, particularly in Parachinar, while access to the rest of the province is through Lower Kurram, which has a predominantly Sunni population. During unrest, this critical route is often blocked, leading to severe shortages of essential goods, medical supplies, and fuel. Such blockades have led to humanitarian crises, further deepening sectarian divisions and perpetuating cycles of violence.

The reckless use of arms and the failure to disarm warring factions, despite multiple peace agreements, has complicated the situation in Kurram. The region remains heavily weaponized, with armed groups controlling strategic locations, setting up bunkers, and engaging in periodic skirmishes. Even in times of relative peace, the mere presence of these weapons serves as a constant reminder that violence can erupt at any moment.

The February 17 attack on food convoys is a stark example of how armed groups continue to operate with impunity. The failure to secure key transport routes underscores the inability of peace committees and government forces to enforce agreements on the ground. Without a concerted effort to disarm local militias and enforce state writ, Kurram will remain vulnerable to such violent flare-ups.

In addition to the physical threats on the ground, a new and dangerous dimension of the conflict has emerged—digital propaganda. Hardline digital activists and sectarian agitators are exploiting social media to spread misinformation, deepen sectarian divisions, and incite violence. Fake news, conspiracy theories, and manipulated narratives are fueling unrest, making it increasingly difficult to achieve peace.

The unchecked spread of misinformation has turned social media into a battleground where sectarian narratives are amplified. Hate speech, inflammatory videos, and fake reports often incite further violence, leading to real-world consequences. Without a concerted effort to counter this digital radicalization, misinformation will continue to inflame tensions and disrupt reconciliation efforts. Government authorities and civil society must actively work to monitor and curb the spread of sectarian propaganda before it causes further damage.

Under the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR), the clause of collective responsibility once mandated that local tribes ensure security on roads and in their respective territories. However, with the merger of the tribal areas into Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the responsibility for maintaining law and order has shifted entirely to the government and security forces. While this transition was essential for mainstreaming the region, it has also created a power vacuum.

Traditional tribal structures that once upheld local security are no longer functional, and the state’s mechanisms are still adapting to the region’s complex dynamics. The weakening of tribal jirgas and local governance systems has removed a critical conflict-resolution mechanism, leaving many disputes unresolved. Meanwhile, the government’s law enforcement agencies have struggled to fill the void, resulting in a situation where neither traditional nor state institutions can effectively maintain order.

The Kurram conundrum is a complex mix of historical disputes, sectarian tensions, geographical challenges, and governance failures. While peace agreements and tribal interventions have provided temporary relief, they have failed to address the root causes of conflict. The persistence of armed groups, the growing influence of digital propaganda, and the lack of strong governance continue to fuel unrest.

As of recently, nearly 50 miscreants have been apprehended, and the crackdown against perpetrators of violence continues. For lasting peace to take hold, there must be a collective effort from both the government and local communities. Community leaders must actively promote reconciliation and dialogue. Disarmament, economic development, and countering sectarian narratives must be prioritized to break the cycle of violence.

Laiba Khan is a research analyst and specializes in nuclear studies and conflict management. She also holds a degree in International Relations from the University of Peshawar.