When a First World country faces a terror attack, especially if it is an Islamist one, the entire world mourns for them.
On 25 October, a police academy in Quetta, Pakistan, was the target of an Islamist terror attack which left 61 dead. Yet, there was no outpouring of grief as was the case with the Orlando night club shooting, and other attacks on the West.
Pakistan has long claimed to the country worst affected by terrorism, however, the rest of the world has had little empathy.
So are the people in Pakistan’s streets more vulnerable to terror attacks than the rest of the world?
If these graphs are not convincing, consider this – the number of people who died in Islamist terror attacks in Pakistan was more than four times that in India, USA, Bangladesh, and France combined.
The Global Terror Ranking Index maps countries every year on the basis of safety. It takes into account all the terror attacks that happen around the world, many of which are attributed to radical Islamist organisations.
Iraq and Syria are grappling with war, which makes them the most unsafe countries to live in.
Yemen is another nation that’s in the grip of a civil war, yet it features below Pakistan, a nation with no declared situation of an internal or external war.
.png?auto=format%2Ccompress&fmt=webp&width=720)
After those figures, the Global Peace Index’s numbers should not come as a shock.
Yes, Pakistan may be a state that funds terrorism, but the world should not be indifferent to the civilians dying there.
The country has been crying itself hoarse, saying it is as badly affected by terror as any other nation, if not manifold more.
Should the life of a person be deemed less worthy because of the actions of his/her government?
(Source: satp.org, visionofhumanity.org, state.gov,)
(At The Quint, we are answerable only to our audience. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member. Because the truth is worth it.)