Deteriorating security condition, escalating insurgency, militancy, Talibanization and worsening state of law and order are the immediate common issues; Afghanistan and Pakistan are passing through these days. The troubled relationship Pakistan experiences with Afghanistan on its western border and India on its eastern border, though are related with decade long distaste between them, yet serve none interests. The neighbors must learn it that “friends can be changed not neighbors”.
The consecutive successful terror plots undertaken by insurgents and militants depict the degree of strength they have acquired over the length of time. Pakistan is presently passing through mirage of problems. One of them is irreversible growth of insurgency, terrorism and Talibanization. In both the states, if not majority, Taliban whilst proposing table talk too claims terror plots.
Over the past weeks, through the month of Ramazan, the Taliban unleashed a terrible bloodbath, leaving close to 100 dead and many others wounded, in Parachinar, in Quetta and elsewhere. Political leaders are working out finding ways dealing with a security nightmare that has left them very badly crippled by arranging All Party Conferences.
Evidently Pakistan has to deal this menace unilaterally, whilst Afghanistan has to seek US and Pakistan’s support with inclusion to regional powers to get to a congenial solution of this very genuine issue.
Subsequent to successive terror plots, in Pakistan the issue of talks with the Taliban is open again. For some time, there were indications that the idea may have been shelved, given reports that negotiations were not favored by the military, which has been locked in a fierce battle with the militants for some years now. The result of this is that seven out of nine tribal agencies, all of which had been with the Taliban when the operation began, are now under military control.
But it is also clear that the political push for talks is a strong one. The Awami National Party (ANP) chief, Asfandyar Wali, in a switch from his party’s previous stance, has said talks should be held — but that a military operation would be required if they failed. The ANP, which fared even worse than expected at the recent polls, has of course, been hit hard by its previously tougher stance on the Taliban, with scores of leaders and supporters killed in bombings and targeting its rallies.
The Jamaat-e-Islami’s (JI) line on the matter is more predictable, with party Chief Munawar Hasan offering to facilitate the negotiation between the militants and the government. The Taliban have said that they were willing to talk to the government, suggested the JI or Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam-Fazal (JUI-F) act as the mediator. Imran Khan, head of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), has consistently backed talks, and advocated a divergence from the ‘US war’ on terror, while the Pakistan People’s Party Parliamentarian (PPPP) led by Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari and the Moutahida Qoumi Movement (MQM) led by Altaf Hussain had through their campaigns opposed negotiations. We can assume, for now, this is the view these parties will take forward to the All Parties Conference (APC) on national security planned by the Pakistani government.
This conference in itself has become an issue. The PTI holds that it should not be held till the government has devised its national security policy, arguing that it would be pointless till then. The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N, Led by Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif, sees the APC as a means to help it devise a plan on what is a huge national concern. The meeting between all major parties had been postponed in July to allow Imran Khan to return to the country and participate in it. The input of the party forming the government in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa (K-P) is, of course, important. Mr Khan’s hesitation over attending the APC and putting forward his views is somewhat hard to understand.
The security complexities are obviously many. After a meeting with Baluchistan Chief Minister, Dr Abdul Malik Baloch, the Pakistani interior minister, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, has sought patience as a policy is formulated. The dynamics of security in Baluchistan are obviously different from that in K-P, and present difficult challenges. The same is true of Karachi, a city facing collapse in terms of law and order. To tackle the problem as it stands at the national level, the Taliban have to be dealt with. But as we plan on how best to achieve this, parties also need to keep principle in mind.
Seemingly the government and political parties wander about the issue instead of focusing at the issue. A unanimous consensus exists on countering terrorism; however, the rout to its partial or complete annihilation differs from party to party.
Confidentially stating, adoption of diplomatic means and force are the two permissive means that let Pakistan ultimately counter terrorism. The diplomatic means can be put to action given the terrorists mould them in accordance to the constitution of the country and turn them as a law abiding citizens. Provided the terrorists to abandon terrorism and bloodshed and transform their militant power into political strength exercised within the jurisdiction of constitutional provisions, should be ensured legal safegaurds. The rotten image democracy, in Muslim countries created in their minds has darkened the gloomy picture and increased the trust deficit – it might not persuade them withdraw their old practiced activities and join a peaceful democratic struggle instead. The government and political parities having surrendered to their condition to talks might owe a solution demanding a heavy price of constitutional aversion, is not practically acceptable. Consequently, there seems a little chance the table talk succeeds, provided the divergent agenda the government and Taliban owe hardly coincide each other.
The other only option left with parallel progression of diplomatic channel is the relentless use of force. The first step to move ahead involves a loud condemnation of terrorism and terrorist activities by citing holy Koran verses supporting this purpose.
The subsequent step includes dismantling the safe havens of terrorists –anybody found extending moral, political or economical support to a terrorist or a group must be taken into custody and tried for terrorist act. Bringing the latest technology into use all the clandestine means the terrorist draw financial backing must be uncovered and curtailed. The terrorists willingly joining peace process and giving up their former malicious activities should be given vocational training and economic incentives.
The democratic and political forces in the parliament must constitute an autonomous counter terrorism department supplemented with fully equipped and trained personnel empowered to take immediate action against any person or group charged with the act of terrorism followed by substantive counter terrorism legislation. An anti-harassment legislation based on ones religious, racial and ethnic inclination must be enacted, in that pursuit the exploitation of religion, sect or ethnicity to harm others must be discouraged and treated a punishable act. The Pakistani government should rely on the use of force against those elements referring to force against innocents’ civilians on any ground. The menace of terrorism can be countered prioritizing the aforementioned course of action.