Today at 5:31pm
The statesman must think in terms of the national interest, conceived
as power among other powers. The popular mind, unaware of the fine
distinctions of the statesman's thinking, reasons more often than not
in the simple moralistic and legalistic terms of absolute good and
absolute evil.
Hans Joachim Morgenthau
It is past seven years since US War against terrorism in Afghanistan.
Rather than assume the nature of large scale counter insurgency
operations supported by intelligence networks, it has degenerated into
a military intervention with force levels insufficient even for peace
enforcement. The composition of US and allied troops and the manner in
which they operate raise questions. Just like the 90s when there was
no desire to curtail Osama or his brand of Islam, there appear no
visible political engagements in tandem with such selective operations
to suggest that a negotiated end is in sight. As the focus shifts from
Afghanistan to Pakistan, attrition through time delay is the nature of
this war. Pakistan's establishment was neither prepared nor
contemplated such a contingency when it gave un-stinted support to
USA.
Across the Durand line, the conflict has gripped the entire NWFP and
now threatens Punjab. Some may argue that this 'Burnout Policy' has
served well to precipitate resistance in Pakistan; to identify pockets
of militancy; and its support amongst people and the establishment. To
that extent, one may partially agree but add that in doing so, USA has
wilfully chosen to draw Pakistan into a chaos akin to Afghanistan in
the 90s. These hardliners also elect to ignore that these seven years
have served to create and increase anti-US sentiments in Pakistan.
This dynamic itself has the potential to provide the water in which
the fish need to swim. Pakistan is in the midst of difficult choices.
The coinage AF-Pak means that Pakistan is now relegated to a strife
ridden ungovernable state and therefore a legitimate war zone; Durand
Line means nothing; and USA will exercise its right of direct and
indirect military intervention in Pakistan. It also reflects that
Pakistan's policy of appeasement of USA has failed to cater to
Pakistan's legitimate concerns, leaving no choice but to hedge its
interests. The vanguard of this new policy will be the symbolic drone
attacks widened into new areas, increased pressure on the political
and military establishment and more violence, particularly in Punjab.
In such state of affairs, Pakistan's leadership, economics and
national integration are equally vulnerable. In the background and
away from the eyes of observers, the dirty game of intelligence and
counter intelligence operations will continue with ferocity and mutual
betrayal. Politicians ready to sell their mothers will be engaged and
mutual erosion of the state of Pakistan will continue.
Even an ordinary Pakistani has allied with the growing perception that
this so called war for democracy, human values and popular
enfranchisement is in fact a frontal assault on Pakistan's political,
defence and intelligence establishments. There is also a growing
perception that USA in cahoots with political minimalists of Pakistan
is on a dangerous road to curtail the over arching role of Punjab in
the politic body. If agendas such as these are accomplished,
Pakistan's geography and the nuclear story will become a tale of the
past. Pakistanis will be their own Brutus.
Rather than react to every bit of news, Pakistanis need to understand
that it is the backstage activity that affects us most. For long, US
state and non state actors have run in overdrive to send mixed signals
to Pakistan. Pakistan's fragile political system, political
immoralities and quest by some to put self before the state provide a
happy hunting ground for such notions to breed. Amazingly, this
activity peaks just before exchanges of high profile visits.
Dramatisation follows a familiar pattern. The most recent to cite are
President Obama's desire while in Czech Republic for a nuclear free
world; report of a US research organisation suggesting recognition of
Pakistan's nuclear capability; sharp shooters in State Department,
Pentagon and CENTCOM focussing on criticism of Pakistan Army and ISI,
interspersed with drone strikes. The recent hall mark was the visit to
Pakistan by US special envoy Richard Halbrooke and Admiral Mike Mullen
wielding sticks and carrots and select academicians doing round of
universities least to mention media mouth pieces. The epitome was the
press conference by Halbrooke and Mullen in India with an implied
threat to Pakistan.
In this context, much written by me on the nature of Pakistan's
present and future war and attrition is validated. I would now expand
my assessment to two very important issues that I mentioned for record
but did not deliberate earlier.
If eradication of militancy is indeed the goal of USA and its allies
in Afghanistan, then why are they not contemplating a full fledged
counter insurgency operation in the areas they control? Despite all
the advantages of technology and precision, Taliban ascendancy in
Afghanistan is increasing. NATO and US forces are confined to well
guarded urban centres and venture out on selective basis in which more
civilians than militants are killed. All open spaces are dominated by
militants. Present military composition in the area suggests that USA
will remain in the region for a long duration. This in turn
complicates Pakistan's security and concerns need to be addressed.
USA is here to stay for a long time. Their need for pivots against a
rising China and resurgent Russia demand that they control strategic
spaces that threaten these rising centres of power as well as deny
them strategic access to the Indian Ocean. Pakistan at cross roads of
geography is also in the midst of conflicts that geography creates.
Just like Islam was used to threaten the godless communism, the
radical Islam is now being used in the generic names of Al Qaeda and
Taliban to further long term geo-strategic objectives. As the notion
of AF-Pakistan assumes currency we shall see the addition of LET and
others to this coinage. India will be used to downgrade Pakistan's
military, agrarian and economic potential. Space for political
manoeuvring and bargaining will be gradually denied. Rise of militancy
in Pakistan serves this game plan and policy makers in Pakistan ought
to realise this.
Pakistan is also vulnerable economically. Surging oil prices followed
by an international economic meltdown have added to Pakistan's
fragility. Home grown speculators and liberal economic managers have
played a treacherous game with Pakistan's sovereignty. A fiercely
competitive domestic economy that withstood thirteen years of nuclear
sanctions has been reduced to consumerism. Trillions of free floating
rupees have been lost out to economic liberalism. Pakistan's most
competitive export sectors have since been edged out. Devaluation of
rupee, rising electricity and energy in-puts have made production non
competitive. Industrial led growth is now a fairy tale. Given the
situation, these difficulties are most likely to worsen. Industrial
layoffs are endemic and chances of complementary alliances for
economic gains dwindling. In due course these could lead to
discontentment, labour unrests and breed radicalisation. The most
affected are the industrial centres of Lahore, Faisalabad, Gujranwala,
Sialkot and Karachi. Though Pakistan ultimately suffers, the worst hit
is Punjab, the bread basket of Pakistan.
Insofar as Punjab, there appears commonality of interests between the
political minimalist of Pakistan and USA. It is Pakistan's biggest
province in terms of population, economic growth and representation in
the national fabric. It is argued that even in vulnerable times such
as these the federation needs to be strengthens albeit more powers to
the smaller federating units. In backdoors, devolution of Punjab is
seen most expedient. In the post 2008 dispensation, Punjab was singled
out for manipulation and political instability. Had it not been for a
national movement spearheaded by lawyers, it would have deteriorated
to chaos. Federalism aside, Punjab must be seen as the heart of
Pakistan.
Pakistan's sectarian militants known for their ferocity inside
Pakistan and as far away as Eastern Europe, sit in Punjab, like a time
bomb ticking away. Over the course of thirty years, these hardliners
have learnt the art to manipulate many masters and to be controlled by
none. Rise of militancy in Punjab's urban centres is no coincidence
and a tell tale sign of events to come. The murder of Daniel Pearl is
a testimony to where their support and ideology comes from. The
intelligence agencies and the government need to keep a vigil on these
militant groups, their off shore lines of funding, local businesses
and foreign handlers from all across the world. Intelligence
establishments world over have used them when needed; yet the axe must
fall only on those who align with the ideology of Pakistan.
The damage to Pakistan's interests runs much deeper than can be
imagined. Succinctly, India that had no role in the anti Soviet war of
the 80s has emerged as a preferred ally of USA. Indian security and
intelligence establishments benefit from a substantial presence in
Afghanistan and create unrest in Pakistan through diverse armed
groups. The irony is that though USA is quick to level allegations
against Pakistan over links with militants, they appear least
responsive to complaints against what India does.
Obama, during the election campaign won the hearts of the Muslims in
USA by raising the Kashmir issue. However, after assuming office and
under pressure from India, he has given no indications of addressing
the issue.
On the question of cooperation with India in Afghanistan, USA chooses
to completely ignore the historical perspectives and the fact that all
Indo-Pakistan issues are linked to Kashmir. While India continues to
stage manage a battle on Pakistan's reverse front as a tit for tat on
Kashmir, USA remains adamant that India and Pakistan have a common
enemy and must cooperate. The message is clear. Succumb or we make a
lesson out of you.
Restoration of the post 2 November Judiciary is a good omen and other
positive developments must lead on from here. For Pakistan, a national
reconciliation could begin through consensus on immediate security
issues including militancy, Pakistan's role as an ally of USA and
economic hedging. The government of Pakistan must draw its strength
from the people. After all,
"National Power rises from a relatively stable foundation of
geography, through different gradations of instability to its peak in
the fleeting elements of national character and morale"
Hans Joachim Morgenthau
Pakistanis from all across the spectrum need to rise to the challenge.
It is indeed the time to eat grass.
Brigadier Samson Simon Sharaf is a retired officer of Pakistan Army
and a political economist.
