Decision-makers and cynics

Difficult situations demand difficult decisions, but can only be made when people, decision-makers are on same page

There is always something at stake, to state the obvious; wars are never a win-win solution. The question is how much are we ready to give away to win this war, which is almost ours now? I use the word ‘almost’ because there are a large number of people, who still think we have dragged it home; then there are those who provide the much asked for ‘political will’ to support the idea and then those who keep our rough history in sight and remain sceptical in willing to do so. The underlying reason here is not only the lack of trust between institutions and their individual gains and losses but also the fact that failure after failure to rein in terrorism has reduced our thought process into mere cynicism.

To be more specific, incidents of violence on a larger scale do not just happen. Not being able to explain why they happened will make the act of violence seem arbitrary, difficult to explain and open to interpretation, which is bound to cause more confusion and result in anger. On the other hand, if the solution only addresses part of the problem, the results, as logical consequences, will also be partial, especially for a society that’s already as divided as ours, not just politically but ideologically as well. The National Action Plan ought to have been more revolutionary than reactionary and should have included more than just emotional support and certain legislative amendments. This war is not just physical but ideological as well. While terrorists are killed and hanged, it’s the ideology that creates more terrorists.

One particular decision, which has caused a massive public uproar in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, after the 16/12 attack in Peshawar, is the decision to arm teachers in schools. We’ve seen a number of confused decisions with the government all over the place, issuing orders and then taking them back under public pressure. Nobody denies the fact that schools and teachers need to be protected and trainings in self-defence, as well as dealing with emergencies, are the need of the hour. But arming teachers is not the solution. The introduction of the AK-47 into culture during the Afghan war has left its impact in ways unimaginable that we at least have two dozen words to refer to the Kalashnikov in the tribal areas, which is a dozen more than the words we have to describe colours in the Pashto language. For every decision taken, there are two basic questions that need to be asked — how beneficial is this for the people for whom the decision is taken? And even more importantly, how will this help in controlling terror attacks?

In all fairness, it’s a very difficult situation, the kind which probably has no precedent. There is an international dimension to it as well. While difficult situations demand difficult decisions, those can only be made when the people involved and the decision-makers are on the same page. Unfortunately, that has not happened the way it should have and while petrol, economic woes and power outages will keep the masses distracted, the dark shadows of terrorism will force us to gather under the same roof again and again. A permanent resolve does require a clearer understanding of the consequences of decisions made so far; there will be questions which will need to be answered if this war is to be actually won and trust regained. If not, the cynicism will grow to a point of disbelief.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 30^th,  2015.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.