Fighting the militancy
It doesn’t mean that terrorism has come to an end in Pakistan; it means that terrorism has suffered major damage.
Addressing the graduation ceremony of the Pakistan Military Academy in Kakul on April 23, Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani said that “the armed forces have been successful in breaking the backbone of the militants”. The big message in his speech was the optimism the general expressed about his ongoing campaign against terrorists aligned with al Qaeda, whose presence the ISI in August last year declared as “the top internal threat to the country”. He clearly wants the nation to shed all misgivings caused by the recent demonstration of a mismatch between the declared objectives of the US in Afghanistan and the Pakistan Army in Pakistan.
There is no doubt that the nation and General Kayani stand together, but this unity is related to the recent quarrel between General Kayani and the US military command over how Pakistan should tackle its side of the war against terrorism. The political scene is no different. Politicians of all stripes stand behind Kayani in his refusal to blindly obey the advice of the US military leaders on how Pakistan should proceed with its strategy against terrorism.
Unfortunately, the country’s internecine politics has also taken advantage of Kayani’s defiance. One example is the drone-related statement of Chief Minister Punjab Shahbaz Sharif before his China visit, which sought to compete with the more outspoken anti-American stance of the so-called Islami Jamhoori Ittehad being created against his party.
Not too far removed from General Kayani’s statement in Kakul in terms of time, the Taliban hit back in Lower Dir in the Malakand Division, causing unacceptable casualties in a region that many in Pakistan thought was pacified by the army. The case of Bajaur is even more remarkable in the sense that the army operation there has been covered by the media and the Taliban threat there has also been pushed back. Some observers insist that, at night, sections of Bajaur fall back into the hands of the Taliban. The three-year ongoing war against Mangal Bagh — the warlord of Khyber Agency with effective outreach into Peshawar — is also hardly over yet.
The Pakistan Army is operating against the terrorist warlords in Orakzai and Mohmand. If you count the successful hits the army has achieved against the militants over the past few months, the terrorists have clearly lost hundreds of their killers. Yet it is very difficult to say that the two agencies have been cleared of all militant threats to the nation; and that includes the normally administered cities of Bannu, Kohat and Hangu, out of which Kohat is Pakistan’s major air force base as well as a cantonment.
So can we say that the back of the Taliban militants has been broken in Pakistan? First, let us be clear about the meaning of the phrase. It doesn’t mean that terrorism has come to an end in Pakistan; it means that terrorism has suffered major damage, after which it will not be able to rise to its former levels of violence. Can we say that we have reached a stage where the way forward will only be characterised by victories against the Taliban and al Qaeda?
General Kayani may be faced with problems of military logistics and other strategic complications but one element of the conflict he has perfectly under control,and that is civilian opinion about how he should proceed against terrorism in the coming days. There is no doubt that the high level of anti-Americanism in Pakistan is indirectly a support to his position which is now increasingly distant from the strategy that the Americans want to follow.
Most analysts have written to back the stance General Kayani has adopted, but one consistent supporter, considered Pakistan’s foremost authority on the conflict, wrote this on April 24: “Sooner or later, Pakistan’s security forces would have to launch operations in North Waziristan, not only due to persistent US demand but also on account of the fact that this tribal agency has become the centre for militants attacking targets all over Pakistan.” The current lull — despite the Lower Dir raid — could be a typical breathing space that the al Qaeda-Taliban combine needs to get its next batch of explosives and suicide bombers in place.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 26th, 2011.
There is no doubt that the nation and General Kayani stand together, but this unity is related to the recent quarrel between General Kayani and the US military command over how Pakistan should tackle its side of the war against terrorism. The political scene is no different. Politicians of all stripes stand behind Kayani in his refusal to blindly obey the advice of the US military leaders on how Pakistan should proceed with its strategy against terrorism.
Unfortunately, the country’s internecine politics has also taken advantage of Kayani’s defiance. One example is the drone-related statement of Chief Minister Punjab Shahbaz Sharif before his China visit, which sought to compete with the more outspoken anti-American stance of the so-called Islami Jamhoori Ittehad being created against his party.
Not too far removed from General Kayani’s statement in Kakul in terms of time, the Taliban hit back in Lower Dir in the Malakand Division, causing unacceptable casualties in a region that many in Pakistan thought was pacified by the army. The case of Bajaur is even more remarkable in the sense that the army operation there has been covered by the media and the Taliban threat there has also been pushed back. Some observers insist that, at night, sections of Bajaur fall back into the hands of the Taliban. The three-year ongoing war against Mangal Bagh — the warlord of Khyber Agency with effective outreach into Peshawar — is also hardly over yet.
The Pakistan Army is operating against the terrorist warlords in Orakzai and Mohmand. If you count the successful hits the army has achieved against the militants over the past few months, the terrorists have clearly lost hundreds of their killers. Yet it is very difficult to say that the two agencies have been cleared of all militant threats to the nation; and that includes the normally administered cities of Bannu, Kohat and Hangu, out of which Kohat is Pakistan’s major air force base as well as a cantonment.
So can we say that the back of the Taliban militants has been broken in Pakistan? First, let us be clear about the meaning of the phrase. It doesn’t mean that terrorism has come to an end in Pakistan; it means that terrorism has suffered major damage, after which it will not be able to rise to its former levels of violence. Can we say that we have reached a stage where the way forward will only be characterised by victories against the Taliban and al Qaeda?
General Kayani may be faced with problems of military logistics and other strategic complications but one element of the conflict he has perfectly under control,and that is civilian opinion about how he should proceed against terrorism in the coming days. There is no doubt that the high level of anti-Americanism in Pakistan is indirectly a support to his position which is now increasingly distant from the strategy that the Americans want to follow.
Most analysts have written to back the stance General Kayani has adopted, but one consistent supporter, considered Pakistan’s foremost authority on the conflict, wrote this on April 24: “Sooner or later, Pakistan’s security forces would have to launch operations in North Waziristan, not only due to persistent US demand but also on account of the fact that this tribal agency has become the centre for militants attacking targets all over Pakistan.” The current lull — despite the Lower Dir raid — could be a typical breathing space that the al Qaeda-Taliban combine needs to get its next batch of explosives and suicide bombers in place.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 26th, 2011.