PTM and a myopic approach to crisis management
PTM is a product of conditions in which people begin to nurture deep and abiding hostility towards the state
Manzoor Pashteen PHOTO: EXPRESS
Despondency generates hostility, anger, acrimony. Driven by frustration, people have sought and found other avenues to vent their feelings of disgust and hopelessness. All dissident movements find their roots in social inequalities, disharmony, and denial of rights, persecutions, ethnic or religious bias or wars.
The movement for freedom in Kashmir manifested itself in the 1990s only when the government began to suppress voices calling for more autonomy. Other movements across the world have taken the plunge into defiance and resistance only when doors of peaceful resolution to the disputes were shut on them.
The PTM takes its roots in an environment of despair and disillusionment following the emergence of militant outfits and a state crackdown. The militant groups appeared on the tribal landscape only when the military was inducted into the area in late 2001 by Gen Pervez Musharraf who took the ill-advised step only to seek the US patronage and to legitimise his illegal government.
With the induction of the military, the long-established administrative and judicial system was jolted and nearly dismantled. That vacuum and absence of an authority long respected by the tribes created ideal conditions for the evolution of terror groups like the Tehreek-e-Taliban. Once created, the new outfits began to attract all those who were living on the margins of society and who began to see some hope of a future and of an identity.
As a ‘clearance ‘operation began in the tribal area, there were reports of widespread abuse of authority and wholly unwarranted use, in some cases, of force. That resulted in colossal damage to properties — houses, villages, shops and other infrastructure — besides huge loss of lives of innocent civilians.
The PTM is a product of conditions in which people begin to nurture deep and abiding hostility towards the state. A rational and a down-to-earth approach would have been to engage the group and all those harbouring such deep-seated grievances into sustained negotiations to ascertain their views and the reasons for their defiance of authority.
Unfortunately, even after having found the reasons for their outrage and anger, no steps were taken to address their concerns and demands. For instance, there was no commission of inquiry to ascertain the number and identities of those who went missing, and whether they are alive or dead. No commission was appointed by the government to ascertain not only the magnitude of the destruction of property but also whether there were large-scale excesses in the use of force to chase or apprehend the terrorists. There was no inquiry either into the large number of cases where deaths were caused either by aerial action or by the use of shelling or gunfire.
Had these issues been addressed, there would have been a noticeable change in the conduct and behaviour of the rank and file tribesmen who would not lend any support to such elements who would try to destabilise the area even after corrective measures had been taken to meet their demands.
Even now action, after inquiries, must be initiated. It is long overdue. But having said that, there is no justification whatsoever for any group or party to malign state institutions. Institutions are not to blame. There is no institution that has a deliberate policy of causing pain and suffering to the people. Institutions are meant to safeguard and protect lives and to promote peace and harmony. In the garb of projecting one’s travails and agonies, no one would be allowed to paint state institutions in a colour that would arouse hatred and rebellion.
Equally importantly if further punitive actions are taken against those who feel genuine anguish and anger, there will inevitably be a severer reaction. Any use of force would unleash more radicalisation and more extremism.
And since there is a groundswell of anger already in the tribal area against large-scale destruction of property and infrastructure, any more use of force would be a huge miscalculation. It would deepen hostility and sow the seeds of permanent discord that would be a nightmare for future administrations.
Those in authority need to take a pause.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 3rd, 2019.
The movement for freedom in Kashmir manifested itself in the 1990s only when the government began to suppress voices calling for more autonomy. Other movements across the world have taken the plunge into defiance and resistance only when doors of peaceful resolution to the disputes were shut on them.
The PTM takes its roots in an environment of despair and disillusionment following the emergence of militant outfits and a state crackdown. The militant groups appeared on the tribal landscape only when the military was inducted into the area in late 2001 by Gen Pervez Musharraf who took the ill-advised step only to seek the US patronage and to legitimise his illegal government.
With the induction of the military, the long-established administrative and judicial system was jolted and nearly dismantled. That vacuum and absence of an authority long respected by the tribes created ideal conditions for the evolution of terror groups like the Tehreek-e-Taliban. Once created, the new outfits began to attract all those who were living on the margins of society and who began to see some hope of a future and of an identity.
As a ‘clearance ‘operation began in the tribal area, there were reports of widespread abuse of authority and wholly unwarranted use, in some cases, of force. That resulted in colossal damage to properties — houses, villages, shops and other infrastructure — besides huge loss of lives of innocent civilians.
The PTM is a product of conditions in which people begin to nurture deep and abiding hostility towards the state. A rational and a down-to-earth approach would have been to engage the group and all those harbouring such deep-seated grievances into sustained negotiations to ascertain their views and the reasons for their defiance of authority.
Unfortunately, even after having found the reasons for their outrage and anger, no steps were taken to address their concerns and demands. For instance, there was no commission of inquiry to ascertain the number and identities of those who went missing, and whether they are alive or dead. No commission was appointed by the government to ascertain not only the magnitude of the destruction of property but also whether there were large-scale excesses in the use of force to chase or apprehend the terrorists. There was no inquiry either into the large number of cases where deaths were caused either by aerial action or by the use of shelling or gunfire.
Had these issues been addressed, there would have been a noticeable change in the conduct and behaviour of the rank and file tribesmen who would not lend any support to such elements who would try to destabilise the area even after corrective measures had been taken to meet their demands.
Even now action, after inquiries, must be initiated. It is long overdue. But having said that, there is no justification whatsoever for any group or party to malign state institutions. Institutions are not to blame. There is no institution that has a deliberate policy of causing pain and suffering to the people. Institutions are meant to safeguard and protect lives and to promote peace and harmony. In the garb of projecting one’s travails and agonies, no one would be allowed to paint state institutions in a colour that would arouse hatred and rebellion.
Equally importantly if further punitive actions are taken against those who feel genuine anguish and anger, there will inevitably be a severer reaction. Any use of force would unleash more radicalisation and more extremism.
And since there is a groundswell of anger already in the tribal area against large-scale destruction of property and infrastructure, any more use of force would be a huge miscalculation. It would deepen hostility and sow the seeds of permanent discord that would be a nightmare for future administrations.
Those in authority need to take a pause.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 3rd, 2019.