Finding a new strategic direction
As Pakistani narrative appears to have reached a dead end
The writer is a former chief secretary of K-P and a former ambassador. The views expressed here are his own
The Pakistani narrative appears to have reached a dead end. For too long, the country has been led to believe that helping Kashmiris to secure their right of self-determination is a cause for which every conceivable price must be paid; that Pakistan remains incomplete without Kashmir and that Kashmir is an unfinished agenda of the Partition, etc.
However, for how long did Islamabad pursue the goal of seeking strategic depth in Afghanistan? Promoting groups, factions and leaders who were thought to be more aligned with our ‘core’ interests was a policy relentlessly implemented.
The domestic scene was characterised by politicians advancing their petty partisan or personal goals. Betrayal, incompetence, jingoism, swapping party affiliations remained the order of the day as democracy took a back seat. In a sign of the decline of institutions as many as four military interventions were seen between the late fifties and nineties---not surprisingly all four were validated by the judiciary.
Institutionalised system of accountability ---one of the strongest pillars of any system of good governance was badly missing from the Pakistani discourse. Accountability, when it happened, was used as tool for harassment of political rivals rather than as an instrument to safeguard and promote the cause of good governance.
Rulers in Islamabad continued to ignore the voices emanating from Balochistan for more autonomy. That led to the estrangement of Baloch nationalists. This sentiment for autonomy was handled with little prudence and caution. The use of force was the preferred option. That led to widespread discontent.
In the perpetual tug of war for advancement of vested interests, the core sectors of the economy were overlooked or received scant attention. Imagine an agrarian economy ignoring the vital sector of agriculture as far as crucial segments like soil conservation, prevention of water wastage, modernised irrigation system, saving farmland, reducing pollution, better drainage systems, provision of better seeds, fertilisers and introduction of more income yielding crops, etc.
Not only that there was much less emphasis on human resource development and its key component, that is, provision of quality education. There was hardly any incentive or stress on research in the fields of science and technology, medicine, agriculture or engineering. The rulers, civilian or military, were either busy with more ‘’important ‘’ activities or simply failed to comprehend the relevance or need for such ‘mundane’ goals.
The goal of acquisition of nuclear weapons was laudable given Pakistan’s vulnerability in a conventional war with its arch-rival that is five times stronger. Possession of nuclear weapons made the country safe and provided deterrence against miscalculation by any country. Added to the arsenal were tactical nuclear weapons as further deterrence against a limited military engagement with a rival many times more powerful.
But the acquisition of nuclear weapons should have been used as a powerful and potent force for peace making. It should have given Pakistan a breathing space in which to lay down the foundation for sustainable peace with India, speaking from a position of near-invincibility. Instead this important milestone was used as brandishing sword to confront a neighbour. In the garb of that, militant outfits in Kashmir were supported and encouraged to carry on their struggle for liberation.
Peace with India has relevance in the sector of climate change that poses a grave danger to the economies of the two countries, besides affecting the health of the population. Both India and Pakistan are exposed to multiple hazards like avalanches, earthquakes, glacial lake outburst floods in the Himalayas in the north, droughts and floods in the plains and cyclones that originate in the Bay of Bengal and the Arabian Sea. Both India and Pakistan are severely water-stressed countries. The two neighbours need to confront the menace by combining strategies and actions on a permanent basis.
The Himalayan ecosystem sustains 1.5 billion people and this system is in danger. Further indifference to the gravity of the situation would spell disaster for the two countries. It is only through collective endeavours that the fragile ecosystem can be saved — by coordinating strategies on climate change hazards, by conserving water, controlling seepage, reducing pollution, saving farmland, afforestation, exchange of data, joint research projects undertaken to study the potential hazards caused by environmental and other factors.
Posterity will not forgive the leaders, media and scientists for not highlighting the quantum of the risks and for failing to coordinate efforts to confront the looming catastrophe by undertaking joint efforts in a bid to save the future for one-fifth of humanity.
On Afghanistan, Islamabad must confront the ground realities. We must come out of such fantasies as restricting the role of India. It backfires and causes more harm to relations with Kabul besides generating more hatred against Pakistan, in the people of that country. It is shocking we don’t see the implications of our lopsided policies. Trade between Afghanistan and Pakistan has plummeted to just 400 million dollars from a high of three billion dollars! The border fencing is a naïve and unwarranted project that would not help in dealing with terrorists but would gravely impact political, cultural and trade relations between the two countries.
Choosing favourites and sponsoring factions has been the bane of Pakistan’s policy in relation to Afghanistan. This, to an extent, has been realised late in the day. But there is need to formulate a new vision that would serve both short-and long-term interests of Pakistan considering that Afghanistan is a bridgehead to relations with Central Asia.
One belt One Road (OBOR) is an opportunity of a lifetime. For CPEC to succeed, peace and stability in Afghanistan is an indispensable ingredient. Rulers in Islamabad must realise that stability will not be guaranteed by bilateral visits or pronouncements of brotherly ties but by dealing with the insurgency .In dealing with the insurgency the ground realities must not be overlooked.
For its expanding population and shrinking resources, Pakistan has to undertake a fundamental reappraisal of its policies on a whole range of issues—relating to environment, climate change hazards, productivity, trade, benefiting from hydrocarbon resources of Central Asia, Afghanistan coordinating strategies with India to harness the river systems and save water, normalise ties with India to unleash resources to lift people out of poverty, focus on human resource development, improving health care systems as well as crafting more realistic policies on a range of issues aforementioned here.
That will happen if the rulers show foresight and shun petty partisan quarrels and stop vandalising, humiliating opponents. Dealing with crimes should be left to the institutions. Rulers should learn to think of the huge potential for socio-economic emancipation of the teeming millions of impoverished Pakistanis if climate change is controlled, if the development priorities are reset on sound lines, if relations with neighbours are improved and attention is focused on human resources development as a key to socio-economic transformation.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 19th, 2019.
However, for how long did Islamabad pursue the goal of seeking strategic depth in Afghanistan? Promoting groups, factions and leaders who were thought to be more aligned with our ‘core’ interests was a policy relentlessly implemented.
The domestic scene was characterised by politicians advancing their petty partisan or personal goals. Betrayal, incompetence, jingoism, swapping party affiliations remained the order of the day as democracy took a back seat. In a sign of the decline of institutions as many as four military interventions were seen between the late fifties and nineties---not surprisingly all four were validated by the judiciary.
Institutionalised system of accountability ---one of the strongest pillars of any system of good governance was badly missing from the Pakistani discourse. Accountability, when it happened, was used as tool for harassment of political rivals rather than as an instrument to safeguard and promote the cause of good governance.
Rulers in Islamabad continued to ignore the voices emanating from Balochistan for more autonomy. That led to the estrangement of Baloch nationalists. This sentiment for autonomy was handled with little prudence and caution. The use of force was the preferred option. That led to widespread discontent.
In the perpetual tug of war for advancement of vested interests, the core sectors of the economy were overlooked or received scant attention. Imagine an agrarian economy ignoring the vital sector of agriculture as far as crucial segments like soil conservation, prevention of water wastage, modernised irrigation system, saving farmland, reducing pollution, better drainage systems, provision of better seeds, fertilisers and introduction of more income yielding crops, etc.
Not only that there was much less emphasis on human resource development and its key component, that is, provision of quality education. There was hardly any incentive or stress on research in the fields of science and technology, medicine, agriculture or engineering. The rulers, civilian or military, were either busy with more ‘’important ‘’ activities or simply failed to comprehend the relevance or need for such ‘mundane’ goals.
The goal of acquisition of nuclear weapons was laudable given Pakistan’s vulnerability in a conventional war with its arch-rival that is five times stronger. Possession of nuclear weapons made the country safe and provided deterrence against miscalculation by any country. Added to the arsenal were tactical nuclear weapons as further deterrence against a limited military engagement with a rival many times more powerful.
But the acquisition of nuclear weapons should have been used as a powerful and potent force for peace making. It should have given Pakistan a breathing space in which to lay down the foundation for sustainable peace with India, speaking from a position of near-invincibility. Instead this important milestone was used as brandishing sword to confront a neighbour. In the garb of that, militant outfits in Kashmir were supported and encouraged to carry on their struggle for liberation.
Peace with India has relevance in the sector of climate change that poses a grave danger to the economies of the two countries, besides affecting the health of the population. Both India and Pakistan are exposed to multiple hazards like avalanches, earthquakes, glacial lake outburst floods in the Himalayas in the north, droughts and floods in the plains and cyclones that originate in the Bay of Bengal and the Arabian Sea. Both India and Pakistan are severely water-stressed countries. The two neighbours need to confront the menace by combining strategies and actions on a permanent basis.
The Himalayan ecosystem sustains 1.5 billion people and this system is in danger. Further indifference to the gravity of the situation would spell disaster for the two countries. It is only through collective endeavours that the fragile ecosystem can be saved — by coordinating strategies on climate change hazards, by conserving water, controlling seepage, reducing pollution, saving farmland, afforestation, exchange of data, joint research projects undertaken to study the potential hazards caused by environmental and other factors.
Posterity will not forgive the leaders, media and scientists for not highlighting the quantum of the risks and for failing to coordinate efforts to confront the looming catastrophe by undertaking joint efforts in a bid to save the future for one-fifth of humanity.
On Afghanistan, Islamabad must confront the ground realities. We must come out of such fantasies as restricting the role of India. It backfires and causes more harm to relations with Kabul besides generating more hatred against Pakistan, in the people of that country. It is shocking we don’t see the implications of our lopsided policies. Trade between Afghanistan and Pakistan has plummeted to just 400 million dollars from a high of three billion dollars! The border fencing is a naïve and unwarranted project that would not help in dealing with terrorists but would gravely impact political, cultural and trade relations between the two countries.
Choosing favourites and sponsoring factions has been the bane of Pakistan’s policy in relation to Afghanistan. This, to an extent, has been realised late in the day. But there is need to formulate a new vision that would serve both short-and long-term interests of Pakistan considering that Afghanistan is a bridgehead to relations with Central Asia.
One belt One Road (OBOR) is an opportunity of a lifetime. For CPEC to succeed, peace and stability in Afghanistan is an indispensable ingredient. Rulers in Islamabad must realise that stability will not be guaranteed by bilateral visits or pronouncements of brotherly ties but by dealing with the insurgency .In dealing with the insurgency the ground realities must not be overlooked.
For its expanding population and shrinking resources, Pakistan has to undertake a fundamental reappraisal of its policies on a whole range of issues—relating to environment, climate change hazards, productivity, trade, benefiting from hydrocarbon resources of Central Asia, Afghanistan coordinating strategies with India to harness the river systems and save water, normalise ties with India to unleash resources to lift people out of poverty, focus on human resource development, improving health care systems as well as crafting more realistic policies on a range of issues aforementioned here.
That will happen if the rulers show foresight and shun petty partisan quarrels and stop vandalising, humiliating opponents. Dealing with crimes should be left to the institutions. Rulers should learn to think of the huge potential for socio-economic emancipation of the teeming millions of impoverished Pakistanis if climate change is controlled, if the development priorities are reset on sound lines, if relations with neighbours are improved and attention is focused on human resources development as a key to socio-economic transformation.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 19th, 2019.