If a policy doesn’t work, it is time to change it. That is where diplomats come in handy. They do the lateral thinking, creating wiggle room where there is none, lessening the rasp of the isolationist noose bequeathed by policy stasis.
Because policy is embedded in ideological amber, Pakistani foreign ministers and foreign secretaries don’t write books. The one big exception this year has been Riaz Mohammad Khan (2005-08) who has produced a rare policy critique with his Afghanistan and Pakistan: Conflict, Extremism and Resistance to Modernity (OUP 2011).
One can recall an exception in ex-foreign secretary Dr Humayun Khan’s critical view of Pakistan’s ‘duplex’ behaviour which usually leaves its ambassadors defending military-induced falsehoods that explode in their faces. He co-authored Diplomatic Divide with G Parthasarathy (Roli Books New Delhi; Distributed by OUP 2003).
Riaz Mohammad Khan who earlier wrote Untying the Afghan knot: negotiating Soviet withdrawal (Duke University Press, 1991), is treading unfamiliar ground by saying “Conflict and Resistance to Modernity” in the title, meaning that he is going to discuss much more than just foreign policy. At a time when Pakistan and al Qaeda are on the same page with their anti-Americanism, and al Qaeda is strangely punishing Pakistan for being pro-American, the topic becomes most relevant.
Can you develop a foreign policy of a mid-level economically prostrate state without “Political and Intellectual Leadership”? (p.351) He writes: “A siege mentality is also manifest in aggressive patriotism and narrow nationalism. The sentiment is especially evident among retired mid-level officials, both military and civilian, and religiously inclined middle-class citizens, who have imbibed suspicion towards the West, hostility towards India and pride in a culture of patriotic self-righteousness typical of middle classes in many societies. This mentality induces further stress in an environment of anger, suspicion, dissension, and delusions in which extremist tendencies breed and thrive.”
On the question of identity: “Pakistani society, which for years has struggled with the questions of its identity, role and destiny in an environment shaped by increasingly intense though amorphous religious influences, Islamisation and jihad policies and weakening institutions of governance. The combination of these factors has induced a resistance to modernisation in education, outlook and behaviour that is fundamental to not just development and progress but survival of a large and complex society such as Pakistan”.
Pakistan’s education under state indoctrination and in the madrassa system: “This dream [education] is pitifully out of sync with present day realities and oblivious of the transformation of the world in the past few centuries in terms of demographics, technological development, expansion of knowledge and phenomenal communications” (p.355).
On extremism: “The Afghan Jihad, policy of Islamisation and proliferation of madrassas in particular gave birth to religious militancy in Pakistan and the Taliban in Afghanistan. The scale and strength of these phenomena owed to political patronage in one instance and political control in the other. Judging from the viewpoint of most other Muslim countries, the Taliban [in government] were synonymous with ignorance rather than standard-bearers of Islam” (p.300).
Riaz Mohammad Khan strongly rebuts strategic depth as a false doctrine, decries Pakistan’s conditionality of a ‘friendly Kabul’, favours giving a transit route to India, rejects the policy of supporting the Taliban in Afghanistan and opposes challenging India at the cost of the welfare of the common man in Pakistan.
The hilt of the ‘duplex policy’ dagger that is supposed to be inserted in the back of America is also visible between the shoulder blades of our foreign secretaries.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 4th, 2011.
COMMENTS (13)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Abdul Rehman Gilani ahh... i am started agreeing with you now. you are taking so much efforts to enlighten me. thank you brother. please please please, remember some more incidences.
@bd:
Oh, I forgot, what about the 2007 burning of Samjhota Express?
@Abdul Rehman Gilani riots in 2002? ...hmmm.... this is 2011 going. few more years to go to happen one more communal/religious riot. if this is effect of dropping of religion from state, then i will go for it. rather than having everyday killing.
@ Gillani under the secularism and liberism every thing is allowed. and our so called librals dont understand that like allama iqbal said ; wo shaheen jo pala ho kergaso me kya jane ra o rasm e shahbazy.
@KASHIF MANZOOR I could not quite understand your comment. Please elaborate in plain language without riddles the context for "Papacy" and "scientific method" and how "western" secularism enters the debate?
These liberals not dont even know a fundamental fact that western secularism is a crticism of papacy's failure to cop with the new challenges and you just cannot imply it to other cases. I wonder where has their "scientific method" gone whilst thinking on the different cases???
@Mohan Ram: they have removed hinduism (apparently) from the state in india, and still 2002 riots happened.
Mr. Khan's views and your voice are commendable.
"The hilt of the ‘duplex policy’ dagger that is supposed to be inserted in the back of America is also visible between the shoulder blades of our foreign secretaries."
We have had between 25 - 28 foreign secretaries (and many foreign ministers). Please name a few who disagreed with the direction of our domestic and foreign policies and resigned, while in office. Just about everyone, inlcuding Mr. Khan, championed blind support for USA, promoted visceral hatred of India and justified a jilted lovers stranglehold over Afghanistan. Mr. Khan was sacked (resigned, perhaps) when he disagreed with PPP's demand of fasking the UN to investigate the assassination of our prime misnister - BB. There were no daggers in between his shoulder blades while he was in office over policy issues. He did have the brains to disagree (and resign) over our destructive policies but did not have the courage to!
I fully endorse all that the ex-Foreign Secretary has said.
Having said that,it seems not only Foreign Secretaries but all bureaucrats including those from the army tend to develop not only a brain but also a conscience once they are out of service. Look around and you will find the same views propounded by others after laying down office.
It seems the trappings of office have a deleterious effect on brains and conscience. Are medical researchers listening.
True to to his honest self - absolutely courageous. We should learn from men of principle like Riaz Mohammad Khan.
If one can remove religion from the Pakistani institutional formula, Pakistan would be a great place.
@faraz
Spot on.
I think mediocrity rather than ideology is the hallmark of our foreign policy. For example, according to an ex-Chief of Army Staff, there is a global conspiracy against Pakistan supported by RAW, CIA, MOSSAD, MI-6 and BND. Keeping in mind that Chief of Staff is the most powerful man in the country, one shouldn’t be surprised at where we are.