Counter-terrorism: The battle between good and evil
To terrorists, this is a zero-sum game and it should be the same for us.
The writer is a The Express Tribune staffer who has a master’s degree in Security and Intelligence Studies from the University of Pittsburgh
Good and evil exist in the world; terrorists represent the forces of evil while those in the business of countering them represent the forces of good, in this case, our counterterrorism officials — who get barely any recognition.
Counterterrorism must be that business which is viewed in black and white. There is no grey area and no middle ground to be sought. The debate must be framed along the lines of whether we are with them or against them, for this is a battle of good versus evil. Our counterterrorism professionals must never sympathise with the enemy. Anyone who, even for a second, sympathises with the enemy, should be held responsible as they themselves become a threat to national security.
Terrorists hate our freedoms. They can’t stand the fact that there is still some space left in this country that allows individuals to mark their own destinies. They represent an ideology which is less and less popular in our society; they should be banished.
They have killed our citizens in the thousands, beheaded our soldiers, attacked our most sensitive military installations and continue to target our intelligence officials.
The cricketer and the ‘All Parties Conference’ should know that the terrorists with whom they are pushing to negotiate with are irreconcilable elements. They have brought us on our knees and coerced us onto the negotiating table, whereas it should have been the other way round, which would have allowed us to negotiate from a position of strength. We don’t have time to wait things out. There’s been enough talk about negotiating with militants and giving peace a chance.
The political class must realise that for terrorists, this war is as much a quest for power as it is to impose their brand of religion. To counter the enemy, we must study their ways and learn to fully grasp their covert tactics. This is a secret war that must be fought quietly, in the shadows, by our intelligence professionals using sources and methods at their disposal.
We need to dissociate ourselves with the label of ‘war on terror’ and rephrase our actions; similar to what the Obama Administration did when it was first elected. Because the reputation of the phrase ‘war on terror’ had become so tarnished, US President Obama decided this name be replaced with Overseas Contingency Operations. And Pakistan must do exactly that. We need to launch domestic contingency operations, which specifically focus on countering terrorism specific to our country.
To terrorists, this is a zero-sum game and it should be the same for us. It would be unrealistic to suggest that terrorism can be eliminated. It can only be contained at best. The ability of terrorists to plan and execute spectacular attacks must be reduced and their safe havens targeted and destroyed.
Our aim should be to launch targeted, intelligence-based snatch/capture/eliminate operations using small special forces contingents. As we have seen, counterinsurgency operations are long-term and politically motivated endeavours. They prove to be too costly in blood and treasure. In addition, Pakistan’s polarised political class has created unfavourable conditions for long-term military operations and presence — especially in the tribal areas.
The space that militants have found to influence society must be diminished. Moral outrage is one of the biggest factors that convinces people to join a cause. And excessive outrage occurs primarily at the killing of a loved one, the destruction of property, and/or the gravity of the devastation of an individual’s surrounding. Such situations naturally make an individual vulnerable, who could then be exploited by non-state entities. We must save people from this vulnerability and targeted kill/capture missions can reduce such instances. The aim must be to contain militant ideology and its territorial reach.
Currently, they are an existential threat to our way of life. If they love to die for their cause, we must choose to live for our country.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 7th, 2014.
Counterterrorism must be that business which is viewed in black and white. There is no grey area and no middle ground to be sought. The debate must be framed along the lines of whether we are with them or against them, for this is a battle of good versus evil. Our counterterrorism professionals must never sympathise with the enemy. Anyone who, even for a second, sympathises with the enemy, should be held responsible as they themselves become a threat to national security.
Terrorists hate our freedoms. They can’t stand the fact that there is still some space left in this country that allows individuals to mark their own destinies. They represent an ideology which is less and less popular in our society; they should be banished.
They have killed our citizens in the thousands, beheaded our soldiers, attacked our most sensitive military installations and continue to target our intelligence officials.
The cricketer and the ‘All Parties Conference’ should know that the terrorists with whom they are pushing to negotiate with are irreconcilable elements. They have brought us on our knees and coerced us onto the negotiating table, whereas it should have been the other way round, which would have allowed us to negotiate from a position of strength. We don’t have time to wait things out. There’s been enough talk about negotiating with militants and giving peace a chance.
The political class must realise that for terrorists, this war is as much a quest for power as it is to impose their brand of religion. To counter the enemy, we must study their ways and learn to fully grasp their covert tactics. This is a secret war that must be fought quietly, in the shadows, by our intelligence professionals using sources and methods at their disposal.
We need to dissociate ourselves with the label of ‘war on terror’ and rephrase our actions; similar to what the Obama Administration did when it was first elected. Because the reputation of the phrase ‘war on terror’ had become so tarnished, US President Obama decided this name be replaced with Overseas Contingency Operations. And Pakistan must do exactly that. We need to launch domestic contingency operations, which specifically focus on countering terrorism specific to our country.
To terrorists, this is a zero-sum game and it should be the same for us. It would be unrealistic to suggest that terrorism can be eliminated. It can only be contained at best. The ability of terrorists to plan and execute spectacular attacks must be reduced and their safe havens targeted and destroyed.
Our aim should be to launch targeted, intelligence-based snatch/capture/eliminate operations using small special forces contingents. As we have seen, counterinsurgency operations are long-term and politically motivated endeavours. They prove to be too costly in blood and treasure. In addition, Pakistan’s polarised political class has created unfavourable conditions for long-term military operations and presence — especially in the tribal areas.
The space that militants have found to influence society must be diminished. Moral outrage is one of the biggest factors that convinces people to join a cause. And excessive outrage occurs primarily at the killing of a loved one, the destruction of property, and/or the gravity of the devastation of an individual’s surrounding. Such situations naturally make an individual vulnerable, who could then be exploited by non-state entities. We must save people from this vulnerability and targeted kill/capture missions can reduce such instances. The aim must be to contain militant ideology and its territorial reach.
Currently, they are an existential threat to our way of life. If they love to die for their cause, we must choose to live for our country.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 7th, 2014.