Post-2014
It is time for PM Sharif to spell out how he proposes to protect and promote Pakistan’s strategic interests post-2014.
The writer is Executive Editor of The Express Tribune
With less than 40 weeks to go before the drawdown of foreign troops from Afghanistan, and the presidential elections in that war-torn country only a little over eight weeks away, the region as a whole and Pakistan in particular presents a picture of terror-filled anticipation.
Afghanistan itself seems on the verge of hitting the panic button, with many of those who could, are reportedly planning to leave. Already, real estate prices in Quetta and Peshawar are said to be spiralling upwards. The same is said to be the case in Islamabad.
And in what can only be termed a sign of changing times, the outgoing Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, while speaking to The Sunday Times (January 27), sent shockwaves all around by roundly condemning what he said was the way the US had treated the Afghans and his government during last 12 years of occupation.
“They (the US) also began to badly undermine the growth of the Afghan government, the growth of our institutions, the police they did not pay attention to, rather they were paying all the money to private security firms…They didn’t work with me, they worked against me on these issues, the prison, the Bagram prison, so a whole lot of extremely important issues for us as Afghans, as a people, as a country; eventually I felt as if we didn’t matter to them, what mattered was themselves and their interests, so I had to stand up…”
This is undoubtedly a very harsh language to be used against those who have sacrificed in blood and treasure protect you from your archenemy and to sustain you in power through thick and thin.
But, perhaps, Karzai was actually addressing the Afghan voters as he spoke to The Sunday Times, trying to canvass for his candidate contesting the upcoming presidential elections. Perhaps, he was just trying to secure his future in a country where he had only a few friends and many enemies.
Here it is appropriate to recall President Obama’s answer to a question about his Afghan withdrawal schedule, while addressing a press conference after the concluding session of the 2012 Chicago Nato summit.
He said: “The gains are still fragile. (But) I don’t think there’s ever gonna be an optimal point where we say ‘this is all done, this is perfect, this is just the way we wanted it and now we can wrap up all our equipment and go home.’ This is a process, and it’s sometimes a messy process, just as it was in Iraq.
“But think about it: we’ve been there now 10 years. We are now committing to a transition process that takes place next year but the full transition to Afghan responsibility is almost two years away. And the Afghan security forces themselves will never be prepared if they don’t start taking that responsibility.
“And frankly, the large footprint we have in Afghanistan over time can be counterproductive. We’ve been there 10 years and I think no matter how much good we’re doing, and no matter how outstanding our troops and civilians and diplomats are doing on the ground, 10 years in a country that’s very different — that’s a strain. Not only on our folks but also on that country, which at a point is going to be very sensitive about sovereignty.
“So, I think the timetable we established is a sound one, a responsible one. Are there risks involved in it? Absolutely.”
Karzai has spoken. President Obama spoke even before Karzai did. Now it is time for Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to spell out how he proposes to protect and promote Pakistan’s strategic interests post-2014.
It is not enough to say that we believe in Afghan-owned and Afghan-led solutions to its problems. We need to do something tangible about it. The most tangible thing that all the concerned parties, including Kabul, expect Pakistan to do is to secure the Durand Line.
Securing the border does not mean its complete closure, but a free flow of people across the border that is secured by check posts equipped to machine read travel documents on both sides in order to completely obviate the possibility of unwanted elements sneaking across with terrorist intentions.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 12th, 2014.
Afghanistan itself seems on the verge of hitting the panic button, with many of those who could, are reportedly planning to leave. Already, real estate prices in Quetta and Peshawar are said to be spiralling upwards. The same is said to be the case in Islamabad.
And in what can only be termed a sign of changing times, the outgoing Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, while speaking to The Sunday Times (January 27), sent shockwaves all around by roundly condemning what he said was the way the US had treated the Afghans and his government during last 12 years of occupation.
“They (the US) also began to badly undermine the growth of the Afghan government, the growth of our institutions, the police they did not pay attention to, rather they were paying all the money to private security firms…They didn’t work with me, they worked against me on these issues, the prison, the Bagram prison, so a whole lot of extremely important issues for us as Afghans, as a people, as a country; eventually I felt as if we didn’t matter to them, what mattered was themselves and their interests, so I had to stand up…”
This is undoubtedly a very harsh language to be used against those who have sacrificed in blood and treasure protect you from your archenemy and to sustain you in power through thick and thin.
But, perhaps, Karzai was actually addressing the Afghan voters as he spoke to The Sunday Times, trying to canvass for his candidate contesting the upcoming presidential elections. Perhaps, he was just trying to secure his future in a country where he had only a few friends and many enemies.
Here it is appropriate to recall President Obama’s answer to a question about his Afghan withdrawal schedule, while addressing a press conference after the concluding session of the 2012 Chicago Nato summit.
He said: “The gains are still fragile. (But) I don’t think there’s ever gonna be an optimal point where we say ‘this is all done, this is perfect, this is just the way we wanted it and now we can wrap up all our equipment and go home.’ This is a process, and it’s sometimes a messy process, just as it was in Iraq.
“But think about it: we’ve been there now 10 years. We are now committing to a transition process that takes place next year but the full transition to Afghan responsibility is almost two years away. And the Afghan security forces themselves will never be prepared if they don’t start taking that responsibility.
“And frankly, the large footprint we have in Afghanistan over time can be counterproductive. We’ve been there 10 years and I think no matter how much good we’re doing, and no matter how outstanding our troops and civilians and diplomats are doing on the ground, 10 years in a country that’s very different — that’s a strain. Not only on our folks but also on that country, which at a point is going to be very sensitive about sovereignty.
“So, I think the timetable we established is a sound one, a responsible one. Are there risks involved in it? Absolutely.”
Karzai has spoken. President Obama spoke even before Karzai did. Now it is time for Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif to spell out how he proposes to protect and promote Pakistan’s strategic interests post-2014.
It is not enough to say that we believe in Afghan-owned and Afghan-led solutions to its problems. We need to do something tangible about it. The most tangible thing that all the concerned parties, including Kabul, expect Pakistan to do is to secure the Durand Line.
Securing the border does not mean its complete closure, but a free flow of people across the border that is secured by check posts equipped to machine read travel documents on both sides in order to completely obviate the possibility of unwanted elements sneaking across with terrorist intentions.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 12th, 2014.