We must secure our interests in Afghanistan
It’s time we set this benchmark; that if we don’t militantly interfere in your affairs, you shouldn’t either.
The writer is an Express Tribune staffer who has a master’s degree in Security and Intelligence Studies from the University of Pittsburgh. He tweets @shahzebshaikha
Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s insistence on holding off on signing the Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) till the new president is sworn in has put the future of Afghanistan in a graver uncertainty. The future of Afghans and their homeland currently hangs in limbo. But the nature of the BSA is such that any head of state, either the incumbent or his successor, will be resistant to allowing an occupying force to stay in a country where they are highly unpopular. Regardless of the merits of the BSA and the intentions of the Americans, Karzai’s wishy-washy attitude has much to do with his legacy. He certainly does not want history to judge him as a president who signed off on sanctioning an additional 10 years for an ‘invading army’. Considering that the BSA gives immunity for all force personnel that would be maintained post-2014 drawdown makes the matter stickier. There is no guarantee that the new president will sign off on the BSA, which would depend on the political climate in the next six months.
Though this is still a developing story, Pakistan must make clear its interests in a future Afghanistan, with or without US presence in that country. Diplomatic niceties like ‘Afghan-owned’ and ‘Afghan-led’ do not mean anything if we intend to act otherwise behind the curtains. We must state — publicly and privately — to our Afghan counterparts that we would not tolerate an Afghanistan whose soil is used to plan and execute attacks against Pakistan. And that in case of a future civil war, similar to the one following the Soviet withdrawal in 1989, we would not extend a welcome to any potential Afghan refugees. We have suffered enough by hosting three million of them; a whole new generation has been born and bred here. We already have young and unemployed people of our own and cannot bear the burden of millions more.
If the Afghan peace process will be Afghan-owned, then that country must take ownership of its people, and also allow existing refugees to return. This is imperative.
Our historical ambition of becoming a gateway to Central Asia has always been hampered by an unstable and dangerous Afghanistan. No trade and no natural resource pipeline can be realised until our north-western neighbour is militant-free. But this is a far cry. It seems that people in that country — through decades of war — have been socialised to get their terms accepted through the barrel. Pakistan should put to rest any grand ambitions of becoming the gateway to Central Asia because Afghanistan is bound to remain war-ravaged and its insurgents, bloodthirsty.
Our course must be, at a minimum, to remain as a facilitator in this unrewarding peace process than as a spoiler. There is no longer a strategic depth to be sought. Afghanistan has become anti-Pakistan on its own; India or any other country for that matter, don’t need to do much about that. As is being reported, Afghanistan might be engaging in the same proxy tactics that we have mastered all these years. Some might say we’re getting the taste of our own medicine; others might say, well, it’s about securing one’s interests using all means necessary. The point is that an unstable neighbour by no means serves anyone’s interest.
Through our interactions with the Afghan leadership, the Pakistani government and military must send a strong message to Kabul that any evidence of its involvement in an act of terror on Pakistani soil will be responded to in an appropriate manner; that all options will be considered. It’s time we set this benchmark; that if we don’t militantly interfere in your affairs, you shouldn’t either.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 22nd, 2014.
Though this is still a developing story, Pakistan must make clear its interests in a future Afghanistan, with or without US presence in that country. Diplomatic niceties like ‘Afghan-owned’ and ‘Afghan-led’ do not mean anything if we intend to act otherwise behind the curtains. We must state — publicly and privately — to our Afghan counterparts that we would not tolerate an Afghanistan whose soil is used to plan and execute attacks against Pakistan. And that in case of a future civil war, similar to the one following the Soviet withdrawal in 1989, we would not extend a welcome to any potential Afghan refugees. We have suffered enough by hosting three million of them; a whole new generation has been born and bred here. We already have young and unemployed people of our own and cannot bear the burden of millions more.
If the Afghan peace process will be Afghan-owned, then that country must take ownership of its people, and also allow existing refugees to return. This is imperative.
Our historical ambition of becoming a gateway to Central Asia has always been hampered by an unstable and dangerous Afghanistan. No trade and no natural resource pipeline can be realised until our north-western neighbour is militant-free. But this is a far cry. It seems that people in that country — through decades of war — have been socialised to get their terms accepted through the barrel. Pakistan should put to rest any grand ambitions of becoming the gateway to Central Asia because Afghanistan is bound to remain war-ravaged and its insurgents, bloodthirsty.
Our course must be, at a minimum, to remain as a facilitator in this unrewarding peace process than as a spoiler. There is no longer a strategic depth to be sought. Afghanistan has become anti-Pakistan on its own; India or any other country for that matter, don’t need to do much about that. As is being reported, Afghanistan might be engaging in the same proxy tactics that we have mastered all these years. Some might say we’re getting the taste of our own medicine; others might say, well, it’s about securing one’s interests using all means necessary. The point is that an unstable neighbour by no means serves anyone’s interest.
Through our interactions with the Afghan leadership, the Pakistani government and military must send a strong message to Kabul that any evidence of its involvement in an act of terror on Pakistani soil will be responded to in an appropriate manner; that all options will be considered. It’s time we set this benchmark; that if we don’t militantly interfere in your affairs, you shouldn’t either.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 22nd, 2014.