Where is the narrative?
Tragically, what we have is a conflation of viewpoints as put out by the civilian and military leadership, reflecting often confused, apologetic approaches and intellectual poverty within the governing structures. Another top-down obstacle in the way of a national narrative is the lack of understanding of the issues of even those officials responsible for counterterrorism and counter-insurgency. Clear identification of the causes of terrorism and the insurgency is missing, hence leading to a muddled response.
The absence of a clear and candid state narrative on relations with India or the US, or the need for fighting non-state actors has only weakened the state. Non-state actors prey on the government’s confusion, disunity between army and the civilians, disconnect between the state and the society, and the omnipresent sense of insecurity (physical, food, electricity, inflation).
High-profile talks with the TTP are a case in point; Interior Minister Nisar Ali Khan stood out as a sympathiser of the dialogue — evident from the hue and cry he raised — over the death of Hakimullah Mehsud on November 1 last year.
Most of the cabinet sided with the prime minister and the army, but the interior minister thought they blew holes in his strategy. Senior officials, who attended national security meetings, speak of the “indecision and absence of consensus” among key stakeholders, with Nisar believing that the army was once again taking the lead by forcing the government into accepting its advance into North Waziristan.
He also fell out of favour with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif over the latter’s tacit approval for the North Waziristan offensive. Nisar remained an avid and avowed supporter of the political option, but his narrative was totally flawed. As was the diagnosis of which shades of the Taliban to talk to. His strategy was premised on befriending militants, without realising that some of them are pawns in a proxy war that is very much a consequence of Pakistan’s own policies.
What is needed? First, a credible national narrative and then another to counter the al Qaeda-led narrative.
The primary prerequisite, however, is clarity in objectives, i.e., clearly defined targets and correct diagnosis of the problem. They need to speak with one voice over issues such as talks with the TTP, or the compulsion of cooperation with the United States. Both the army and the civilians need to win the trust of the people by demonstrating their commitment to rule of law through their actions.
Selective targeting of militants and terrorist groups erodes peoples’ trust in state institutions, confuses them, and strengthens non-state actors; when faced with multiple insecurities, people tend to retreat into their own silos rather than stepping forward in support of the state in its fight against crime and terrorism. This probably is the most detrimental element in the state’s counter-insurgency endeavours.
Al Qaeda and its Pakistani affiliates, on the other hand, easily conflate poor governance and the state incapacity to defend its citizens into their anti-state narrative. The state, unfortunately, lacks a unified view and course of action against these narratives.
For this, the civilians must show that they possess the vision and also express their preparedness for taking issues head on. The army, on the other hand, will need to be flexible and accommodating to the civilian view.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 9th, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (4)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
"What is needed? First, a credible national narrative and then another to counter the al Qaeda-led narrative."
How is that possible? The Constitution of Pakistan compels ministers and parliament to swear, "I will strive to preserve the Islamic Ideology which is the basis for the creation of Pakistan" - and the Islamic militants can cite passage after passage of Koran and hadith to prove that's what they are doing, thus a national government which opposes them is illegitimate, or at least a less-worthy competitor, to be replaced by militant rule as soon as can be.
When things get complex beyond the stage of comprehension, looking at details only compounds the confusion, and no sensible solution can be fabricated that will sort out all the problems. However, there is one sure way to address the matter: tailor your ambitions to the size of your economy, and build the latter for all you are worth. Everything will then fall into its right place. Of course, that first requires a minimum level of collective perceptivity.
A statement of objectives cannot rescue any nation, it needs clarity of thought, power of analysis, plan of action and finally execution. When individuals as well as Institutions have their own goals and objectives not in consonance with each other and pulling in different directions, success will remain elusive. Any narrative can be meaningful when majority subscribe to it, so far only a negative narrative of hatred towards other religions and countries like US and India has worked, with obviously negative results. Hanging on to the coat tails of India and trying to catch up by putting maximum efforts to derail their progress, cannot stall them or benefit Pakistan. Any business will be a success if all business associates gain, similar is the case in diplomacy and international relations. Trying to scare the world that terrorists will take over the country and its Nuclear Weapons, if financial Aid does not continue, is not the best way of nation building. Turning the country into an Islamic Republic contrary to the vision of Jinnah, reeked of political opportunism, without any benefits. Same goes for the Objectives Resolution, Blasphemy Law and disenfranchisement of Ahmadies. All these actions reflect a certain negative mindset, unless these obstacles to a positive mindset are not eliminated, no new narrative no matter how effectively publicized, can work.
There is no doubt that we need a new narrative to counter the extremist threat. Since independence every thing has been messed up, even our national purpose. The mindsets have gone so complexed and there is a confusion on our identity. Did we make Pakistan to make it FORT OF ISLAM or we were created it to facilitate selected allies in the power struggle South Asia? The separation of East Pakistan should have been an eye opener but our ill conceived policies remained intact. And we added Jihad to our national purpose and were proud to be a conduit to get finances. How can economy grow from aid, nations create their own wealth. But the only good it did was to stabilize Zia for 11 years. The respected author is spot on to say we need a narrative. But it is not an easy undertaking.
To me the most critical question is: the purpose of Pakistan in the international community. We need to decide to be a warrior state and keep extending ourselves beyond our economic prowess or we need to be a real welfare state? If history is some guide, poverty, absence of education and democracy takes a nation towards internal turmoil. The result is war lord-ism and we have it in our society in a palpable form.
Democracy, rule of law, equal distribution of opportunities/wealth, merit and justice may be some of the ingredients of a new narrative. We also need to separate religion from the affairs of state. By saying this i am not denying our right to defend ourself. But security concepts must match economic capacity. We cannot follow Napoleonic grand strategy but our model should be Singapore. The disintegration of British Umpire and USSR are the recent examples of overextension of power ambition. The change of mindset is an arduous journey but we need to take first step.