Militancy has now been recognised as the global enemy. Not the odd agitator who still wears the hammer and sickle on his T-shirt. Or the odd anarchist who is like a character nicked from the old French and Italian films where everybody is a nihilist of sorts and displays a cynical philistine artiness. Even at the height of the Cold War neither the Soviet Union and its satellites nor the United States and its allies went around deliberately targeting children and blowing up schools. They just did the adults in and one is supposed to sit back and say well, that’s all right, mate. The intelligence agencies in both camps committed outrageous atrocities and we were led to believe that their actions were motivated by ideology. A critic who didn’t approve of my preference for Barack Obama over other US presidents was quick to point out that the drones the Americans send into Waziristan also kill children. Of course they do. But next to the Taliban and their rivals the IS, the other terrorists look like boy scouts. The point is, as Chris Cork pointed out in his hard-hitting piece published in this paper on December 18, no government in Pakistan had recognised just what had been happening in the country, and even if they had, they just ignored it or turned a deaf ear to the gradual fomentation of aggressive radicalism that was taking place and eating into the populace like cancer.
All communities are equally vulnerable. The silent majority has become the silent minority and did on occasion express the view that things might have been different if General Kayani had sprung into action when he was the head of the army. The commercial class, when it comes to chipping in to arrest a rapidly deteriorating trend, develops the pulse of a hibernating frog. The politicians carry on with their little games in parliament, do their share of posing and table thumping, and mutter under their breath that catching the suicide bombers is the job of the army… not the politicians. The newspapers, staffed mostly by left wingers, are baying for action. The only force that is hitting back against the internal enemy is the military, and the military cannot do it alone. Unless we, as a people, unify down to the last man as the Vietnamese did when fighting a superpower, we will continue to be at the mercy of an enemy without a conscience, without scruples and without a country. And that, my dear Horatio, is a tall order.
Published in The Express Tribune, December 21st, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (6)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
Second attempt at a comment : My first comment was an expression of my feelings but they really don't matter......... I have come to the conclusion and as you have indicated that whatever will be done will have to be done by the people themselves.
@Ch. Allah Daad: The four of you commentators have completely missed the point. Nowhere has the author said that the people who conducted the attack were not real. I believe when he used the word invisible he meant they don't go around parading themselves in public. They strike at will when and where they like. As a Pathan I know just what he means. It is a question of interpretation.
Invisible enemy? Joke of the century.
The enemy is not invisible Mr Author, It is the same elements some of the leaders in Pakistan and the Military have been hobnobbing with and been indulgent to for years.
That the enemy is invisible is yet another canard by those who want to obfuscate and duck all responsibility. The enemy are the known terrorist groups, the establishment that nurtures them, and regular people who support their radical Islamist ideology. Unless you introspect and call a spade a spade you cannot fight this "enemy". People of the land do not think it is an "enemy".
If someone sitting 1000s of miles away from Pakistan can clearly see who the enemy is, why can't you?