The new administrative-political structure will be used to implement a counterterrorism policy. In fact, the emphasis of the National Action Plan (NAP) appears to be on counterterrorism and this is where all attention will be focused. The initial eight-point formula that was later expanded to cover other issues — ranging from controlling terror financing to curbing sectarian violence — are issues which may not form the centre stage of the new plan. But real life is not like the Pakistani movie Waar, in which military and intelligence commandoes, all dressed up and behaving like CIA agents, gun down all the bad guys. We are certainly not like the US, which emphasised fire power because it could afford to. For America, the enemy was an outsider attacking the US mainland. In our case, the enemy sits right in our midst. It has the tremendous capacity to go underground when the need arises and is consistent in its mission. But then, many including those in the military believe that these people are also outsiders. Since Mullah Fazlullah was behind the attack, there is a high possibility that an enemy funded him. Members of the larger security community or the just-born military strategists argue that this is part of the great game. Even if that may be the case, the issue is that Fazlullah was once an insider and has greater access to and connection with many other insiders who have the same ideology. The only thing that makes Fazlullah different from those who are still being kept in the heartland of Punjab is that the latter are not fighting the state yet.
The problem is that many, who have suddenly ducked and become less noticeable, have a similar ideology. For instance, one of the Punjabi Taliban leaders, Asmatullah Muavia, agreed not to attack Pakistan, but did he also abandon his ideology? We are talking about people who are not fighting for some territorial demand but for an ideology, which they believe is ordained by God. And let’s be very clear on one thing: any argument pertaining to the mainstreaming such people or changing their views through creating a new narrative does not work for them. The Punjab government had started a de-radicalisation programme, picking people up and putting them through technical training. Once trained, these people were provided small loans to set up businesses. The idea being to provide people jobs and take away their reason to fight. The approach worked for those who had accidentally fallen on this path but then there were some limitations as well. The shortcomings of this project were two-fold. First, it used as a standard formula for all without assessing what a person was suitable for. For instance, in South Punjab, most were trained to become electricians when they did not all have the desire to pursue this work. Second, the programme has totally failed in weaning away the hard-brand radical/jihadi, who continued to believe in his philosophy. In fact, some used the training and opportunity to expand their influence, which was used to capture more young men. There was no de-radicalisation component. It is certainly needed even if it may not work in all cases. There are many amongst this army of jihadis who will not budge. They will have to be fought; otherwise, not fighting them will eventually increase the cost for the state at some later stage.
It is interesting to note that the extended NAP sort of deviated from the initial assessment that under the circumstances, only counterterrorism could be done. The new version has counter-extremism built into it. Unfortunately, this does not seem to be backed by any commitment from the government. It was just the other day that an Ahmadi got killed after remarks on a show conducted by a popular televangelist. Didn’t the prime minister say that the state will provide security to its minorities too? Moreover, can the state afford to watch silently while non-state actors threaten its citizens as it happened in the case of Jibran Nasir?
As mentioned earlier, it will be almost impossible to fight this war without breaking the edifice of extremist ideology. Battles can be won but wars lost if decision-makers don’t take a long-term perspective. This is exactly what happened with us even during the Kargil War. Now that the military and civilian leaderships are all part of one happy family, they must calculate the larger cost of not preparing for the war. Whether there are sectarian issues, blasphemy, carrying the burden of the Muslim ummah on their shoulders, or fighting the ‘great game’, these are all tied up in the same ideological thread.
Last, but not the least, instead of leaving all the planning to bureaucrats for designing the NAP formula, the government might consider holding broader consultations with the civil society. It is by standing together that can help us win.
Published in The Express Tribune, January 1st, 2015.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (10)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
First, are we ready to accept at the national level that too much of religion has been bad for the society? You didn't even touch that because you are occupied with army bashing. Second, where is the capacity in the civil governments? Have you seen the PM talking to press. With that shallowness, can he even comprehend the problems let alone finding solutions to them? What you say is not wrong but that is only part of the truth. Taken as a whole, the Army has to exert itself to roll back the menace of terror.
Miss Ayesha and many of her collegues are a great asset for any society, a community and the State. What is surprising, however, that a lot of delusion and day dreaming is covered in their scripts, of course with the usual emotions, passion and question marks. it is sad to read and watch the events of this great country with the majority claiming to be muslims, and yet do not recognise the reality and by comparing it to other Nations of this planet, especially the muslim majority lands. Pakistan has one of the largest army in the world, which can never find peace with the non khaki people unless there is a specific task for them which only the army can fulfill. Starting with the USA, its large army is often employed in foreign lands and high seas to wage wars, whereas the army in Egypt has most recently refused to play the second fiddle in serving the poilticle elites and sent the democraticaiy elected President to dungeons of the 16th century. This leaves Turkey whose army has the largest contingent allocated to protect NATO countries outside Turkey and its Islamic Justice party leadership has sent some of the AtaTurk generals with Napoleanic ambitions to the desert. Is it therefore a surprise that every now and then Pakistani Generals get bored and decide to run the affairs of Governance? Cut down the size of the army, Pakistan does not require a large contingent to look after their garrison towns, a dialogue and reconciliation among the several Nations of Pakistan is mandatory for a cohesive Nation and peace with neighbours comes from peace treaty..
Rex Minor
you wrote beautiful article but u have missed something. You badly criticized Pakistan army for establishing military courts,i have question to the author did our civil courts award punishment to any terrorist ? . As every body knows that civil judges are frightened to give their verdict against TTP. Sometime my eyes get wet of hearing/reading against our army that military has ruined this country etc...If our army is so worst then why we are keeping them and wasting huge amount on defense as there are numerous country in the world who have no army.please do not criticize them every time they are among us not from our neighboring country,they have lost their limbs,laid their lives and their kids/wives were brutally slaughtered and What we have given to this country less making criticizing. in the end i want to say that if we have to control the extremism in the country the government will have to make strict law against the tv channels who exaggerate the headlines when any attack is carried out from terrorist.Media needs to get mature and think about this soil rather than channel RATTING.
There is an undeclared civil war in Pakistan, and much of the Muslim world, between the extremists and the moderates/secularists. The problem is that government leaders and media commentators keep dismissing extremists as a tiny minority - they may be a minority but it is not a tiny minority. Decades of gulf state financed indoctrination of the Muslim world has created a significant minority, embedded in every level of Pakistani society, who embrace extremism, and the moral dualism that permits the "other" to be dehumanized and treated like an animal. There are two critical beliefs that must be instilled in Pakistan to turn the tide:1) that non-state actors are NEVER justified in pursuing ideological or religious violence. Terrorism as a strategy must be rejected, whether the target is Pakistani schoolchildren or Kashmiri Indians; 2) Non-believers must be treated as equals, deserving of equal rights and respect. The application of an Islamic Golden Rule must replace the dualistic hatred and intolerance that continues oppress religious minorities. These themes must be emphasized in schools, madrassas and mosques until they can take hold and steer Pakistani society in a new direction that will ultimately permit Pakistan to rejoin the world of civilized nations.
Great article Ayesha ji...I hope Army and Politicians are reading this.
I wish the writer had defined the "war" and "Battle" first. It is the ideology of every institution and not just the terrorists who had landed us where we are. So if you take a straw poll when no terror related events have occurred then people will ask for a civil leadership that addresses their everyday problems (i.e, infrastructure, education, jobs, etc.) and if you do the same right after a terror related event then people will ask for the Armed forces and the local police to be working on security issues and at that moment the civil leadership will look weak.
Civil leaders are expected to be ordinary people so the primary requirement is electability. The institutions within a country allow the leaders to be effective. We have a situation where time after time one way or another we have the Army diluting the effectiveness of civil leadership.
So if each election is a "War" and each terror event is a "War"...what is the definition of the "Battle" that we are really trying to win? How do we all agree on that definition?
As always, Ayesha touched the most important aspect of the present discourse in Pakistan, but glossed over by most of the analysts. The Establishment is happy to ignore those jihadis who, for the present, are repositioning themselves ideologically but are a potential danger to the Pakistani society. Yes, political leadership is culpable for toeing a line that could be suicidal to Pakistan.
You are an expert in your field,no doubt,however,this article is too shallow.You are known for your bias against Pak army,which surely has flaws,however you hardly ever criticize political leaders who are totally flawed and have myopic self centered visions.Please in addition to criticism,also offer plausible suggestions.You need a lot of self correction.Do not try to be a hero,instead be realistic
You are right Ayesha ji. The government and the army are unlikely to get anything right and in the right priorities. JUD is not yet attacking Pakistan but once they see their monopoly on terrorism, they will do just that. Even the TV anchors are not looking at the clear perspective. Pakistan must learn from the Indian fight against the terrorism in Panjab. Just go after the terrorists and shoot them. No need for military courts or amendments to the constitution. Enact AFPSA, a Pakistan version and believe me, people will appreciate it when there is peace. The way it is going, Pakistan is not likely to achieve any significant progress,ess in the elimination of terrorism. The Pakistani establishment are wrong in assuming the JUD is a strategic asset. They might provoke a war with India.
writer is too biased and always writes what the people think about pakistan, whom never visited pakitan although some reality is laced in it to a chunk of fallacious parables