More talk, less efficiency

Whether it’s gun violence in America or extremist militants in Pakistan who continue to be a nuisance, all I hear are redundant conversations about how to control the aftermath of these ongoing debacles. It’s like putting out raging wildfires with a tiny squirt gun when what we really need is a tidal wave. Merely tackling the symptoms of a crisis with empty public declarations and frantic security measures will only produce temporary solutions. The goal should be to bear down on the crux of a problem — the epicentre that relentlessly causes more damage.

On September 14, government officials in Pakistan, once again, gathered to voice their mounting concerns about terrorist activity in the country. This time, Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar wants to take prompt measures against financial sponsors of terrorists. Even though an investigation to find culprits is underway, government officials have previously made sweeping claims about their efforts to confront terrorism. Will this recent attempt to prevent money from flowing into suspicious accounts be any different? Pakistan has witnessed terrorist attacks for more than a decade. How is it that the government still hasn’t been able to rein in financial resources being funnelled to various militant organisations? Even though rampant militant activity is a glaring problem, its persistence is a result of the government’s inaction. Our politicians have carelessly dragged their feet for years. Let’s not forget that it eventually took a fatal assault on young schoolchildren in Peshawar to make political rivals come together and produce an anti-terrorism plan.

Now if we look to the West, we see a similar dilemma unfolding. Only this time, it involves shooters who aren’t necessarily labelled ‘terrorists’. Regal Cinemas, one of America’s largest cinema chains, is reportedly searching bags in response to several attacks on movie theatres across the US. Are bag checks the only answer? What’s next then — metal detectors, electromagnetic wands and X-ray conveyor belts? Will cinemas start resembling airports in terms of the extensive security checks movie-goers will need to undergo?

Maybe the solution can be found in Washington, D.C., where gun control regulations collide with infinite obstacles. The Second Amendment to the US Constitution, which concerns the right to bear arms, is always a topic that sparks heated arguments. In 2013, President Obama’s gun control bill hit a brick wall in the Senate. The regulation simply called for increased background checks on gun sales. What gun rights groups and lobbyists fail to understand is that regulations are not designed to limit constitutional rights — they are meant to ensure that people capable of inflicting harm do not get their hands on a gun. Cinemas should feel free to enhance security measures. Shooters will, however, only do their best to find ways around a system trying to keep them out. At the end of the day, they’ll have the gun; they’ll just need a new strategy. Gun violence is not escalating due to a lack of security — the core issue originates from a lack of regulation.

Even though the given examples describe two separate problems from different parts of the globe, they share one common misfortune — each predicament has a root cause that has not been appropriately addressed.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 16^th,  2015.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.