|
| November 01, 2007 | Thursday | Shawwal 19, 1428 |
President’s warning
Moving beyond ‘new-look’
Return of the radicals
OTHER VOICES - Pushto Press
THE reopening of Lal Masjid after a government siege in July is a direct threat to the country and to the world community fighting religious extremists and international terrorist networks.
THE latest terrorist attack in Rawalpindi on Tuesday came in the wake of police reports that 11 suicide bombers were at large in the garrison city and Islamabad. Matters have come to such a pass that any conjecture on the target — police stations, embassies, soldiers or even General Musharraf who was at the Army House less than a kilometre from Tuesday’s explosion site — of intended or actual attacks would be moot. The terrifying reality is that even a high-security area like Rawalpindi is not safe from the wrath of the militants as witnessed earlier in September when a number of people, including ISI men, died in a suicide attack. Admittedly, it would be difficult for law-enforcement personnel at a checkpoint to identify and stop a suicide bomber in his tracks. But surely, better and more comprehensive intelligence, especially in sensitive zones, is not asking for too much. Even if some lives are saved the effort would be worth it. There is no better example of the complete failure of our intelligence set-up than the Lal Masjid episode last July. Unless efforts are made to reverse this image by making the intelligence apparatus more professional and responsive, one can be sure that there will be no stopping the militants.
Another point that merits reflection — by the military establishment, the politicians and the people — is why militancy is being allowed to spread from the remote region of Fata to settled areas like Swat where it is casting a long shadow. How come we hesitate to condemn terrorism in all its manifestations, and instead, maintain a stony silence when the news of the beheading of women, accused of ‘immoral activities’, reaches us? Our passivity and our failure to react with horror, revulsion — and anger — are what gives militancy an added boost. Action comes with introspection, and it is only when society and politicians shake off their sanctimonious, ideological blinkers that they can be capable of clear thinking. Perhaps it is the military establishment that is most in need of such soul-searching. For decades it has followed flawed policies that have actually encouraged militancy. Now, when the menace has become a hydra-headed monster, the establishment has difficulty keeping it at bay, not least because after years of indoctrination, it is not easy to think differently. As events in Swat show, the danger is coming closer with the militants pressing for no doubt a draconian version of Islamic law. While finding an amicable solution through jirgas might be all very well, Islamabad will be on the losing side if it compromises on the writ of the state by ceding even partially to militant demands for what can only be described as a parallel government.
IRRESPECTIVE of what the Supreme Court decides on the dual office issue, the forward thrust toward democracy must continue. This needs to be emphasised in view of what President Pervez Musharraf said at Swabi on Tuesday. Inaugurating the Peshawar-Islamabad motorway, the president said some elements were trying to derail the third phase of the on-going political process but that he was determined to go ahead. He issued a stern warning to terrorists, no doubt, but a perusal of the speech would make it clear that he did not have the terrorists in mind when he spoke of the threat to the democratic process. One wishes the president were a bit more specific. While there is no doubt that acts of terror and what is going on in Swat — virtual rebellion against the state — pose a threat not only to democracy but to society itself, one expects the military-led government to stand firm and stick to the election schedule notwithstanding any political developments or court verdicts.
What causes concern are periodic statements from ruling party bigwigs hinting at measures that could delay the general election. PML leaders are on record having said that the life of the assemblies could be extended by a year or perhaps there could be emergency rule. The latter possibility was serious enough to prompt Washington into warning Islamabad against any measures that could cause a setback to the democratic process. Since the Supreme Court’s July 20 judgment that held the reference against the Chief Justice illegal, the government’s attitude toward the judiciary has been a mixed bag. While it accepted the decision in the CJ’s case with good grace, its implementation of the judgment on the Sharifs’ right to return is at the moment being examined by the Supreme Court. As for the judgment due shortly on the constitutionality of the presidential election held on Oct 6, the government has no choice but to accept it.
It will cause chaos and lead to consequences that cannot be predicted at this stage if a negative decision by the Supreme Court evokes from the military a response other than that of unconditional compliance. President Musharraf’s pledge to the Supreme Court to shed uniform (“if elected”) was conditional. What happens if the court rules against him? Will he continue as army chief and president and then prolong what has been an intolerable status quo for the nation? The president is right that some elements are trying to derail the democratic process, but he must make sure that the military he represents is itself not going to do anything that will block the movement toward what he calls the third phase of the political process.
‘VOMITING up defeat from the stomach of victory’ was how one South African cricket writer described Pakistan’s astonishing loss in the last one-day international in Lahore. And the South Africans should know, the Proteas of recent years having perfected the art of crumbling under pressure of their own creation. On Monday the ‘chokers’ tag passed to Pakistan as they handed the game over on a platter, and with it an otherwise hard-fought series. The Tests that preceded the ODIs were an uneven contest, pitching as they did a markedly superior team against a young Pakistan side that is yet to come to terms with the five-day game. It may know something about crash-bam cricket, as seen during the Twenty20 World Cup, but the sustained application required to put up a fight in Test matches will involve a steep learning curve. It can even be asked whether some among the current lot have the necessary skills.
Worrying concerns surround the team as it leaves today for India. ‘New-look’ is how this side is often described though there is nothing terribly new about it save the coach and captain. Young, yes, but all the players besides Abdur Rehman have been around for quite some time. The opening problems persist, yet the same old faces are tried and discarded, only to be given another chance. Surely that is not the depth of our resources — or is it? More innovation is required and someone new who does not lug around the baggage of failure deserves a chance. The batting is heavily dependent on two players — Yousuf and Younis — and opponents have caught on that getting one of them out should be enough. A new wicket-keeper is also in order. His misery against leg-spin is well documented but Kamran Akmal is now struggling against pace as well. Fast bowling is the one area where there should be no problems, fitness and tantrums permitting.
Three months after clashes between homegrown militants and the Pakistani army, who many believed put extremists to rest in the capital city, the use of the mosque for Friday prayers and inflammatory speeches against General Pervez Musharraf are evidence of a violent trend that the army may not be able to control.
To many observers’ surprise, the army’s raid against the mosque in the summer did little to silence the extremists’ chant for an Islamic revolution. Rather than crush the militants, the government’s siege provoked extremists throughout the country to seek vengeance against the ‘killers’ during the nine-day standoff in July. Soon after the radical mosque reopened, extremist cleric Maulana Aziz called on his followers to start a revolution.
He noted, ‘The nation should be ready for jihad because only jihad can bring a revolution…The students of schools, colleges and universities should spread in the nook and corner of Pakistan and work for bringing an Islamic revolution.’ In retaliation for the death of Aziz’s brother and the students of the Lal Masjid during the siege, Aziz further stated that those who were killed ‘were dear to Allah. That’s why they have embraced martyrdom (which) has boosted our morale. Every mosque in the country is Lal Masjid’.
Echoing Aziz’s desire for martyrdom, the call for jihad by local groups and by Al Qaeda in its recent videotapes and communiqués prove that the Lal Masjid affair is far from over. On the jihadi website, Murasil al-Buraq, a Sept 20 statement entitled, ‘A call for jihad by the lion, Shaykh Usama bin Laden’ launched by Al-Sahab Productions contained a message warning the Pakistani public and its armed forces that jihad was the only answer.
In the voice of Al Qaeda’s ‘grand strategist’, Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri, the site offered praise for a number of Pakistani clerics, particularly Abdur Rashid Ghazi who was killed by Pakistan’s armed forces. Seeking revenge for his death, Al Qaeda urged the Pakistani public and the army to rise against Musharraf for his ‘submissiveness’ to the United States.
But how much support does Bin Laden have among Pakistanis? In a poll conducted by Terror Free Tomorrow, Al Qaeda has a 43 per cent approval rate, the Taliban have 38 per cent, and support for local extremist groups fall between 37 to 49 per cent. Overall, Bin Laden has a 46 per cent approval rating with Musharraf falling behind at 38 per cent — an astonishing figure, according to Ken Ballen, the director of the polling agency, because it reflects that the Taliban and Al Qaeda ‘are more popular than our allies like Musharraf’. Despite the apparent support for the terrorist movement, most Pakistanis (i.e. 75 per cent, according to the poll) rejected suicide bombings.
While most Pakistanis disagree with suicide terrorism, a determined, dedicated and decisive Al Qaeda in Pakistan has adopted the tactic to launch attacks against targets inside both Pakistan and Afghanistan. Through a wave of suicide bombings, Al Qaeda and local jihadis have proven the lethality of their attacks inside Pakistan which have mostly been directed at the Pakistani armed forces, paramilitaries and the police. Borrowed from the Iraqi insurgents, the use of suicide as a weapon of choice has had deadly consequences.
In the first half of 2007, there were more than two dozen suicide attacks in Pakistan. From January to March 2007, suicide bombings accounted for 67 per cent of civilian casualties, compared to 41 per cent in 2006. From 2003 to 2006, at least 150 tribal elders in Waziristan were murdered presumably by the Taliban who have publicly criticised many elders for siding with Pakistan in its war against the militants.
Unprecedented in Pakistan’s history, suicide terrorism is an emerging trend that has gained popularity among militants after the Lal Masjid event and the breakdown of a peace agreement between the tribal lords of North Waziristan and the Pakistani government.
Pakistan has witnessed a new trend in suicide terrorism — female fidayeen are being prepared to carry out suicide attacks against US interests. A sizable majority of female students of Jamia Hafsa are willing to become suicide bombers. Around 200 women are committed to striking US targets: ‘If the US tried to attack Iran or Pakistan like Afghanistan or Iraq then we will kill the Americans through suicide attacks. We will tie bombs to our bodies and stop the Americans from entering Iran and Pakistan,’ said Sidra Muntaha, a Hafsa student.
Therefore, the steady rate of suicide bombings underscores Musharraf’s claim to the world community that he alone is capable of battling a formidable foe. One of the key challenges before Pakistan is that the resurgent Taliban, allied with Al Qaeda that can manoeuvre, regroup and rearm, destabilise Pakistan’s internal security, its relationship with Afghanistan, and nurture the perception among the international community that Pakistan is a refuge for terrorists.
The exploitation of the porous border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, which analysts consider the ‘world’s (new) terrorism central’, inhabited by Pashtun tribes, has refocused the attention of Washington and Islamabad. The penetration of the tribal belt by Al Qaeda — once an ally of Pakistan’s intelligentsia — and the Taliban is publicly acknowledged by the Pakistani military.
According to a former spokesman of the Pakistani military: ‘We don’t deny the Taliban come and go, but that is not the entire truth.’ Whatever the truth may be, greater US engagement in Afghanistan creates risks for Pakistan. After the US assumed control of Nato forces in Afghanistan, the Taliban said 2007 would be ‘the bloodiest year for foreign troops’ and indicated a ready supply of at least 2,000 suicide bombers for their spring offensive against the United States.
With the Taliban-Al Qaeda merger in the tribal belt, General Musharraf will need to rethink his current strategy in the war against terror. In recent weeks, the army’s heavy-handedness against militants has resulted in civilian deaths in the northern areas and contributed to the general’s growing unpopularity.
Whether it is liked or not, the general, in charge of a country that is seen as the citadel of Islam and the only Muslim nuclear power, will continue to be a strategic ally in the US-led war on terrorism. Pakistan will continue to receive international attention so long as Al Qaeda, the Taliban and homegrown extremists threaten the state’s grip on power and so long as Pakistan is viewed by western countries as fuelling the fire of violent a jihad.
Farhana Ali is a research scholar at RAND Corporation. Mohammad Shehzad is a freelance writer based in Islamabad.
Duty of nationalists
POST-September 11, Pashtuns and the region inhabited by them have been the centre of international attention. In a thoroughly changed strategic situation and a polarised political milieu, most countries are striving today to enforce their agendas in the Pashtun-dominated belt.
Little golly then they are the worst hit by competing influences that pose serious threats to their land and vital interests. In these trying circumstances, it is unfortunate to note this huge community has no workable plan of action to contend with multifarious challenges to their already dolorous existence.
More than anything else, the reason for the Pashtuns’ predicament is that they are rudderless as a nation. In the present environment of despondency, it is the responsibility of nationalist forces and intelligentsia to chart a more secure route to their future. With their homes set aflame, Pashtuns in Pakistan as well as Afghanistan are being exterminated under the garb of an increasingly debatable war against…terror. Amidst this bloodletting, all mainstream political entities…are busy trading on the plight of Pashtuns to meet their narrow political ends.
What is imperceptible…is the proactive role that the nationalist leaders and intellectuals are expected to play in bailing their people out of trouble. It is about time they joined forces to show the world the injustices being inflicted on the people. Together they should prove the Pashtuns have nothing to do with Taliban, Al Qaeda and other extremists. Instead, some quarters are projecting it in a grossly negative light. Much in the same way, Pashtun writers and journalists are required to conscientise their brethren about the steps they need to take to steer clear of the trap laid by international schemers. — (Oct 28)
Let bygones be bygones
THE formation of the interim government had fuelled hopes for peace and reconstruction among Afghans, who enthusiastically swung behind the transitional administration and welcomed the deployment of Nato forces in their country. Only days after the provisional dispensation was put in place, fighting erupted and progressively intensified to temper the upbeat mood. Six years on, the Taliban and security personnel remain in a state of war. The conflict has left thousands of fighters and government functionaries dead and maimed.
Apart from frittering away millions of dollars, the US-led Coalition and the 26-member alliance also lost a large number of soldiers to the pointless war. More importantly, with a precipitous fall in the broad support they enjoyed among the Afghans some years ago, the foreign troops have had their popularity dented. Continued hostilities will certainly translate into more bloodshed and material losses without yielding any tangible gains for either party. However protracted the conflict may be, in the ultimate analysis, the adversaries will have to arrive at a negotiated settlement.
Despite all their might, Nato or the Afghan government for that matter will never succeed in snuffing out armed dissidents by military means alone. In a similar vein, Taliban can neither decisively rout their rivals nor return to power by clinging to the insurgency option. It can be asserted without any fear of contradiction…the use of brute force will not bring stability and reconstruction in its train; the two sides, therefore, should bury the hatchet to pave the ground for lasting peace and guarantee Afghanistan’s steady progress. Finally, we would like to tell the unremitting opponents of peace talks the nation is determined to craft its future with or without their involvement. — (Oct 28)
— Selected and translated by S. Mudassir Ali Shah