7
IT has been over four weeks now since the Nato ground supply line through the Torkham border was blocked. The Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf has declared it a tactical victory for its anti-drone campaign. Yet, last week a drone strike in North Waziristan reportedly killed four militants.
So, where does the PTI’s protest go from here? Imran Khan vows to continue his campaign till the US gives in. The latest strike, however, shows this is certainly not going to happen. It is something of a stretch to think that the US could be forced to change its policy by this isolated protest.
Not only has the PTI led itself into a blind alley, its senseless action has undermined Pakistan’s position on the drone issue, increasing the country’s international isolation. Not surprisingly, the PTI”s solo flight finds support only from the Jamaat-i-Islami and the outlawed Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan. Both these groups have been directly affected by drone strikes, killing several of their members and commanders.
The absurdity of the mob action has become more apparent as most of the Nato cargo shipment has long been diverted to other routes. While the stick-wielding PTI workers have blocked the Torkham crossing, the Chaman supply route is open. In fact, Torkham was not the main transit point prior to the PTI protest. The number of Nato cargo trucks passing through Khyber Pakhtunkhwa had declined sharply over the last several months.
The US and Nato are now increasingly using the Central Asian route. That may be much costlier, but at least it is open and safer. Most of the shipment passing through Pakistan now consists of coalition withdrawal military hardware. What purpose does it serve to stop it?
What the PTI does not understand is that Nato has nothing to do with the CIA’s drone operation. Pakistan is bound by international agreement to allow the passage of Nato cargo shipment to Afghanistan. But this irrational action has created an embarrassing situation for Pakistan. Drone attacks are a serious issue and concern Pakistan’s sovereignty, but they should be dealt with more prudently at the national level, not through mob action.
It sets a dangerous precedent when a provincial government unilaterally takes a decision on an issue that involves international agreements and foreign policy. The PTI’s strange logic is that it is just implementing an APC resolution and the Peshawar High Court ruling ordering the Pakistan government to take measures to stop drone strikes.
Imran Khan’s politics is full of paradoxes. His slogan for change got his party support from the youth and an educated urban middle class disillusioned with the established parties. A new generation of young professionals among the ticket holders made the party even more attractive for voters.
But the so-called party for change has allied itself with the most retrogressive right-wing politics. In fact, the Jamaat-i-Islami having been marginalised in electoral politics is now piggybacking on the PTI.
Imran Khan’s one-dimensional approach to the drone issue has blurred his party’s position on the much graver problem of violent extremism and militancy that has led to a thousand times more civilian deaths. Its vociferous support for reconciliation with the Taliban when the militants continue to attack Pakistani forces and civilians make us wonder which side of the conflict the party is on.
It appears that the PTI’s anti-drone campaign is not as much a protest against the US breaching Pakistan’s sovereignty as a defence of militants under attack. The drone strike on a madressah in Hangu in KP that killed five senior members of the Haqqani Network triggered the blockade. No doubt, the attack inside Pakistani territory violating our sovereignty is unacceptable. But foreign fighters taking sanctuary inside the country is an equally serious national security issue.
And it is certainly also the responsibility of the provincial administration not to allow Afghan insurgents to operate from its soil. It is very clear that the US drone strikes will not stop until Al Qaeda and other militant sanctuaries in the tribal areas are not cleared.
Instead of keeping a singular focus on drone politics the PTI could serve the people of KP much better by getting its priorities right on militancy. In fact, the policy of appeasement has allowed the militants much more space in the province. The presence of the Taliban is reported to have increased in Peshawar and the surrounding areas.
With a sympathetic government in the province they have nothing to be afraid of. Some 279 civilians and 40 security personnel were killed in 22 suicide bomb attacks in the province in 2013 alone.
It is indeed commendable that the PTI chief has pledged to personally spearhead polio vaccination efforts in the troubled province that has remained the centre of the Taliban’s resistance to the immunisation campaign. Several vaccinators have so far been killed in the militant attacks in the province. The success of the vaccination campaign is directly linked to the battle against violent extremism.
It is not the drone attacks, but militancy and terrorism which present the biggest threat to Pakistan’s security. The drone strikes are now taking place only in North Waziristan where Pakistani forces are also fighting local as well as foreign militants. That raises the question of whether drones targeting the common enemy are more dangerous, or the policy of appeasing the Taliban. Imran Khan’s populist drone politics only strengthens the militant narrative of war against the Pakistani state.
The writer is an author and journalist.
Twitter: @hidhussain
