THE prime minister seems to have finally realised that the country is moving from crisis to catastrophe. During the last cabinet meeting held to discuss the proposed security policy, he said: “Pakistan is facing a serious security situation and to address the extraordinary situation, we need to take extraordinary measures.”

What are those extraordinary measures going to be like? He did not elaborate. As they say, when the going gets tough, the tough get going. Does this mean the strengthening, finally, of state institutions with sound strategies and the use of effective legal instruments to tackle the menace of terrorism that threatens to unravel the state?

The track record of this government so far and the mindset that prevails at the helm of affairs have unfortunately sent confused signals. Combating terrorism through talks only has been a non-starter given the intransigence of the outlawed Taliban as well as the lack of national consensus on how to deal with the violence unleashed by groups of militants with an unambiguous extremist ideology. Fighting militancy through military means alone has also not produced the desired results as there are fundamental differences in counter-insurgency and counterterrorism strategies.

A formal announcement of the internal security policy has been deferred yet again after deliberations by the cabinet that felt that “a half-baked policy wouldn’t serve any purpose” and further suggestions have been sought.

It is hoped that the proposed internal security policy will provide a comprehensive and an overarching conceptual framework to meet daunting challenges like terrorism, militancy, insurgency, lawlessness and organised crime being faced by beleaguered but resilient citizens who want peace, progress and prosperity and to be counted as part of a self-respecting, dignified nation.

The major internal security challenges facing the nation can be summed up as follows: lack of national consensus on ways to tackle militancy; absence of a national narrative against the religious and political agenda of the terrorists and militants; weak writ of the state in peripheral areas like Fata and Balochistan; lawlessness in certain important urban centres, especially Karachi; and the absence of formal and institutional interaction on the internal security framework among professional experts and policymakers.

In addition, we can see inadequate coordination, cooperation and collaboration between civilian and military law enforcement agencies; lack of intelligence and information-sharing between the federal and provincial agencies and departments; limited capacity of police and civil armed forces to meet threats; ineffective investigation and prosecution of terrorism cases; and insecurity of investigators, prosecutors, witnesses, lawyers and judges dealing with terrorism cases.

There are other challenges with strategic and tactical implications. These include: use of media by the terrorists for issuing messages and threats; an ineffective public education system resulting in the growth of madressahs to fulfil the needs of the poor; and the lack of socio-economic justice creating a gap between the haves and have-nots and attracting unemployed youth to militancy.

There’s also proliferation of and easy access to weapons; and last but not the least the unwise promotion of non-state militant actors who pursue a violent agenda at the expense of weakening the state institutions.

The interior minister has announced that the proposed security policy document will have three parts: a secret one not for public consumption, a strategic framework, and an operational and tactical portion.

I must advise that the secret operative part be subject to in camera parliamentary or judicial oversight. Given the trigger-happy culture of our law enforcement agencies and the prevalence of gross human rights violations on the part of our intelligence agencies, we do not want the ‘kill and dump’ strategy and enforced disappearances to continue anymore as we as a nation should not put up with such tactics.

The strategic framework should be based on the trilateral paradigm of security, sovereignty and sustainability.

Security implies state monopoly over the use of force, elimination of domestic threats and dealing firmly with non-state actors. Sovereignty entails the effective reach of law enforcement over the entire territory of the state, the use of civil armed forces and military in aid of the civil authorities, and reassertion over de facto and de jure policies by parliament and the civilian government. Sustainability should aim at socio-economic justice, a sound public education system, a national counter-extremism narrative, good governance and rule of law.

The tactical and operational component of internal security should treat the police as the lead institution and the civil armed forces, intelligence agencies and military must all work in close coordination. They have all made supreme sacrifices so far and they owe it to our future generations to make a difference.

In short, for Pakistan to be a sustainable state, it needs to be sovereign, and for it to be a sovereign state, it must be secure.

The writer is a retired police officer.