FOR many political observers, the news of Maulana Samiul Haq’s ‘quitting’ the peace process designed to bring religious militants to the bargaining table with the state must have been greeted with mirth. After all, when did the maulana-led process ever begin? An ostensibly hurt Samiul Haq released a statement on Wednesday in which he blamed Nawaz Sharif’s “lack of seriousness” for the failure of his grand push for peace. However, Prime Minister House retorted with a sharply worded statement on Thursday that Mr Sharif had never actually tasked the maulana with “any specific mission”. Who to believe? Our politicians have mastered the art of spin and are known to dismiss statements on record as ‘siyasi bayan’. But most people familiar with the hurly-burly of Pakistani politics had regarded Samiul Haq’s original claims of opening dialogue channels with the militants with scepticism. After all, reports indicated the prime minister had never explicitly assigned the cleric the role of go-between and gave him the vaguest of go-aheads to attempt mediation. The maulana, never media shy, made it appear as if he had been officially anointed the state’s peace emissary to the Taliban. Samiul Haq has backed out because, according to him, despite getting positive feelers from the Talibs all he got from PM House was silence. He added that the recent air strikes in North Waziristan also scuttled the ‘peace process’. PM House disagreed, saying they had not heard anything from the maulana in weeks.

Even if Samiul Haq had not abandoned his peace mission, his efforts were hardly likely to have succeeded. It is debatable how much actual influence the ‘Father of the Taliban’ retains over his wayward progeny. After all, as any parent will tell you, disciplining kids is not easy. And if those kids grow up into militants out to conquer the country, things really get difficult. These errant children of ‘jihad’ are hardly likely to listen to their elders.