THERE has been much talk lately of Pakistan’s military doctrine. On Friday the prime minister said the country needs a new one. That comment came just a couple of days after media reports that the military is redefining its doctrine to incorporate internal militancy as a serious threat. But this idea is not a new one; in his Independence Day speech last year, Gen Kayani had publicly stated not only that “extremism and terrorism present a grave challenge”, but that “the war against it is our own war, and a just war too”. A shift in the military’s mindset appears to have been taking place for some time, and the government has been speaking out against the threat by way of condemning individual incidents. But what neither has done is convincingly lay out a new doctrine in a way that can unite the country — including doubting citizens, soldiers, politicians and members of the media — against violent extremism.

Part of the problem is that the doctrine has changed drastically over time. Pakistanis remember the way militants were trained and equipped by the state to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan, and then used to fight what was dubbed jihad in Kashmir. When the policy was changed in 2001, formerly ‘good’ jihadi organisations banned in 2002 — though some are still allowed, again for undefined reasons, to get away with violating bans — and military operations launched in the tribal areas in the following years, Pakistanis were left with no explanation other than post-9/11 American pressure. In private some military officials will now admit that the state followed the wrong course in the 1980s and 1990s, and in his speech Gen Kayani said, though without explanation, that “all of us have a share of the blame of our past”. But the case has not been made clearly or loudly enough.

This is particularly important to do at a time when militant groups appear to be proposing talks. While dialogue may be a tempting idea to sell to the public, the government and the military need to be crystal clear on the approach to militancy before sitting down with people who declare allegiance to Al Qaeda, don’t believe in democracy and demand war with India. There is also the lingering issue of false distinctions between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ militant groups. But the series of tragic incidents of terrorism that have taken place in the last few weeks should serve as a rude awakening, and this time be used as an opportunity for the state to finally explain, explicitly and publicly, what the current military doctrine is — and how it differs from those of the past.

More From This Section

Too much for too little

THERE is no deadlock, Interior Minister Nisar Ali Khan had told the country regarding talks with the outlawed TTP....

The name of the game

WHAT’S in a name? A lot, it turns out, at least in the case of a proscribed organisation that wants to participate...

Roles reversed

THE story has been repeated ad nauseam over the decades, but is still a favourite with many Pakistanis who bemoan...

Life without dignity

CAN a family survive with dignity on the minimum wage of an unskilled worker, asked the Supreme Court on Monday in...

Comments are closed.

Comments (4)

January 6, 2013 11:00 am
good one
January 6, 2013 5:37 am
I like how all the news headlines bearing words like "way forward" and "prosperity" invariably talk about mending relations with India..proud to be an Indian
January 6, 2013 5:58 am
May one, humbly inquire about a CIVILIAN DOCTRINE,please ?
January 6, 2013 6:08 am
Commen sense would say, parents cannot encourage and train their childern to kill their neighbours and than grumble later that their childern have gone wayward, we told them to kill and trouble only our neighbour but they have become habitual trouble makers and killers every where!!!! Great job Dawn....Please keep pressing for our Miltary and Govt to come crystal clear on this....
Explore: Indian elections 2014
Explore: Indian elections 2014
How much do you know about Indian Elections?
How much do you know about Indian Elections?
Front Page