A DAY after the KP government announced a phased withdrawal of the military from Malakand division, an IED attack claimed by the TTP killed three soldiers, including a major general, in the region. There may be an impulse to find a link here between the PTI’s policy of appeasement and the militants’ irrepressible appetite for conflict, but it is an impulse that should be resisted. Malakand division is not the tribal areas; it is a settled and developed part of the country that has been run by a civilian administration for many decades — ergo, an indefinite military presence is neither desirable nor in the interest of the region itself.

The provincial government’s plan to start with Buner and Shangla is also a fairly reasonable one. While parts of those districts are still problematic in terms of security, where the army is not needed for active duties withdrawal makes sense. There is also the simple fact that the army is stretched and under huge material and manpower pressure. Freeing up troops from one area can free up troops for another — perhaps North Waziristan? Much, as ever, will depend on how effectively the provincial government — civil administration, intelligence and law enforcement — will be able to step up and assume full control. The recent efforts of the police in many parts of Malakand are fairly encouraging, according to reports from the ground. But sustaining the gains and building on them will be the real test for the provincial government.

Now to the larger problem: dialogue with an enemy that has given no sign of rejecting violence and has now laid down two preconditions for talks — prisoner releases and army withdrawal. Set aside the tactical advantage that each side will seek in talks for a minute and consider the extremely defensive position the federal government, at the urging of the PTI provincial government, has taken at the outset. In no way can the timidity and fecklessness of the government be a good starting point for dialogue, especially dialogue with an enemy that is so blunt about its aims and adamant about its use of violence to achieve those aims. Sunday was a doubly sad day for this country because it lost a senior military figure in an internal conflict and yet the civilian leadership was unable to even issue a strong condemnation of the group that claimed responsibility for the attack. With the kind of political leadership on display in recent days, a fairly legitimate question would be: ought the country to fear the TTP more or its own elected leadership? Surely the situation demands that the politicians rectify their pusillanimous approach.