IT appears as though the symptom of externalisation is gradually taking over the thinking pattern of most people living in this country. While regional strategic and internal security challenges and threats are generally externalised, many also see an external conspiracy in the current political crisis and the Supreme Court’s disqualification of Mian Nawaz Sharif.

Some commentators have even pointed to certain Gulf countries that were mentioned in the Panama case and were reportedly not very happy with the Pakistani government’s stance of impartiality in the ongoing crisis in the Middle East. The mind’s association with externalisation is like opium addiction: it makes it fly high to things that are far removed from reality.

An interesting disclosure came from the former interior minister, a day before the disqualification verdict. In his presser the other day, Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan claimed the country was being encircled and that only he, Mr Sharif and two army men knew this. In this backdrop, he advised Mian Nawaz Sharif to accept the Panama case verdict humbly. Interestingly, he had reacted otherwise when the Justice Qazi Faez Isa commission report, probing last year’s Quetta blast that claimed the lives of several lawyers, criticised his performance as interior minister.

Without reassessing internal security challenges, external challenges cannot be countered.

He did not elaborate on what exactly he was referring to, but one can guess that his words were somehow related to issues of security since he — as interior minister at the time — was in charge of internal security. His stress on ‘encirclement’ can also be interpreted as the compounding of challenges for Pakistan on the eve of the United States’ review of its policy towards Afghanistan and Pakistan, and its growing strategic ties with India.

Yet, this is not a secret as debate on these issues is already going on in policy and opinion circles. The turmoil in Afghanistan, unrest in India-held Kashmir, the growing Middle East crisis and India’s opposition to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor are among the factors that have largely shaped external views of the country. These factors are connected to each other and they also have an impact on the economy and the internal security environment.

Whatever Chaudhry Nisar may have been referring to, one thing is certain: a protracted political crisis will only add to our external and internal challenges. At the same time, without reassessing internal security challenges and re-evaluating past responses, external challenges — including ‘conspiracies’ — cannot be countered. The new cabinet must rethink the approaches and policies of the past few years. Internal security challenges are hardly connected to political activism. Political actors have a right to activate their support base on national issues. Freedom of speech and political activism in cyber and virtual spaces does not harm national security. Rather such debates can counter extremism and strengthen democratic processes.

A review of the internal security situation suggests that the frequency of medium- to large-scale terrorist attacks has not changed much, compared to the previous year. Ambiguities continue over the status of some banned militant groups, and this is also a cause of fissures between the civil and military leaderships. Many groups that have been tagged as ‘proxies’ not only continue to cause diplomatic problems but have also, gradually, taken control of the state narrative to emerge as a new far right that is both interfering in ‘strategic affairs’ and, alarmingly, causing space for mainstream politics to shrink.

The pace and success of the implementation of measures under the National Action Plan are far from satisfactory. It appears that the government has been investing a great deal on monitoring the implementation of the plan, rather than directly investing in counterterrorism initiatives. A major hurdle in the way of the effective implementation of NAP has been the lack of a centralised mechanism; the plan, importantly, lacks parliamentary oversight. On the other hand, while security institutions have made a few adjustments in their operational strategies, they have failed to completely transform their approach to counterterrorism.

Sectarian violence is and will remain a threat so long as sectarian extremist groups remain active in Pakistan — the discourse of hatred in the country continues to be sectarian often through sectarian streams of madressahs. The government’s approach in dealing with such extremists has been oriented around counterterrorism, without addressing the causes that promote this particular mindset.

Secondly, intolerance against religious minorities is still a major issue in the country. It is of concern that the government has not taken any concrete measures to stop persecution on the basis of religion. The government is not implementing its own laws to curb hate speech or the targeting of religious minorities that are also being subjected to violence. These points in NAP have hardly received any attention from the government.

Unfortunately, the government has given very little priority to parliament. Except for approval of NAP and the occasional discussion on the security situation in the aftermath of major terrorist incidents, the institution has not put in efforts to shape internal security policies. Though a new cabinet will have only a few months to function, it can draw the contours of the security policy with the guidance of parliament, while civilian law-enforcement agencies should be the first line of defence against any extremist threat. The Constitution is the guiding principle of any dialogue on tensions within the country.

While parliament’s role in security policy formulation and in countering extremism is vital, it is also essential for enriching democracy and the country’s political culture. An active parliament and a fine balance between parliamentary, policy and executive functions could foil all conspiracies and help in the development of effective responses to internal and external threats.

It remains to be seen, however, whether the next cabinet crafts new paths or remains a captive of old habits.

The writer is a security analyst.

Published in Dawn, July 30th, 2017