ISLAMABAD: ‘Settlement, settlement’ was the call of the day at the Oxford hosted talk by Anatol Lieven, an expert on Pakistan and the author of his latest book Pakistan: A Hard Country. Being celebrated across the academic circles as an in-depth analysis, the book is being touted as a welcome change from the standard analyses of Pakistan that paint an unpleasant picture of doom and gloom for its future.
So what kind of settlement? Lieven is pushing for a peace settlement with the Taliban as the ultimate and much-needed solution to the Afghanistan conflict.
“Initially, I was a supporter of the talk and fight simultaneously strategy but it soon became obvious that this strategy put such stress on the US-Pakistan relationship that it endangered the wider process,” explained Lieven, a professor at King’s College, London and an ex-journalist.
Lieven’s conclusions are entirely understandable. He puts forward the assumptions that Taliban attacks are impossible to stop completely, the rollback of US ground forces in Afghanistan will make it very hard to maintain ground bases and the US desperately wants to avoid a repeat of its Vietnam experience in Saigon. Combines these factors together and it makes sense that the US wants to find a settlement.
“The inevitable fate of Afghanistan is an intense decentralisation - this can happen with a settlement or after years of bloody war - how we get to it is the question,” declared Lieven, and for these very reasons, a settlement is exactly what Pakistan should be aspiring for. “A settlement is possible and Pakistan should want it - in fact, there is no doubt that Pakistan is very much committed to a settlement.”
What was hidden behind these rational game plan suggestions put forward by Lieven was a sympathetic but fair assessment of Pakistan.
“Afghanistan is a failed state, Pakistan is not,” he declared. But he was not willing to not let Pakistan get away without any responsibility and suggested proactive action to Pakistan’s problems with its messy neighbour. When an audience member asked what Pakistan can do, Lieven emphasised that Pakistan can use media and confidence building measures to show its commitment to a settlement: “I have talked to Pakistanis in positions of power and military men and seen that many of their ideas are even used by the US on the ground - but no one knows about it. Media can be used to bring out Pakistani ideas for settlement.”
It was not all sugar and candy at the talk, however; Lieven was not willing to ignore the fact that at the end of the day, Pakistan is breeding grounds for terrorism. In reference to a question about the tribal areas, he did not mince words in saying:
“Unfortunately, Pakistan is home to a great many terrorists. If a territory becomes host to such elements, there will be repercussions - not that I am using this to justify aspects of the drone program - but it is a responsibility of the local people to not allow their territory to be used for such purposes.”
Neither was Lieven shy in admitting that if Pakistan’s nuclear arms fall in the wrong hands or if another terrorist attack takes place with roots of its planning in Pakistan, there will be serious repercussions for Pakistan from the US.
“Pakistan should use its influence. If it has any influence over Haqqani or the Taliban, it should convince them to cool it a bit,” said Lieven, adding at another point: “Al Qaeda is diminished to a great extent and I would strongly urge Pakistan to capture Ayman Al-Zawahiri so US can declare victory and pull out.”
Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the talk was hearing such sentiments. Here was a Pakistan sympathetic analyst putting a lot of responsibility on Pakistan to capture important terrorists, convince Taliban and Haqqani groups to cool down (albeit with a grain of salt) and help in the settlement process - perhaps it is about time that the Pakistani public also steps up its expectations from the state in bringing the Afghanistan conflict to closure.—Ayesha Shahid