'Outsourcing' done, the govt has become a spectator in 'war on terror'

[Neo]

'Outsourcing' done, the govt has become a spectator in 'war on terror': Whose war is this? Are we winning? Will it end any time soon?

ARTICLE (June 29 2010): Let me take you round to for a look at a single day's news headlines in a national newspaper last week on the subject of "war on terror":

-- 20 militants killed in Orakzai blitz

Jet fighters hit militants' hideout, killed 20. 4 civilians (2 women) killed when shell missed "target".

-- Copters kill 4 militants in Mohmand

Gunship helicopters shelled suspected militants' hideouts killing 4 militants.

-- 3 militants die in Swat

Militants opened fire on security forces which retaliated, killing 3 of them.

-- 3 cops hurt as militants attack post

Militants attacked police post with bombs and rocket launchers. Police abandoned post when ammunition ran out. Militants blew up the post. 3 policemen were wounded.

-- FC man killed, 14 hurt in Quetta blast

Powerful remote controlled explosion killed 1 FC man, injured seven others people.

-- 2 killed one injured in Quetta firing

Unknown gunmen on motor bike killed 2 civilians, injured one.

-- Militant held in Bannu

Police arrested militant and recovered explosives from his possession.

-- Two levies recruits killed in Timegara.

Suspected militants stormed a training center and killed 2 recruits and injured 2.

The total tally reported on a single day adds up to 27 "militants" killed, 4 non-combatant civilians, 1 FC man and 2 levies recruits martyred, 3 cops and 14 civilians injured by militant action, a militant arrested and explosives recovered from his possession. Welcome to the ground reality of our "war on terror", one year on. It was by no means a day out of the ordinary. Look up any day's newspaper at random and you will see what I mean.

It should be obvious from a perusal of daily reports of clashes and casualties in this war that, one year down the line, we are not winning it. Neither are we loosing it. We have got into a stalemate - a very bad situation to be in. The US has been in one for a decade now, desperate to extricate itself, but not finding a way. Will we stop to think and consider a possible change, of course, before things get totally out of hand for any one to handle?

Just who are we fighting?

It would be the height of stupidity to think, and a dangerous premise to build action upon, that the "enemies" our army is fighting since over a year now, are a homogenous like-minded group. Nothing is further from the truth. Let us try to identify the different diverse groups, which defy a common description.

The mercenaries: First and foremost are mercenaries hired from among our own people or introduced into the country under camouflage by other countries, whether geographically close to us or far away from us, but having an interest in destabilising the country. Rehman Malik keeps talking about this, but has yet to pinpoint and take to a conclusion a single case. Eliminate them, certainly by all means by all means at our disposal.

Criminals: Then there are a number of criminal elements, dacoits, kidnapers, extortionists and the like who have taken the garb of ideology or cover of the Taliban name to continue their despicable activity. They would like to be seen as anything but what they are: criminals of the worst kind. They should be fought against without let, apprehended and punished according to law.

Anti-colonialists: A third and sizable group comprises people, who are basically opposed to the US aggression in Afghanistan, an aggression which was started on pretexts that are becoming less and less tenable as each day passes and reality becomes more evident. They think it is their duty to help Afghan resistance with whom they share historical and cultural ties as well as their way of life. They also share with them zero tolerance for foreign armies' presence on or near their soil. Drone attacks in Pakistan, which by admission of the US sources, kill perhaps ten times as many innocent people as alleged "terrorists", further make these people add Pakistani rulers to their hate list when they see that the murderous attacks - controlled and executed from American locations thousands of miles away - are carried out with full agreement of and facilitation by the government of their own country despite the fact that the UN has questioned this aggression on the part of America and their questioning has been ignored by not only America but, alas, by their own (Pakistan) government as well. Thus with every innocent man, woman or child killed, more people are added to this group seething with thoughts of revenge for (among other things as above) the cruel and illogical loss of a parent a son, a daughter or a spouse. We need to revisit our policy towards the so-called "war against terror" and towards America. The effect could be dramatically favourable for peace in the region, if the right changes are made without further delay.

Sharia seekers: Finally, we have people waging their own struggle for quick justice which they equate with the rule of Sharia law. Remember Swat. The people were long used to quick justice by their Vali and yearned for the same. When the British rulers threw out the Vali the areas in Malakand division were brought under the Frontier Crime Regulation (FCR) designed mainly to subdue Pashtun resistance to foreign occupation. Successive governments in Pakistan committed themselves before the people of the area to replace the FCR civil law with Sharia compliant law. In fact, during the 1990s a civilian government introduced a similar law that was poorly implemented. In April 09, following a long agitation, President Asif Ali Zardari signed a bill, introducing the Islamic law in the region, which Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, said had "the support of the nation". There were celebrations on the streets of Swat. But the euphoria did not last. Poor implementation and foot-dragging by the government led to unrest again. Sharia law was maligned by display of a cleverly designed clip on TV screens and print media supposedly showing a woman being publicly flogged by bearded men as if to say that this is what Sharia law meant! The government again reneged on solemn promises. So the discontent returned among the people, who had struggled for the Sharia law for decades now. They and other like-minded people are considered part of this group, which has taken up arms for a cause for which they think - rightly or wrongly - they should rise up in arms against authority. We need to convince these people through dialogue with respected Islamic scholars that violence will not help their cause and is not justified under Islamic code of conduct in the present circumstances. At the same time, the government should make good on its promises and commitments in respect of the Sharia law.

The govt: a spectator in 'war on terror'?

In lumping together all these disparate groups, the civilian government has committed a great folly. Having "outsourced", the war to the Army, at the very outset, it is content to sit back and watch, busy fighting a different kind of war (for own survival).

-- The government has miserably failed to convince the people with its refrain of "it is our war".

-- It has failed to establish even a nominal civilian structure in areas "pacified" by the Army at great cost in money and blood.

-- It has made no effort to initiate a dialogue with groups which could be amenable to that approach. It appears to have learnt nothing from the British experience of successfully negotiating s settlement with the Irish Republican Army despite the latter's decade-long history of terrorist activity.

-- It's lack of effort in this vital crisis in our national life has added to the burden of the army and made its task more difficult.

What needs to be done?

1) Distinguish between different groups of people, up in arms against the government for their own diverse motives and deal with each accordingly.

2) Enter into a dialogue with militant groups who do are not foreign agents and who are not criminals. After all with the US and Karzai already reported to be engaged in a dialogue with the Taliban, do want to be the last or to delay, till it is too late? Of the war in Afghanistan, Milliband says dialogue is the only way. The British Commander-in-Chief says the war in Afghanistan cannot be won. Can we not draw any lessons?

3) Fulfil in letter and spirit promises made time and again to people of Malakand for introduction of Sharia justice; it could become a role model for the rest of the country. After all, our Constitution commits us to a system of governance compliant with Quran and Sunnah and that is Pakistan's raison d'être even if we ignore the promises during the struggle for creation of Pakistan.

4) Ask America to stop drone attacks with immediate effect. The UN has already objected to these attacks as having no legal or moral sanction. How can we keep suffering and not cry "enough"? Perhaps, no single action by us would result in as dramatic a reduction in the scale of hostilities as this.

5) Put a gradual brake on lethal and non-lethal supplies to Nato forces from our soil. After all if and when a Taliban government eventually takes charge in Afghanistan, as seems more likely by the day, do we want a hostile and inimical government as our closest neighbour? But this entails revisiting our policy towards the US and towards the so called 'war on terror'.

Business Recorder [Pakistan's First Financial Daily]