Daily Times Editorial Nov 3, 2013

Hakeemullah’s death and its fallout Hakeemullah Mehsud, leader of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), along with his deputy, bodyguard and 25 other people were killed on Friday in a drone attack on his house in a village near Miransah, North Waziristan. Clearly, this is a big blow to the TTP. Nevertheless, if history is any guide, the TTP may bounce back by electing another chief as it has done in the past and continue its activities, likely with redoubled viciousness. Hakeemullah himself rose to chief of TTP after the death by a drone attack of his predecessor Baitullah Mehsud in 2009. Already reports are filtering in that while on the one hand, Hakeemullah’s supporters planned to bury him on Saturday, the TTP shura was expected to meet urgently to elect a new leader. Hakeemullah Mehsud had a bounty placed on him of $ 5 million by the US after he appeared in a farewell video with the Jordanian suicide bomber who killed seven CIA operatives in a camp in Afghanistan in 2009. Hakeemullah and Baitullah Mehsud’s deaths by drones fall in a fairly long ist of terrorists taken out by the unmanned aerial weapons. The Pakistan government’s reaction, as expressed by Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar in a press conference on Saturday, seems to revolve around the narrative that this attack is a deliberate US attempt to sabotage the peace efforts that were poised to begin by a ‘facilitators’ delegation on its way to meet Taliban representatives with a letter setting out the dialogue offer. Sceptics and critics, however, are doubtful that the government’s claims hold water. Certainly, there was no indication so far that the TTP were willing to come to the negotiating table and in fact had set such unacceptable prior conditions such as release of all their prisoners and withdrawal of the army from FATA that indicated a lack of seriousness on their part. Theirs appeared to be a tactical position of fighting while creating the maximum confusion in the public’s mind about the talks process. Unfortunately large parts of our media too have been peddling this narrative of the peace talks being the best option, poised to take off, and offering a way out for Pakistan from a war many (including Chaudhry Nisar) argue is not theirs. To justify this line of argument, the government, Imran Khan and those sections of the media forget, and fail to remind their audience, of the trajectory whereby things have come to this pass. Pakistan’s involvement in Afghanistan over the last four decades is conveniently brushed under the carpet, including the fact that the Afghan Taliban emerged from Pakistani soil to take over Afghanistan, retreated to the ‘mother’ country after the overthrow of their government in 2001, and now are linked with the Pakistani Taliban inside Afghanistan as well as Pakistan. Imran Khan’s emotional claim to stop the NATO supply lines, even if it means the loss of the PTI’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) government, boils down now to the KP provincial government hijacking foreign policy. That policy, according to Chaudhry Nisar’s remarks during his press conference, would involve delivering a demarche to the US ambassador, approaching the five permanent members of the UN Security Council on the drones issue, reviewing US-Pakistan relations (including presumably cooperation in the US/NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan), and drumming up support by briefing the other political parties. Chaudhry Nisar also appealed to the media to support the government at this delicate juncture. Just how delicate the juncture is, and could become, may become clear in the following days, but one fact is glaringly obvious. There are definite limits how far Pakistan can confront the US without severe damage to its interests, including economic and security aid, and perhaps worse. The need of the hour is not to get on our emotional high horse regarding ‘sovereignty’ and ‘national honour’ while claiming the US had committed, and violated, a promise to halt drone attacks during the peace efforts. A careful reading of the outcome of the prime minister’s Washington visit does not uphold this wishful thinking. We had argued in this space after that visit that the US maintained a diplomatic silence on the drones issue and refused to be drawn into any form of commitment either way. This assessment now stands vindicated by the latest developments. Pakistan cannot ‘go to war’ against the US. Our interest lies in protesting against drone attacks, which is our legitimate right, but not getting carried way by our own rhetoric to the point where we fall foul of the sole superpower.

The fate of the talks strategy Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif, in a meeting in London with British Deputy PM Nick Clegg claimed that talks with the Taliban were underway. The PM said the government could not wait and see innocent people and members of the law enforcement agencies being killed in the streets. He went on to underline that the government was enhancing the capability of its counter-terrorism forces and intelligence agencies to root out extremism and terrorism. Lest anyone get too excited about the ‘announcement’, officials back home moved swiftly to pour cold water on the PM’s assertion by saying the ‘process’ had begun but no direct contact with the terrorists had so far taken place. To be charitable, one could say the PM was only guilty of terminological inexactitude, but the incident has once again focused attention on the government’s talks strategy and its snail-like progress since the government took office.. Markers along the way include the All Parties Conference, in which the government received a mandate for the talks. The PM having tasked Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar with taking the political parties on board, especially since Leader of the Opposition Khursheed Shah had written a letter to Nawaz Sharif regarding doubts emanating from the apparent lack of progress, the interior minister briefed the parties. Nothing has been revealed about what the interior minister had to say, but the political parties leaders, though tight-lipped, seemed satisfied by the briefing. However, Khursheed Shah did say that they had been told there were 37-57 splinter groups of the Taliban. That underlines the complexity of negotiating with the ‘Taliban’ when they are clearly not a unified organisation, rather the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is merely an umbrella for all these groups, but does not enjoy absolute authority over them, as the example of the breaking away of the Punjabi Taliban from the TTP over its support for talks with the government proves. Even worse, so far the TTP has been showing no inclination of being open to talks, setting conditions such as its refusal to disarm, release of all its prisoners, and an end to the drone strikes as prior conditions. A timely reminder of the fact that the Taliban intend in the interim, until the talks conundrum yields some movement, to continue their attacks is provided by the rooftop blast on a pro-government tribal leader’s business premises in Bajaur on Thursday that injured three people. On the other hand, the encouraging news is that the FATA Secretariat is in touch with the Taliban through a tribal jirga to try and get the ‘ban’ imposed by the terrorists on polio vaccinations lifted so that around 150,000 children in the area so far not inoculated may be reached and administered the vaccine. Cases of polio are regularly emerging in FATA, showing how children in the tribal areas are at risk, not to mention the threat of Pakistan being condemned to pariah status as a country of origin of the virus. To underline the threat, which could include a travel ban on Pakistan by 2015 if it is still not polio-free, the recent unconfirmed accusation that the polio virus has travelled from Pakistan to Syria and Egypt points to the possible future. The fact that one round of talks between the jirga and the Taliban has taken place, and the latter are prepared to return for another round since they have accepted the jirga's contention on one of the Taliban’s preconditions for talks that the drone strikes must end that this is not within the power of the Pakistan government, indicates what many knowledgeable people regarding the tribal areas argue. The best way forward, they say, for a dialogue process is to return to the traditional method of a representative jirga of all the tribes in FATA to talk to the Taliban and persuade them to end their campaign of terrorism. It is not known if the ‘mediators’ the government is relying on are also making efforts in this direction, but it is an idea worth exploring since it sits well with the traditions and culture of the area. Mobilising such a jirga would bring the tribes onto the government's side, and the Taliban, who after all have to survive amongst these tribes, may find it difficult to resist the consensus view of such a gathering. On the other hand, if the Taliban defy the jirga, life for them in the tribal areas could become very difficult, and their very survival may be at stake. This is a line of thought the government would be advised to at least explore.

Daily Times Editorial Nov 2, 2013

The fate of the talks strategy Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif, in a meeting in London with British Deputy PM Nick Clegg claimed that talks with the Taliban were underway. The PM said the government could not wait and see innocent people and members of the law enforcement agencies being killed in the streets. He went on to underline that the government was enhancing the capability of its counter-terrorism forces and intelligence agencies to root out extremism and terrorism. Lest anyone get too excited about the ‘announcement’, officials back home moved swiftly to pour cold water on the PM’s assertion by saying the ‘process’ had begun but no direct contact with the terrorists had so far taken place. To be charitable, one could say the PM was only guilty of terminological inexactitude, but the incident has once again focused attention on the government’s talks strategy and its snail-like progress since the government took office.. Markers along the way include the All Parties Conference, in which the government received a mandate for the talks. The PM having tasked Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar with taking the political parties on board, especially since Leader of the Opposition Khursheed Shah had written a letter to Nawaz Sharif regarding doubts emanating from the apparent lack of progress, the interior minister briefed the parties. Nothing has been revealed about what the interior minister had to say, but the political parties leaders, though tight-lipped, seemed satisfied by the briefing. However, Khursheed Shah did say that they had been told there were 37-57 splinter groups of the Taliban. That underlines the complexity of negotiating with the ‘Taliban’ when they are clearly not a unified organisation, rather the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is merely an umbrella for all these groups, but does not enjoy absolute authority over them, as the example of the breaking away of the Punjabi Taliban from the TTP over its support for talks with the government proves. Even worse, so far the TTP has been showing no inclination of being open to talks, setting conditions such as its refusal to disarm, release of all its prisoners, and an end to the drone strikes as prior conditions. A timely reminder of the fact that the Taliban intend in the interim, until the talks conundrum yields some movement, to continue their attacks is provided by the rooftop blast on a pro-government tribal leader’s business premises in Bajaur on Thursday that injured three people. On the other hand, the encouraging news is that the FATA Secretariat is in touch with the Taliban through a tribal jirga to try and get the ‘ban’ imposed by the terrorists on polio vaccinations lifted so that around 150,000 children in the area so far not inoculated may be reached and administered the vaccine. Cases of polio are regularly emerging in FATA, showing how children in the tribal areas are at risk, not to mention the threat of Pakistan being condemned to pariah status as a country of origin of the virus. To underline the threat, which could include a travel ban on Pakistan by 2015 if it is still not polio-free, the recent unconfirmed accusation that the polio virus has travelled from Pakistan to Syria and Egypt points to the possible future. The fact that one round of talks between the jirga and the Taliban has taken place, and the latter are prepared to return for another round since they have accepted the jirga's contention on one of the Taliban’s preconditions for talks that the drone strikes must end that this is not within the power of the Pakistan government, indicates what many knowledgeable people regarding the tribal areas argue. The best way forward, they say, for a dialogue process is to return to the traditional method of a representative jirga of all the tribes in FATA to talk to the Taliban and persuade them to end their campaign of terrorism. It is not known if the ‘mediators’ the government is relying on are also making efforts in this direction, but it is an idea worth exploring since it sits well with the traditions and culture of the area. Mobilising such a jirga would bring the tribes onto the government's side, and the Taliban, who after all have to survive amongst these tribes, may find it difficult to resist the consensus view of such a gathering. On the other hand, if the Taliban defy the jirga, life for them in the tribal areas could become very difficult, and their very survival may be at stake. This is a line of thought the government would be advised to at least explore.

Daily Times Editorial Oct 31, 2013

Hamlet sans the Prince of Denmark In London for the World Islamic Forum, Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif said in an interview with a TV channel that he wants the Taliban to join the peace talks his government has offered as a solution to the terrorism afflicting Pakistan. The PM claimed that whenever there is progress in this endeavour, an unfortunate incident takes place, setting back the process. He went on to reiterate that his government is serious about a negotiated settlement with the militants, and desires peace not only in Pakistan but also in the region. The PM said Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar has been tasked with pursuit of the talks. Nawaz Sharif would like to include all stakeholders in the talks process, amongst whom he also counts the Taliban. The latter, he argued, should become part of the political process. Back home Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar said during an address to the 99th National Management Course for senior officers in Islamabad that talks with the Taliban would begin soon as all the homework has been completed in consultation with all the stakeholders. It may be recalled that before his departure for London, Nawaz Sharif had asked Chaudhry Nisar to take all the political parties into the loop regarding progress in the effort to start the talks process with the Taliban. Since there is no word on whether the speculations in the media regarding some tentative contacts with the Taliban are true and bearing fruit, one can only assume for the moment that the interior minister was talking about only the political parties. Scepticism is rife in Pakistan about the lack of visible progress in the talks initiative. Until and unless the government feels confident of revealing some details that may be sensitive and run the risk of aborting whatever ‘contacts’ may or may not be in the works, there is no telling how much worth there is in the claim of ‘homework’. Chaudhry Nisar also took advantage of the occasion to reiterate his pet project of a joint intelligence directorate that would bring under one roof all the intelligence agencies. Here too, not much visible ‘homework is to be had. Chaudhry Nisar dropped the bombshell that the stillborn National Counter Terrorism Authority (NACTA) would be revived (from its present moribund state) as a major counterterrorism authority in the country. One can only wait and hope. Last but not least, the interior minister trotted out the rapid response force his government plans, complete with an air wing to meet any terrorist emergency. There are a number of problems with the formulations of the PM. First and foremost, his inclusion of the Taliban amongst the ‘stakeholders’ beggars the imagination. How terrorists who threaten the very existence of the state or at the least the democratic political system Pakistan has achieved after much struggle and sacrifice can be described thus is beyond understanding. Second, the government has so far failed to clarify who it will be talking to amongst the plethora of groups describing themselves as ‘Taliban’. It is not clear that there is any one major group amongst them, e.g. the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), with whom negotiations could be held with the hope that whatever agreements are arrived at would be accepted by the other groups under the umbrella of the TTP or whether the TTP could persuade them to go along with those agreements. Not only is there confusion on the government’s side about who would be at the other end of the negotiations table, the government appears divided between its desire to achieve a peaceful solution through talks and its guarded posture that if the talks fail, force may become inescapable. The other ‘stakeholders’, i.e. the political parties, are divided too about the best way forward and what should be the outcome. Last but not least, the Taliban have so far given no indication that they would abandon what they see as a win-win situation for them on the ground and don their negotiation hats. Given all these questions and uncertainties, and the absence of a negotiating partner so far at the other end of the table, the government’s talks initiative seems more and more like playing Hamlet sans the Prince of Denmark.

Daily Times Editorial Oct 29, 2013

Missing persons long march It is difficult not to feel stirrings of sympathy for Dr Abdul Malik Baloch, the Chief Minister (CM) of Balochistan. In his foray the other day to the Karachi Press Club, he was nothing if not candid. First and foremost, he admitted up front that he and his government had failed to resolve the issue of missing persons that has bedevilled the province for years. Although he asserted in one breath that the law and order and security situation in Balochistan had improved since he took over, the next moment he confessed the difficulties in the way of bringing peace and reconciliation to the troubled province. When questioned about contacts or talks with the Baloch nationalist insurgents, Dr Malik tried to put the best possible face on it by stating that his government was trying to find a ‘constitutional’ solution to the conundrum. Presumably what he meant was a negotiated settlement of the conflict without conceding the demand for separation. To create what he called the mechanism for contacts with the Baloch nationalist insurgents in the mountains and those in exile, his government has proposed a provincial All Parties Conference in December to deliberate upon the ways and means to achieve at least an opening to the aggrieved and angry dissidents in the separatist camp. Dr Malik’s small space for manoeuvre however, was exposed in his statement that until such time that the police and Levies in Balochistan were strengthened to take over security and law and order duties, reliance on the Frontier Corps (FC) would have to continue. Given how controversial the FC has become over the years in Balochistan, particularly with reference to the notorious alleged ‘kill and dump’ policy, there is a logical flaw in the CM’s argument. So long as the FC is deployed, and given that the government elected this year seems so far helpless to control the incidence of such incidents, one fails to see how the FC could be taken out of the equation. Rather, its posture and actions suggest the FC will be difficult to remove or replace for the foreseeable future. That cuts the ground from under the ground of the well-meaning CM. High hopes were attached after the May 2013 elections that the coming to power of a middle class Baloch moderate nationalist like Dr Malik offered the best hope in years of promoting a negotiated settlement and peace in Balochistan. Four months down the road, that appears a virtually lost cause, not the least because in practice the CM seems unable to rein in even the more objectionable parts of the FC’s campaign against nationalist dissidents. The CM has proved equally helpless when it comes to meeting the challenges of the earthquake-hit victims in Awaran. Whatever the provincial government, the military/FC and the National and Provincial Disaster Management Authorities have managed, and it could be conceded that their efforts are not inconsiderable, nevertheless they fall far short of the requirement, as Dr Malik himself has repeatedly said. Nevertheless, his appeals to the federal government to either do what is required itself or allow international aid agencies to come in and help have fallen on deaf ears. Meanwhile persistent reports from the remote earthquake zones speak of immense deprivation and a humanitarian crisis, the claims of the authorities to have adequately met the emergency notwithstanding. To add poignancy to Dr Malik’s confession that he has been unable to do much about the missing persons conundrum, a brave group of men, women and children of the Voice of Baloch Missing Persons has undertaken an arduous long march from Quetta to Karachi to highlight the lack of progress on recovery of missing persons in Balochistan, despite the efforts, amongst others, of no less than the Supreme Court. Of course, the difference between the journey of the CM to Karachi and that of the relatives of the missing persons agitating for the return of their loved ones since 2009 is that the latter are making the trek on foot, for 12 hours a day, resting wherever they find themselves at nightfall. Even the most hardened heart must feel for these unfortunate people, whose misery and grief knows no bounds and has seen no relief despite their best efforts. Neither Pakistani nor international human rights organizations have taken up this cause with the persistence it demands, occasional nods in its direction notwithstanding. Without a cessation of tortured dead bodies of nationalists turning up all over Balochistan and increasingly in Karachi, whatever hopes resided in a political reconciliation in Balochistan through Dr Malik and company seem ordained to end in failure. That implies a continuation, and perhaps worsening, of what Dr Malik described as troubles confined to a few districts. How long such complacency can hold the field is a moot point.

Daily Times editorial Oct 28, 2013

Saving Pakistan Soon after returning from Washington, Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif has written a letter to all the political parties setting out the rationale for the Protection of Pakistan Ordinance 2013 and asking for their support in getting it passed by parliament. Making reference to the “spirit and determination” displayed by all the political parties during the All Parties Conference (APC), the PM appealed to them to read the Ordinance carefully and support its passage. The PM’s letter argues that decades of dictatorship and misgovernance by successive governments are the factors responsible for the complete erosion of the writ and authority of the state. Apart from remote areas, the PM points to the safe havens for terrorists in urban areas that have emerged over the years and are a matter of serious concern. At the same time, he has taken the Law Enforcement Agencies (LEAs) to task for their failure to maintain internal security and effectively prosecute criminals. Ineffective legislation has fed into this conundrum, while constant tampering with different laws over an extended period of time has led to a legal vacuum. This has produced a situation where the lives and properties of the people are in grave danger. On the other hand organized mafias are running free. As a result of all these negative developments, the socioeconomic fabric and age-old value system that bind society are in danger of disintegration. The Ordinance, the PM asserts, sends a strong message to organized crime and anti-state elements regarding the will and determination of the state and people to face and eliminate all challenges to the country’s sovereignty and integrity. The PM goes on to remind the political parties that they have been elected by the people to rid the country of the menace of terrorism that has inflicted such enormous losses since the adoption of the post-9/11 policies. He also reminded them of the potential unfolding events in post-2014 Afghanistan. Last but not least, the PM argued that expert opinion had been consulted to ensure the Ordinance was within the parameters of the constitution. Whatever the merits of the PM’s iteration of the scenario bedevilling the country, its reasons and the solution his government thinks offers the best shot for overcoming the present afflictions, and there is weight in his analysis, it is obvious that the PM is reaching out to the parties to ensure the passage of the Ordinance in parliament since the ruling PML-N does not enjoy a majority in the Senate. Without the support of the parties in the upper house, and particularly the opposition, therefore, no legislation can pass. That may be the obvious procedural compulsion for the PML-N to take all the parties with it on legislation that seeks in extraordinary times to put in place powers for the LEAs and judiciary to deal in extraordinary fashion if need be with the existential threat to the country posed by terrorism and the deleterious effects of the breakdown of law and order at the hands of criminal mafias determined to take advantage of the disturbed conditions. The PPP has rejected the Ordinance on the touchstone of fundamental and human rights and it also faces a legal challenge in the Islamabad High Court. This underlines the need for cooperation from all the parties or at least enough of them to allow passage of the Ordinance. As to the PM’s argument that the Ordinance remains within the four corners of the constitution, there is little doubt that the supreme law of the land does envisage extraordinary measures to meet unusual emergencies and contingencies. The moment the civil armed forces are called in by the government, as the Ordinance envisages, and empowered to deal with terrorism on a ‘shoot first and ask questions later’ basis, not to mention searching premises on the basis of suspicion even without a search warrant and disallowing bail to suspects under interrogation, fundamental rights stand suspended. This can be tolerated in situations that threaten the very existence of the state, as arguably the present scenario does, and the hope is that this dispensation will not be misused or extended beyond the exigencies defined above. The PM has also attempted to meet the criticism by Leader of the Opposition, the PPP’s Khursheed Shah, and the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government regarding the seeming lack of progress on the talks with the Taliban by tasking Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar with keeping all parties in the loop on this issue, in line with the mandate the government received from the APC. Both the letter on the Ordinance and the directive to Chaudhry Nisar reflect the PM’s correct approach of taking the political forces along in tackling the grave crisis facing the country.

Daily Times Editorial Oct 26, 2013

Droning unlikely to stop The atmospherics of the meeting between Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and US President Barack Obama in Washington appeared very positive. According to the prime minister, while talking to reporters in London on his way back to the country, the Pakistan side had talked to the Americans on all issues. He said it was time to come out of the duplicity and hypocrisy of the past. This remark has significance given the revelations in a Washington Post story that successive Pakistani governments had privately been in the know about the US drones programme and even approved it, while publicly condemning the strikes to pander to domestic opinion. The assertion is neither new nor devoid of substance. Ex-president Musharraf admitted in a television interview in April this year that he had given verbal approval to the drone strikes. Ex-US ambassador to Pakistan Anne Patterson's diplomatic cable in August 2008, later leaked by Wikileaks, too confirmed this. Ex-premier Yousaf Raza Gilani and other top officials have attempted to deny this, but there is too much weight of evidence to simply wish it away. It should not be forgotten that at one point, Shamsi airbase in Balochistan had been used for drone flights. The foreign office spokesman has tried to put the best possible face on the issue by saying whatever past implicit agreements may have existed on the issue, the present government neither subscribes to them nor is willing to retreat from its stand that the drone strikes violate Pakistan’s sovereignty and are counterproductive. The prime minister has sounded optimistic that the drone strikes issue will be settled soon, although there is the opposite sense emanating from Washington. Nawaz Sharif may be playing to the domestic gallery on this matter as well as on his hopes for the US’s intercession with India on Kashmir and improving relations. Washington has made reassuring noises on both, but is unlikely to do more. The positives of the visit are the fact that it took place at all, both sides committed to understanding each other’s concerns and addressing them, and on the energy and economic front, the news seems positive. Nawaz Sharif may also be able to draw some comfort from the US State Department's statement that Washington supports his policy of talking to the Pakistani Taliban to resolve the terrorism issue. The State Department has expressed its good wishes for Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s ascension to power as presenting a “renewed” opportunity to discuss the continued key bilateral relationship between the two countries and went on to assert that his visit was marked by “warmth, breadth and honesty in fulsome discussions”. The State Department reiterated the US’s commitment to substantial economic and security assistance as Pakistan continues to pursue the objectives of curbing militancy and terrorism and peace and stability for the region. So far so good. The areas of convergence between Washington and Islamabad are clear, as are the actual or potential areas of divergence. In the former, despite the prime minister’s assertions in Washington that he came looking not for aid but trade, aid still forms the critical matrix for the relationship, as in the past. US investment in energy and the economy would seal ties on the foundation of shared economic interests while lifting Pakistan out of its crippling energy shortage and struggling economy. On the rest, though, there are too many variables at play to conclude much except to point to the problem areas. Afghanistan still looms large between the allies, the withdrawal and subsequent situation causing everyone to burn the midnight oil or even perhaps gaze into their crystal balls. On it depends not only the future of Afghanistan, but also the chances of Pakistan overcoming terrorism and taking advantage of the subsequent peace dividend and its concomitant economic benefits. At the risk, therefore, of sounding too didactic, all eyes are still fixed on Afghanistan.