Business Recorder editorial Aug 27, 2016

MQM at turning point The extraordinary developments surrounding the MQM since its founder-leader Altaf Hussain’s diatribe on August 22 have left the party facing a turning point. Altaf Hussain’s speech was incendiary, anti-state, and incentivised violence and rioting against the media for not carrying his speeches. What followed was mayhem. That proved a speech too far for the governments in the Centre and in Sindh as well as the security establishment. While cases and arrests of those responsible for the riot on August 22 continue, the authorities have taken the decision to demolish or seal around 200 offices of the party in Karachi and conduct similar actions throughout Sindh. The justification being presented for these actions is that these offices were encroachments on state land. This is disputed by the MQM, which argues that not all these offices were encroachments and no notices were issued, as would be the normal legal procedure. To some this may appear too fine a point or quibbling after what transpired on August 22, but that could arguably be construed as a knee-jerk response or taking advantage of the MQM’s present difficulties to impose a fait accompli while the going is good. No one can dispute that the MQM’s rise to power owed not a little to its strong arm, criminal and even terrorist actions in Karachi over the years, which produced a climate of fear that the party rode to dominance. But this is only one side of the picture. The MQM still enjoys massive political support amongst the Urdu-speaking people of Karachi and throughout Sindh. It was to save the party and its constituent community that Dr Farooq Sattar took the unprecedented step of distancing MQM Pakistan from Altaf Hussain and the London Committee perceived to control the militant wing of the party. Sattar distanced himself from Altaf Hussain’s anti-state diatribe and the militant past of the MQM, stopping just short of a denouncement for tactical reasons. Now speculations are rife whether this represents a permanent or (as so many times in the past) temporary sidelining of Altaf Hussain, pending his perceived need for medical professional help and treatment. How long the mercurial leader would continue to eat humble pie and not reassert himself remains in the realm of conjecture. In the meantime, Farooq Sattar is poised on the horns of a dilemma. If he appears still loyal unreservedly to Altaf Hussain, he and his party may not be spared the unwelcome attention of the authorities. His attempt is to reposition the MQM as a law abiding mainstream party. This is an enterprise, despite its risks and potential pitfalls, which should not be dismissed lightly. For it to succeed, which appears to be in the interests of the MQM as well as the country, he needs to be cut some slack. Also, from the point of view of the state, the temptation to steamroll over the MQM in the favourable climate for it at this conjuncture notwithstanding, there is a need to proceed cautiously, circumspectly, and within the four corners of the law and constitution. Only thus can the state retain the moral high ground and help persuade the MQM’s considerable vote bank that their best option is going with Farooq Sattar and company and dumping Altaf Hussain and his London cohorts. Even if some or all of the MQM offices being demolished or sealed were illegitimate encroachments, surely this is not a fact that has suddenly come to the attention of the authorities. Most of these offices are decades old and were allowed to exist because military dictators backed the MQM and civilian governments chose expedient mollycoddling of the party to keep it from reverting to its worst avatar. Revenge should not appear as the motive for actions against the MQM, but rather the belated and long overdue re-establishing the writ of the state and the rule of law. The latter in particular will not be helped by actions deemed arbitrary. Ironically, while the demolition/sealing of MQM offices and the arrests of those suspected of being involved in the violence of August 22 continue, the federal and Sindh governments are playing ping-pong with who is responsible for these actions against the party. If legitimate, lawful actions against MQM were the order of the day, perhaps these governments would feel less hesitant, if not confident, of acknowledging their ownership. Legitimate actions would also help isolate Altaf Hussain and the London Committee further, establish the credentials of Farooq Sattar and MQM Pakistan, and help wean the Urdu-speaking community away from the men of violence and into the arms of a reinvented, acceptable MQM.

Business Recorder editorial Aug 24, 2016

IHK continues to bleed The wave of unbridled repression let loose by the Indian troops in Indian Held Kashmir (IHK) since the July 8 killing of militant commander Burhanuddin Wani and the consequent mass youth uprising shows no signs of abating. On August 23, Indian troops opened fire on protestors demanding an end to Indian rule in the southern Shopian and northern Bandipore areas, wounding at least 14 people to add to the mounting casualty toll in the troubled state. In Shopian, police claimed the troops fired after villagers pelted them with stones while they were clearing roadblocks set up by protestors in about half a dozen villages. Local residents however, said the clashes erupted after troops fired tear gas indiscriminately to intimidate the villagers while moving through their area. The agitated villagers retaliated with rocks, and were met by a hail of bullets and shotgun pellets. Clashes were also reported from at least two locations in the Bandipore area, where a woman was injured. This has become a pattern since the largest protests in IHK since the 2010 intifada broke out after July 8. Unarmed civilian protestors throwing stones and rocks or whatever is at hand are brutally killed and wounded by bullets and shotgun pellets fired directly at the defenceless crowds. At least 65 protestors have been killed and thousands wounded in this manner. Two policemen have been killed and hundreds of security personnel injured in the clashes. These figures are alarming enough, not to mention the horror of unrestricted use of live ammunition and pellets against unarmed protestors. The shotgun pellets fired indiscriminately at crowds and even passersby have resulted in thousands losing their eyesight or suffering horrendous wounds to the face and eyes. The Modi government seems to believe it can indefinitely keep up these atrocities in a continuing attempt to forcibly retain the people of Kashmir within India’s fold with the liberal use of the knout and at the point of a bayonet. History may not be on Modi’s side in this unremitting cruelty, but until it delivers its final verdict, the pain inflicted on the long suffering people of Kashmir has attained unprecedented heights. Not only is IHK continuing to bleed at the hands of Modi’s butchers, constant curfews and harassment of citizens going about their daily business, not to mention the gagging of the media in IHK, has made the life of IHK’s denizens miserable (the rest of the Indian media, with a few honourable exceptions, continues its long standing practice of turning a blind eye to the atrocities being perpetuated on defenceless people or toeing New Delhi’s line of denying the problem is indigenous and dumping it all in the basket of ‘terrorism’ or militancy allegedly being ‘exported’ from Pakistan). Regrettably, the voices of dissent in India from this cruel policy are still all too few and far between, the increasing disquiet and criticism of India’s opposition parties notwithstanding. Brave individuals such as writer and activist Arundhati Roy are charged with sedition for daring to challenge India’s officially certified truth in IHK. An Indian movie actor and onetime Congress MP Ms Ramya is similarly charged for contradicting Indian Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar’s description of Pakistan as ‘hell’, based on her recent visit to our country. Even respected human rights watchdog Amnesty International is roped into the sedition fold for critiquing the bloodshed. Sadly, neither the UN nor the international community has shed even a crocodile tear for the blood of innocent youth being butchered without mercy in IHK. One fruit of New Delhi’s attempts to pin the blame for the troubles in IHK on Pakistan is the impact on bilateral and South Asian relations. Indian Finance Minister Arun Jaitley has skipped the SAARC finance ministers’ meeting in Islamabad, sending the finance secretary in his place. In the current climate, the chances of Foreign Secretary Aizaz Chaudhry’s invitation to his Indian counterpart to discuss Kashmir seems unlikely to bear fruit. The Modi government is playing with fire by brutally suppressing the people of IHK and stubbornly refusing to engage in a dialogue with Pakistan or the people of IHK. Perhaps they need to heed the words of Arundhati Roy, whose subtextual meaning is that no people can be free if it oppresses another people. The clampdown on dissent over Modi’s IHK policy is living proof of that wisdom.

Business Recorder Editorial Aug 24, 2016

Altaf Hussain’s political hara-kiri The dizzying events in Karachi on Monday and Tuesday shook the country and left the political actor at the heart of what evolved into a major crisis, the MQM, reeling. First, a recap. MQM had mounted a hunger strike before the Karachi Press Club in protest at the alleged ‘disappearance’ of dozens of its workers at the hands of the security agencies, some of whom, according to the MQM, have been tortured or extra judicially killed. The pressure on the federal government first and foremost as the controller of the Rangers leading the operation in Karachi reached a critical point when the health of some of the hunger strikers, including parliamentarians, deteriorated. Islamabad then dispatched Information Minister Pervez Rashid to Karachi to hold talks with MQM leader Dr Farooq Sattar and his colleagues. At the end of their deliberations on Monday, it appeared as though a breakthrough had been achieved when the minister revealed that he had heard the MQM and conveyed to them the message of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif that an MQM delegation should visit Islamabad to see him and that the government would try to redress their grievances. After this announcement, it was stated from the MQM side that the hunger strike had been ended. What followed surprised all and sundry. Altaf Hussain, whose incendiary speeches from London have been banned from being broadcast on the electronic media, spoke to the to-be-dispersed hunger strike camp and delivered a broadside to beat all his previous efforts. Not only did he castigate Pakistan in terms that have been construed as treasonous (a case under Article 6 has reportedly been lodged against him and others), he instigated the hunger strikers to ‘attend’ to the media houses that were refusing to broadcast his speeches. Unfortunately for them, two media houses in particular were located near the Press Club and therefore were on the receiving end of the unwanted attentions of the angry MQM workers, led by women. Not only were the offices and studios of these media outlets trashed and staff attacked, clashes with the small contingent of police on the spot resulted in one death and about a dozen wounded. A police motorcycle was set on fire and many cars and vehicles smashed. Eventually, a heavier contingent of police arrived, along with Rangers, to quell the violence. The incident was condemned from all sides, including the prime minister. COAS General Raheel Sharif instructed the DG Rangers in Karachi to arrest all those involved in raising anti-Pakistan slogans in response to Altaf Hussain’s instigation and perpetrating violence against the media. In the evening. Farooq Sattar and other MQM leaders who arrived to conduct a press conference at the Press Club were arrested and taken away by the Rangers but then later released. MQM workers were arrested all over the city, all the party’s offices, including its headquarters Nine Zero, were sealed and some 13 workers allegedly guilty of the Monday violence were sent on police remand by an anti-terrorism court. The following day, Tuesday, Farooq Sattar held a press conference in which he made the startling announcement that henceforth, decisions of the MQM would be made in Pakistan (i.e. Karachi) and not in London. This effectively meant sidelining the MQM supreme leader Altaf Hussain and his London Committee, although Farooq Sattar and other MQM leaders cautiously tried to ‘balance’ the distancing from the supremo with ritual declarations of Altaf Husain still being the leader of the party. Farooq Sattar also distanced himself and the MQM Pakistan (as it is now being called) from the anti-Pakistan slogans authored by Altaf Hussain as well as violence in any form or for whatever reason. Sattar’s ‘caution’ was visible in his reluctance to answer journalists’ questions at the press conference. Clearly, Farooq Sattar has attempted damage control aimed at preventing the MQM being banned, as is being advocated by many quarters. He may also have had an eye on Karachi’s mayor and deputy mayor elections due today, in which the MQM obviously has a big stake. Sceptics though are wondering out loud whether this ‘distancing’ between Karachi and London is tactical or permanent, voluntary or establishment pressure-driven, and the final imposition of the ‘minus-one’ formula vis-à-vis Altaf Hussain. Of course the answers will only be available over time, and perhaps even over the next few days. Much will depend on Altaf Hussain’s reaction. This is not the first time Altaf Hussain has embarrassed his party on the ground in Pakistan by making outlandish speeches/statements. Each time it has been left to the likes of Farooq Sattar to pull the leader’s chestnuts out of the fire lit by his own hand for the sake of the survival of the party. Farooq Sattar’s attempts to present the MQM as a legitimate, moderate, parliamentary party were constantly undermined by Altaf Hussain’s ravings. Sattar was even ‘punished’ (verbal and physical abuse) in the past for allegedly defying the supremo’s orders or not following them to the letter. Farooq Sattar always attempted to put a brave face on this mistreatment and attempted to soldier on for the sake of the MQM’s survival. This time however, it seems Altaf Hussain has gone too far. Even his most ardent admirers and defenders in the MQM leadership have thrown up their hands if not thrown in the towel on this mission impossible. What follows could decide the fate of the MQM and therefore also of Karachi and the politics of mohajir ethnicity that has been the leit motif of the MQM for the last 32 years. Altaf Hussain may yet survive this crisis, but his penchant for committing political hara-kiri seems to have impelled him in the direction of one speech too far.

Business Recorder editorial Aug 17, 2016

Panama commission conundrum Finance Minister Ishaq Dar seems to have mounted a fresh effort to persuade the opposition, the PPP in particular, to cooperate in getting the stalled inquiry commission on the Panama leaks off the ground. In this regard, he reportedly recently met Asif Zardari in Dubai and has now followed that up with a meeting with the Leader of the Opposition in the National Assembly (NA) Syed Khursheed Shah. To end the stalemate on the commission and its Terms of Reference (ToRs), Dar asked Khursheed Shah to agree a date for the meeting of the parliamentary committee to prepare mutually agreed ToRs for the inquiry commission. Khursheed Shah circumspectly responded by saying he would give his response in a day or two after consulting the Senate Leader of the Opposition Aitzaz Ahsan and other opposition allies. Aitzaz has been the party’s leading light in insisting that the probe must begin with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his family. Dar later addressed the media to say that the meeting with Khursheed Shah had been on the one-point agenda of discussing the draft of the government’s bill, The Commissions of Inquiry Act, 2016, in view of the opposition’s demand for a specific law under which the commission would investigate those owning offshore companies. The new Act is meant to replace the existing Inquiry Commissions Act 1956, which the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP) Anwar Zaheer Jamali categorised as “toothless” while rejecting the government’s proposed ToRs and asking for new legislation to empower the proposed commission. While this response of the CJP strengthened the opposition’s hand as it endorsed their demand for fresh legislation, Dar advocated the new and improved draft of the proposed bill. Dar also explained that since there was no convener of the 12-member parliamentary committee that has equal representation of the treasury and opposition, the government had to approach the Speaker NA or the opposition leader to agree a date for the meeting. The parliamentary committee has not met since June when, after a series of its meetings, the opposition decided not to hold further negotiations after the government’s refusal to accept its ToRs. Last month, the Speaker NA’s intervention had produced an agreement to meet on August 9, but it had to be postponed because of the Quetta attack on August 8. The main sticking point in the ToRs has remained the insistence of the opposition that the Panama probe must begin with the prime minister and his family. After the deadlock, the opposition parties separately have moved references before the NA Speaker and the Election Commission of Pakistan seeking the disqualification of the prime minister and his family for allegedly concealing assets abroad and details of taxes. The government’s fresh effort to break through the logjam on the Panama affair seems motivated by a number of developments after the negotiations broke down. First and foremost, the government wants to wean the PPP away from its recent flirtation with the PTI. The PPP in the past, especially during Imran Khan’s months-long Islamabad sit-in, had stood by the government’s side on the basis that they were defending the democratic system. But of late the PPP has been alienated by the government’s actions against and statements about the party and its government in Sindh, particularly Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar’s railings against the party’s leadership. Although the PPP’s attempt to sail in the same boat as the PTI and the rest of the opposition has not been smooth, it seems to have finally dawned on the government that the costs of alienating the PPP far outweigh any actual or perceived benefits. Second, now that Imran Khan has once more embarked on a series of protest rallies and sit-ins and intends to move the Supreme Court against Nawaz Sharif, it becomes even more imperative for the government to once again win back the PPP to at least a defence of democracy, which in the obtaining situation obviously helps the ruling PML-N. Whether the fresh government initiative will succeed or not only time will tell. But there now seems no escape from a Panama leaks inquiry after the necessary legislation is passed and provided the two sides of the political divide agree on what have proved contentious ToRs.

Business Recorder Editorial Aug 16, 2016

Addressing NAP lacunae In the third meeting of the top civilian and military leadership in the last six days, the final touches have apparently been administered to rejig the National Action Plan (NAP). The move comes after the military expressed concern about the lacunae and gaps in the implementation of NAP, reiterating on Monday, the day of the meeting, that failure to address the weak or unimplemented parts of NAP would make the consolidation of the successes of Operation Zarb-e-Azb difficult, if not impossible. In the wake of the August 8 Quetta carnage, the government seems finally to be moving to allay the military’s concerns. National Security Adviser (NSA) Lt-General (retd) Nasser Khan Janjua has been named to lead the new body constituted to oversee the implementation of NAP. Apart from the NSA, the body will include the military’s Director General Military Operations (DGMO), the Interior Secretary, DG National Counter Terrorism Authority (NACTA), the provincial Chief Secretaries, Inspector Generals (IGs) Police, Home Secretaries, an Additional Secretary of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) and representatives of the intelligence agencies (civilian and military). The decision to appoint NSA Nasser Janjua as the head of the new NAP implementation body reflects a ‘compromise’ on the original provisions of NAP, which saw NACTA in the role of the coordinating centre for implementation of NAP. But that plan fell foul of the tug of war between the prime and interior minister over who NACTA would report to, as well as the opposition of the military’s intelligence agencies to be answerable to civilians. NACTA therefore never took off. The new body will fill the void under NSA Nasser Janjua who, being a former General, seems to have proved acceptable to the military and its intelligence agencies. While this may allay some of the military’s concerns regarding NAP, that is not the whole story. The military seems concerned also about the uncertain future of the Protection of Pakistan Act (PoPA), liable to lapse if not renewed in January 2017 because of the two-year sunset clause slipped into it by parliament. Parliament had also wisely thought to limit the arbitrariness at the heart of the military courts set up under the Act to summarily try terrorism suspects by keeping their verdicts open to judicial review by the higher courts. In practice, this has led to many death and long prison sentences handed down by the military courts being suspended by the superior judiciary on the touchstone of due process and fair trial. And this in spite of the endorsement of these military courts verdicts by COAS General Raheel Sharif. At the time of writing these lines, reports speak of his endorsement of the death sentences by military courts of another 13 alleged terrorists, perceived as the military’s ‘answer’ to the Quetta atrocity. It remains to be seen, however, whether their fate will be any different from all the other military courts verdicts so far. Apart from the fate of PoPA, the military harbours reservations about the reluctance of the political leaderships to allow special powers to the Rangers in Punjab and the whole of Sindh, issues regarding preventive detention of terrorism suspects, and poor prosecution of terrorism cases. As far as the military’s concern about raising new wings of the Frontier Corps (FC) is concerned, a beginning towards eventually raising 73 new wings has been made by announcing the establishment of 29 new wings this year. The prime minister himself has promised all necessary funding and support for counter-terrorism. In addition, the Finance Ministry and the State Bank have been instructed to take action on terrorism financing. Another top level meeting is expected this week to be attended by all the provinces’ chief ministers. Further legislation that may be required and investing the new NAP implementation body with the authority it needs will also be dealt with. A mechanism for intelligence sharing amongst federal and provincial authorities and the intelligence organisations and other departments will be strengthened to plug this major coordination gap. Action is planned against proscribed organisations functioning under different names and the provinces will be provided more funds for the anti-terrorism drive. All this represents a new found resolve to plug the loopholes left over in the implementation of NAP. The response of the civilian authorities after the Quetta attack is to be appreciated, even if it is a case of better late than never. It may also serve to smoothen the rough edges and worries of the military regarding the tardiness so far of the civilian authorities to do the needful and ensure the full implementation of NAP. The struggle against terrorism requires nothing less than the complete and unhindered cooperation and coordination of all state stakeholders to ensure the success of the national endeavour to root out and eliminate the existential threat posed by terrorism.

Business Recorder Column Aug 15, 2016

NAP in the doldrums Rashed Rahman Another Independence Day came and went with little beyond the ritualistic commemorative events and statements. Although there were references galore to the Quetta carnage on August 8 that left over 70 dead and many others wounded (the toll including a preponderant weight of lawyers), what was missing perhaps was an announcement by the government/s to hold a national level one minute’s silence as a mark of respect to the victims. Instead, from the day of the blast at Quetta’s Civil Hospital, we have been inundated with the narrative that such incidents are the product of outside powers’ malign and inimical intent towards Pakistan. India and its intelligence agency RAW have in particular been singled out for blame. All this means that the ubiquitous ‘foreign hand’ thesis has been granted a fresh lease of life. Is the ‘foreign hand’ narrative completely without basis? It is difficult to say since there is a long history of the intelligence agencies of Pakistan and India conducting covert activities against each other. The narrative cannot therefore be dismissed out of hand. However, what is disconcerting about the repeated accusations by the two countries (and Afghanistan for good measure) is the lack of supporting evidence to back up these claims. In Pakistan, the media has not only failed to critically interrogate these claims of both civilian and military leaders, it has joined the chorus without a second thought or any attempt to present some clinching evidence. Pakistan says it has presented a dossier to back up its accusations against India as being behind the terrorism in Pakistan to the UN. Fine, but no details are available to date about what the dossier contains. Scepticism about the belated initiative is deepened by the lack of response to the dossier by the UN or the global powers-that-be. Why is this demand for persuasive evidence to substantiate the allegations of the ‘foreign hand’ being responsible for terrorism in Pakistan important? First, as Pakistan’s feeble diplomatic efforts at the UN and bilaterally with the global powers shows, dossiers and statements seem so far to have failed to persuade anyone of Pakistan’s ‘case’. No effective support for Pakistan therefore can be expected in the near future. Meanwhile such repeated accusations raise the temperature of hostility and confrontation between neighbours in our part of the world, with two at least of the countries concerned being nuclear-armed (Pakistan and India). Second, the knee-jerk fashion in which every terrorist incident is immediately blamed on the ‘foreign hand’ serves to distract from the critically needed focus on domestic non-state actors directly responsible for terrorist atrocities. This is the major failure of the National Action Plan (NAP) agreed with consensus by the political class and unreservedly backed by the military. Let us examine the reasons for this failure. First, some context. It may be recalled that soon after the May 2013 elections that brought the PML-N to power, the government gathered all the political parties to discuss the issue of terrorism afflicting the country. After long deliberations, the political class arrived at the consensus conclusion to give peace a chance by conducting talks with the terrorist outfits, particularly the homegrown Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). That initiative soon came a cropper because of the terrorist attack on Karachi airport in June 2013. The military’s response was to mount Operation Zarb-e-Azb in FATA to root out the terrorists from their safe havens and main operating base inside the country. The operation achieved great success in uprooting the terrorists from the area. But the adjunct NAP agreed to, again by consensus, by the political class that was meant to deal with the expected ‘blowback’ from the military operation in FATA, fell short of effective implementation. Six of the 20 points agreed to in NAP were never implemented because of a lack of government focus, perhaps contributed to further by the expected blowback taking longer to arrive than expected. They were: inaction on madrassa reforms, banned organisations, terrorism financing, FATA reforms, bolstering the operational capacity and efficiency of the civilian law enforcement agencies and updating criminal laws to take account of the new challenges posed by terrorism. It has been reported that during the last two months during Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s illness and absence from the country, nothing at all has been done on these continuing lacunae in the implementation of NAP. Now, in the wake of the Quetta tragedy, a two-day consultation amongst the top civilian and military leadership has produced the intent to establish a panel to oversee the execution of NAP. The new body (which could have been created earlier since Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar seemed incapable of taking up this task satisfactorily) will include senior security officials of the federal and provincial governments, although the exact composition is still to be decided. In passing, it should be recalled that this was precisely the mandate of the National Counter Terrorism Authority (NACTA) according to NAP, but this umbrella coordination and centralised implementation organisation was left to wither on the vine. In the wake of the Quetta carnage aimed at, and to a considerable extent successful in, decapitating an articulate and aware section of Balochistan’s intelligentsia wedded to the struggle against terrorism, i.e. lawyers, the military appears upset with the civilian government for its manifest failure to fully and effectively implement the NAP entire. It has been joined in this criticism by MNA Mahmood Khan Achakzai, an outspoken interrogator of the officially certified truth despite his party, the Pashtunkhwa Milli Awami Party, being part of and a major beneficiary of the coalition government in Balochistan with the PML-N. However, Achakzai’s blast included the intelligence and security agencies for their demonstrated ineffectiveness and failure in the face of the terrorist challenge. Since speaking truth to power is not without risk in Pakistan, Achakzai has been rounded upon by many rascals posing as ‘super patriots’, accusing him of all sorts of ‘crimes and misdemeanours’, including treason. Lest the impression is gleaned that the failures in the anti-terrorist struggle belong entirely on the civilian side, it should be noted that the military’s triumphalist claims of having crushed the TTP and other terrorist groups in FATA through Operation Zarb-e-Azb were premature, misleading, and liable to (and did) have the unintended consequence of complacency creep. The fact is that the terrorist problem, far from being eliminated by Operation Zarb-e-Azb’s undoubted successes in cleansing and denying the terrorists their longstanding safe havens in FATA, merely succeeded in ‘exporting’ the malady. The TTP (and other terrorist groups) have reportedly found safe havens across the border inside Afghanistan’s eastern provinces, hosted and facilitated by our so-called ‘boys’, the Haqqani network. That development should have immediately changed the triumphalism in the wake of Operation Zarb-e-Azb into alarm and staying on our toes for the expected riposte in the form of terrorism. The fact that this riposte did not arrive immediately, as expected, meant that the TTP and other terrorist groups took time to regroup, reorganise and activate their cells throughout Pakistan, the lull before the storm contributing to complacency and letting our guard down through sheer inertia. Lessons of course need to be learnt by all sides, civilian and military, from the weaknesses and lapses of the past regarding implementation of NAP as the critical counter-terrorism aspect of our strategy. The fact that ‘combing’ operations were ordered in Quetta and elsewhere in the wake of the August 8 suicide bombing at the Civil Hospital indicates a major inertia aspect. Counter-terrorism, just as counter-insurgency, cannot afford to be reactive. Unless the strategy is proactive, the state would surrender the initiative to the other side, which already enjoys the advantage of choosing the time and place for strikes. Without the strategic advantage, the battle against terrorism is all but lost. This implies not reactive actions after each incident but a planned continuous intelligence-driven campaign that attempts to eliminate terrorists before they attack rather than after they have plied their bloody trade. rashed.rahman1@gmail.com rashed-rahman.blogspot.com

Business Recorder editorial Aug 14, 2016

Talks impasse Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi addressed opposition leaders on August 12 in New Delhi at a meeting called to discuss finding a political solution to the ongoing unrest in Indian Held Kashmir (IHK). His remarks regarding Pakistan’s role as a peace partner in the matter however, seemed to rest more on provocation than a sober approach to solving the IHK conundrum. He said India would like to discuss human rights issues with expatriates from Balochistan and Azad Kashmir living in exile in different countries. The first mentioned, a province of Pakistan, was obviously referred to in a crude attempt to equate Pakistan’s criticism of the ongoing repression in IHK with the situation in Balochistan, on the spurious ostensible ground of IHK being a part of and internal matter of India. The latter reference was in line with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government’s long standing and often reiterated stance that the only discussion New Delhi wanted with Pakistan was on Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (i.e. Azad Kashmir) and its ‘return’ to India. His opposition audience though, seemed unimpressed by Modi’s posturing and told him to heal the shattered hearts of the people in the Kashmir Valley first. In an eerie echo of the dominant narrative in Pakistan since the horrendous Quetta blast, Modi ascribed the unrest in the disputed region to cross-border terrorism, ignoring in the process the toll of 50 people killed and 5,000 injured in the clashes between Kashmiri protestors and the Indian security forces since July 8, when unrest erupted over the killing of Burhan Wani. While the opposition backed the BJP government’s attempt to restore peace in the Valley, they demanded immediate confidence building measures be initiated such as discontinuing the use of pellet guns against the protestors that have led to at least 100 people being blinded and many others injured. They also suggested discussions with all groups in IHK and asked for the draconian Armed Forces (Special Powers) Act to be lifted from civilian areas. In reply, the BJP government said it would consider the opposition’s suggestions, including sending an all-party delegation to IHK but only after the ground situation improves. Pakistan’s Adviser to the Prime Minister on Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz in the meantime proposed to India a dedicated dialogue on Kashmir since New Delhi was dragging its feet on a comprehensive dialogue. This proposal has followed the Pakistani envoys’ conference in Islamabad recently. The logic seems to be to try and nudge forward the dialogue frozen since 2014 (the year the BJP came to power). An agreement to revive the talks reached during Modi’s surprise stopover in Lahore in December 2015 could not materialise because of the Pathankot airbase attack. The current uprising in IHK has added further strains to the troubled Pakistan-India relationship. Realistically speaking, and especially in the light of the New Delhi meeting mentioned above between the Indian government and opposition and the former’s hardline stance, it is unlikely that the offer of a dialogue dedicated to Kashmir will receive a positive response from New Delhi. Nevertheless, while Pakistan attempts to mobilise international opinion on the ongoing repression in IHK through the upcoming UN General Assembly session or by approaching Muslim countries, the perfectly sound and welcome initiative squarely puts the ball in India’s court. If it fails to respond to the proposal or rejects it, that will raise questions about India’s commitment to finding a solution to the long standing Kashmir dispute and its inability to deal with Kashmiri grievances of long standing and increasing intensity. Embarrassed or not by this exposure, the BJP government should heed at least the words of its own opposition leaders in reaching out to the alienated and angry Kashmiris in IHK so as to show, as former prime minister Dr Manmohan Singh put it, a caring heart. An internal settlement with the Kashmiris in IHK can only facilitate a final solution of the problem amongst Pakistan, India and the people of Kashmir.