Daily Times Editorial Dec 1, 2013

Challenges for new COAS The baton of command of the Pakistan army was ceremonially passed from outgoing COAS General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani to new incumbent and the 15th COAS General Raheel Sharif on Friday. With it ended General Kayani’s long 44-year career in the army, which saw him occupy some of the highest positions, including as head of ISI, before taking over as COAS from General Pervez Musharraf in 2007 and receiving an extension of three years in 2010. General Kayani in his farewell address at the handover ceremony in Islamabad reiterated that the armed forces were fully prepared to thwart both internal and external threats. He said the high spirit, sacrifices and martyrs of the army in the struggle against terrorism was a golden chapter in the country’s history, and the martyrs in particular were the benefactors of the country (an indirect rebuttal of Jamaat-i-Islami chief Munawwar Hasan’s statement declaring army men killed in the struggle against terrorism as just 'casualties' and not martyrs). General Kayani’s tenure as COAS saw some remarkable and important developments and his legacy may be debated for years to come. However, what can be stated at this hour of his bowing out is that by and large, General Kayani will be remembered as a military commander who kept the army out of politics and was in office when the first historic democratic transition in Pakistan’s history from one elected government to another took place. He will also be recalled as the first COAS to define the paradigm shift in the military’s mission from one of predominantly guarding the country’s borders to one of combating the internal threat posed by terrorism. The fact that this paradigm shift did not see entirely satisfactory results on the ground in the struggle against the terrorists may owe less to lack of intent and more to the inherent inertia that challenges changes in policy in such large organisations, despite the legendary discipline of the armed forces. In other words, the translation of a conceptual change to operational shifts on the ground is never an easy nor trouble-free transition, especially when faced by an elusive and tough battle hardened enemy. The shifting lines of alliance and conflict in the grey and murky area of jihadi proxies in the shadow of 9/11 and the subsequent invasion and occupation of Afghanistan by western forces led to inevitable gaps and weaknesses in intelligence and operational efficacy, notwithstanding the outstanding successes of the military operations in Swat (almost unqualified success) and South Waziristan (not so unqualified). In these two success stories, while the surviving Taliban in Swat fled under Mullah Fazlullah into Afghanistan, in the latter case they simply shifted into the even denser hornet’s nest of North Waziristan, where they continue to be based till today. In fact these operations point to two incontestable lessons from the guerrilla wars in Pakistan and in the world in recent times. One, the approach to the campaign in FATA has suffered not only from the overhang of the so-called ‘good’ and ‘bad’ Taliban misconception, it has also failed to achieve the desired results because of a piecemeal strategy of attacking Taliban groups Agency by Agency, thereby allowing the guerrillas to move away in classic fashion into adjoining, safer Agencies or over the porous border into Afghanistan. Two, the history of guerrilla wars in recent times in Afghanistan and Sri Lanka, to take two examples that ended in diametrically opposite denouements, indicates that modern armies are able to eventually overwhelm guerrilla movements with their incredibly enhanced firepower and technical capability if such movements have no external safe havens to retreat into to regroup and whenever threatened. Afghanistan is a case of a guerrilla movement that remains undefeated because of the external safe havens factor, while the Tamil struggle in Sri Lanka arguably had no answer to a determined assault on its internal bases with nowhere to retreat to. Amidst other challenges, the main one facing the new COAS is the struggle against terrorism which, if the above analysis is valid, requires a reformulation of the strategy in FATA to treat the area as a theatre whole rather than a piecemeal approach as in the past in order to have some chance of encirclement of the guerillas and cutting off their avenues of retreat. Second, the new COAS will seriously have to tackle the intelligence weaknesses in the counter-terrorism campaign (a largely urban phenomenon) since such operations are inherently intelligence-led, police operations rather than the big guns of the regular military. General Sharif brings to the task operational, conceptual and training and preparatory experience that eminently makes him the right person for the job. The entire country joins us in wishing him every success.

Daily Times Editorial Nov 23, 2013

Day of protest Increasingly, it is difficult to recall good news on most days in Pakistan. The exceptions therefore stand out. Religious parties and groups throughout the country had called for protests after the Friday prayers yesterday against the Rawalpindi incident on 10th Moharram in which at least 11 people were killed. A shutter down strike closed markets through the length and breadth of the land on Friday, providing a trouble-free passage to the protest rallies and processions taken out. No reports of violence or other negative developments had been received by the time of writing these lines. This is cause for breathing a sigh of relief, since the apprehension that the tension that had erupted between different religious denominations in the wake of the Rawalpindi tragedy may erupt into sectarian riots once again on a day fraught with such possibilities. The fact that nothing like this transpired is both a relief and also food for thought why a potentially dangerous situation has been successfully defused so quickly. Credit must go to the authorities for deploying sufficient forces, army, rangers, police, etc, to ensure peace prevailed wherever protests were due to take place. Credit must also go to the religious parties and leaders on all sides for successfully managing and defusing the anger of their respective followers. While Imambargahs were specially protected on the day, the routes and sites of protest rallies and all sensitive locations along the way were also adequately secured. The day of peaceful protest has reinforced faith in the inherent good sense of the people across religious denominations. If only the country could learn to handle all such potential powder kegs with the same sagacity, calm and maturity, Pakistan could well be transformed before our very eyes from ‘the most dangerous country in the world’ to one that invited the respect and admiration of the world. As Friday has shown, this is not a goal beyond our ken. Afflicted as the country is by a range of issues that inherently lead to conflict, such as terrorism, the sectarian divide and the extremist, intolerant mindset that has permeated society in recent decades, the historically evolved, tolerant, syncretic Sufi culture is the paradigm state and society must strive to return to. This is the antithesis of the ‘contributions’ of Ziaul Haq, the Afghan wars, jihad through proxies without and increasingly within, and can help Pakistan to reassert its true character and personality. Whereas the extremist mindset can and must be combated by these ideological and theological means, non-state actors who refuse to listen to reason will have to be tackled with the full might of the state. The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) government at the Centre and the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa campaigned in the elections on a platform of seeking peace through negotiations with the militants and terrorists. Since assuming office, both claimed to have been attempting such a denouement, but assert that the US drone that took out Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) leader Hakeemullah Mehsud put paid to all such efforts. The icing on the cake was Hakeemullah Mehsud’s replacement as TTP chief, Maulana Fazlullah of FM radio fame. Since the latter has declared after being selected to head the TTP that no talks with the government were possible, the PML-N government appears to be in a dilemma. The Prime Minister’s Advisor on Foreign Affairs Sartaj Aziz was forced to eat his words to a parliamentary committee the other day that the US had now committed to halting drone attacks while the peace negotiations were on. That assertion was blown sky high by the drone attack in Hangu that reportedly killed Haqqani network commanders. Increasingly therefore, the PML-N government is being inexorably pushed towards girding up its loins for military action against the TTP. While this plan is being (hopefully) firmed up, the Central and Punjab governments (both led by the PML-N) must mount an ideological offensive against extremism and deny the sectarian and terrorist groups that enjoy ‘immunity’ in Punjab the ‘safe havens’ they have carved out over the years in the heartland of Pakistan.

Daily Times Editorial Nov 19, 2013

Musharraf’s fate Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali pulled another rabbit out of his hat of ‘tricks’ to announce in a press conference on Sunday that ex-president General (retd) Pervez Musharraf would be tried for treason under Article 6 for the Emergency he clamped on the country on November 3, 2007. For this purpose, the government would have recourse to the Supreme Court (SC) with a request to set up a trial court (not a ‘commission’ as the minister erroneously said) comprising judges of the high courts. The government also committed to appointing a special prosecutor to conduct the trial. On Monday, the Ministry of Interior reportedly sent a letter to the Ministry of Law to implement the government’s decision. These moves followed the receipt by the government of the investigation by the FIA into the matter, a report Chaudhry Nisar said would be submitted to the SC along with its application. The announcement set off a virtual storm of comment and speculation as to the procedure adopted by the government and its intent. Some rejected the path being taken as unconstitutional, unnecessary, an attempted distraction from the fraught sectarian situation in Rawalpindi and elsewhere in the country, and an attempt to shift the responsibility from the executive (where it belongs) to the judiciary to avoid any adverse fallout from the military. There were also questions raised about why only the November 3, 2007 Emergency charge was to be pursued and not the (arguably more serious) October 12, 1999 coup in which an elected government was overthrown. To the response to this by some circles that the coup was endorsed by parliament and therefore was a closed matter, the objection could legitimately be raised that a parliament packed with the King’s Party and Musharraf’s political collaborators lacked the inherent legitimacy to provide immunity on the treason charge to the coup maker, apart from such an endorsement falling foul of the constitution. While Musharraf’s spokesman expectedly trashed the move as vengeful (denied at some length by Chaudhry Nisar earlier), a distraction, and likely to annoy the military, at the time of writing these lines an interesting development was expected in the Sindh High Court (SHC), which had ordered the institution of a treason charge on Musharraf, and where the latter’s application for his name to be taken off the Exit Control List (ECL) was up for hearing on Monday. A contempt of court petition had also been filed against the prime minister and the government for their failure to implement the SHC’s order to file a treason case against the ex-dictator. In a first in the country’s history, a military coup maker and dictator is being charged with treason. In the only other instance in our history, Yahya Khan was declared a usurper by the courts only after his death. Musharraf on the other hand is alive and kicking, out on bail in the four serious cases of murder, etc, instituted against him so far. Were the SHC to grant Musharraf the relief of removing his name from the ECL, some are inclined to believe he would fly straightaway to Dubai, ostensibly to visit his ailing mother, and perhaps never return (although some of his gung-ho supporters are vociferously denying he would leave Pakistan). Musharraf’s return to the country earlier this year in a quixotic effort to enter politics clearly backfired, and even his parent organisation, after he ignored advice to stay away, was unable to prevent the ignominy of a former COAS being dragged through the courts. However, no one should take lightly the possible reaction of the military to a treason case carrying a possible death sentence being pursued against its former chief. Whether GHQ would be inclined to swallow such humiliation in a country dominated almost throughout its existence by the powerful military remains an open question. That may be one reason why the charge of shifting responsibility from the executive to the judiciary and putting the ball in the latter’s court by the government rings credible. Nor should the influence of the Saudi monarch be ignored, who is believed not to be in favour of pillorying Musharraf and who is widely regarded as enjoying a lot of influence over the present PML-N leadership. So while in principle the idea of a treason trial (and for the 1999 coup too) appears the correct thing to do, the sceptics are still understandably unconvinced that the government means what it says and that some other way out may not be in the offing.

Daily Times Editorial Nov 15, 2013

KP coalition splinters On Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf (PTI) leader Imran Khan’s advice, the PTI’s alliance with Aftab Sherpao’s Qaumi Watan Party (QWP) has been ended. There were rumblings of trouble for some weeks. The startling development reportedly followed warnings to two QWP ministers allegedly involved in corruption, to desist. These warnings did not sit well with the QWP, a coalition partner in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) provincial government. Senior Minister Sikandar Sherpao and other QWP ministers stopped attending cabinet meetings and their 10 MPAs boycotted the Assembly. Imran Khan has said that his party was given a mandate in the May 2013 elections on a platform of opposing corruption, and therefore the PTI would not tolerate any partner who indulged in, or turned a blind eye to corrupt practices. In the same breath he praised his Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) coalition partner’s ministers for exemplary adherence to probity and the KP government’s anti-corruption stance. The QWP has reacted angrily to these developments. They claim they were never informed of any concrete charges of corruption against their ministers. Had the PTI so informed, they assert, they themselves would have taken action against the ministers if the charges against them were proved. Under the circumstances, their ministers were dismissed without a hearing or opportunity to clear their name, the QWP stated. A press conference was planned y the QWP at the time of writing these lines, in which Sikandar Sherpao and other leaders promised to expose the PTI’s own ministers’ misdeeds and corruption. Whether there is any weight in this riposte or it is merely a retaliatory move will only become clear with time. QWP spokesman Tariq Khan attempted to link the breakdown in relations with the QWP’s principled stand on not attempting to disrupt NATO supplies as demanded by the PTI because this was the prerogative constitutionally of only the federal government. The PTI now stands accused of not acting against its own ministers’ alleged corruption to set an example before dismissing the QWP ministers and expelling the party from the coalition. However, the PTI has removed one of its own ministers who was disqualified by the Supreme Court (SC) for holding a fake degree. The move against the QWP has evoked demands that the PTI put its own house in order by investigating the alleged corruption of its own ministers. In a house of 124 members in the provincial Assembly, the PTI still commands 53 seats, the JI eight, Awami Jamhuri Ittehad Pakistan five. These coalition partners along with two independents gives the incumbent KP government 68 seats, a majority, but just how comfortable is not clear. Maulana Fazlur Rehman’s JUI-F and the PML-N are waiting in the wings. That would be a new turn for the books since the PML-N had turned down the JUI-F’s offer after the elections to form a coalition government instead of the PTI’s. Speculation swirls around whether the redoubtable Maulana will now see this splintering of the PTI-led coalition as his best chance since the elections of fulfilling his wish. Imran Khan and the PTI have put corruption centre-stage in their election campaign and after. What is surprising therefore is that the PTI did not see fit to take into account the reputation of Aftab Sherpao when he was chief minister of KP before entering into a coalition with his party. That not only smacked of the usual expediency in forming coalition governments by throwing moral imperatives to the wind in favour of garnering the necessary numbers, it may also have owed something to CM Khattak’s long standing relationship with Aftab Sherpao, dating back to when they collaborated in 1994 to remove the PML-N’s government in KP and as result of which, Aftab Sherpao was elevated to CM. Simply to recount this background is sufficient to bring home the expedient and shifting nature of politics and political alliances in our political culture, a tendency of long standing but which appears to be alive and kicking even today. The KP government may be able to ride out this storm, but the episode has certainly cast the PTI itself in a less than savoury light for ‘cavorting’ with what they now call corrupt elements.

Daily Times Editorial Nov 13, 2013

Another Haqqani rubbed out The assassination of the eldest son, Nasiruddin Haqqani, of the Haqqani Network (HN) leader Jalaluddin Haqqani in Bhara Kahu on the outskirts of Islamabad on Sunday night comes barely a week after Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) leader Hakeemullah Mehsud's death in a drone strike in North Waziristan. He is reported to be the fourth Haqqani brother to have been rubbed out by one means or the other. Two armed men opened fire on Nasiruddin, the chief financier and spokesman of the HN, as he was buying bread in the bazaar, stopped to make sure he was dead and then fled. Nasiruddin’s driver picked up the body and transported it to the Haqqani home near Miranshah, North Waziristan, where he is reported to have been buried. No claim of responsibility has surfaced so far, feeding the rumour mills fulltime. The TTP was quick to react, blaming the ISI for the assassination because they said, of Nasiruddin’s close support to Hakeemullah Mehsud. They also vowed to avenge his death. Other speculation centres on the usual cast of suspects, headed first and foremost by the US, which had declared the HN a terrorist group in 2012, in an ironic twist on the HN’s once blue-eyed boys status in the eyes of Washington during the anti-Soviet struggle in Afghanistan. Former US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen had categorised the HN in 2011 in testimony before Congress as a “veritable arm” of the Pakistani ISI. HN is considered one of the most deadly groups fighting the US, NATO and the Karzai Afghan government, with links to al Qaeda, the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, and a string of militant groups in Pakistan, including the TTP. The Pakistan army’s ISPR refused to comment on the assassination. The local police appeared clueless about whether the murder had actually occurred, and if it had, who was the victim, since the body was whisked away long before the police lumbered onto the scene. The local SHO has been suspended, but what good does that do when the incident is clearly a ‘black ops’ targeting by whoever was responsible. Some intriguing questions have arisen as a result of this incident. Some are describing it as a replay of the Osama bin Laden raid. It is being reported that Nasiruddin Haqqani had been living in the area for the last 3-4 years. Surely the intelligence agencies, if not the authorities, would have been aware of his presence. That will be the question that will once again be asked by the world. It will strengthen the conviction amongst wide swathes of international and domestic opinion about the establishment’s support for the HN. It will also once again resurrect the questions about the policy of the security establishment when this incident has once again highlighted the links of HN with a conglomeration of the Pakistani state’s enemies, including the homegrown TTP against whom the military is fighting. Nor should it be forgotten that all the reports speak of Maulana Fazlullah, the recently crowned successor of Hakeemullah Mehsud as the chief of the TTP, having found safe haven in eastern Afghanistan just across the border under the aegis of the HN. Internationally, it may ratchet up the pressure on Pakistan regarding its links with the HN. The complex play of forces in the Afghanistan (and now increasingly Pakistan) theatre shows the manner in which alignments have changed and shifted since the end of the Cold War. Yesterday’s allies (the US and the Afghan Mujahideen, including the HN) are today’s sworn enemies. Pakistan’s long standing policy of so-called ‘strategic depth’ in Afghanistan to be gained through armed proxies has badly backfired in the shape of domestic terrorists (like the TTP) linked inextricably with the global (al Qaeda) and regional (the Afghan Taliban, etc) terrorist groups that have laid siege to Pakistan and Afghanistan, not to mention the broader region, and created the gravest threat to Pakistan’s security in living memory. The military needs now (if it has not so far) to review its policies and options in the matter of Afghanistan before the 2014 drawdown of US and NATO troops and, as a corollary, how to tackle the homegrown terrorist threat, and advise the government accordingly.

Daily Times Editorial Nov 9, 2013

LG elections conundrum The Local Government (LG) elections ordered by the Supreme Court (SC) are becoming more and more controversial. On Thursday, a consensus emerged across the aisle in the National Assembly (NA) to not hold elections that would suffer from inadequate preparation and may end up becoming less than credible if not engender the usual round of accusations and counter-accusations that the process had been non-transparent if not rigged. Although the unanimous resolution of the NA to delay the LG elections until preparations were completed satisfactorily is not binding, it does reflect the misgivings of the political class as a whole that the SC's insistence on holding these elections on November 7 in Sindh and December 7 in Punjab and Balochistan, over and above the Election Commission of Pakistan’s (ECP’s) reservations regarding printing the millions of ballot papers required and delimitation of constituencies, may lead to a great deal of ruction if a flawed election process is conducted. While it is understandable that the SC’s insistence is rooted in the sorry track record of political governments in holding LG elections in the past, making haste now despite the obvious obstacles to a credible and transparent process does not inspire confidence. Underlying the NA resolution, and reflected in the speeches made on the floor during discussion on the issue, is parliament’s resentment of an overbearing and interventionist judiciary that has seen fit to venture into areas normally within the purview of the executive or parliament. Lest anyone conclude that the role of the superior judiciary in this matter is all controversy, the decision by the Lahore High Court (LHC) overturning the intent of the Punjab government to hold LG elections on a non-party basis, is a clear verdict upholding the LHC’s interpretation of the relevant Articles of the constitution that militate in favour of political parties-based local elections. However, the SC is seen as leaning on the ECP to hold the elections in November/December come hell or high water, and in turn the ECP is leaning on the Sindh and Punjab governments to complete the delimitations, etc, in time. The federal government, in the person of Finance Minister Ishaq Dar, has also expressed the difficulties in printing the required ballot papers by the Printing Corporation of Pakistan within the 20-25 days available, while the NA opinion tilted in the direction of rejecting any attempt to farm this task out to private printing presses as this could not be considered free of the apprehension of mistakes and even deliberate manipulation. Ishaq Dar said it was not appropriate for the executive to get involved in having the ballot papers printed as this may give rise to controversies regarding the transparency and accuracy of the process. If all this were not enough, nine parties in the Balochistan Assembly want the ‘bogus’ voters lists used for the May general elections revised by the ECP, failing which the LG elections would not reflect the will of the people. The above iteration of the controversy surrounding the LG elections is enough to make one’s head spin. The whole furore owes its origins to the insistence of the SC on holding the elections irrespective of the problems pointed out by the ECP, the NA, and the federal government. Sympathy for the consideration of the SC that neither the ECP nor the politicians should be allowed to once again ‘sabotage’ the holding of local bodies elections cannot and should not blind us to the possibility that elections held without proper preparation and in haste despite all the roadblocks could end up with a whimper rather than a bang. There is no denying the necessity and importance of having elected local bodies as the lowest rung of the democratic edifice, but that rung must be seen to have been constructed transparently and credibly according to the provisions of the constitution, law and best democratic practice. Falling short on these standards would not lend credence to any local bodies that may emerge as a result of a flawed process. It is still not too late for the state’s institutions, the executive, parliament and the judiciary to put their heads together and sort out the anomalies in the present plan. The heavens will not fall if the local bodies are elected a few months later, provided that in the process all the wrinkles in the process are ironed out.

Daily Times editorial Nov 5, 2013

US ‘distances’ itself from talks The US, through its State Department spokesperson, has found a ‘convenient’ way to ‘distance’ itself from the Pakistan government’s proposed peace talks with the Taliban, while refusing to comment on the drone strike that killed Hakeemullah Mehsud the other day. On the peace talks, the spokesperson said in Washington that this was an ‘internal’ matter for Pakistan. Neither confirming the drone strike nor the fact that Hakeemullah was dead, the spokesperson ‘diplomatically’ referred in general to the “shared interests, including security and counterterrorism cooperation” with Pakistan in the quest to build a more prosperous, stable and peaceful region. He did not even bother to answer Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar’s accusations that the US deliberately sabotaged the allegedly impending peace talks. This dissembling may serve the US’s interests by remaining non-committal while continuing with its drone campaign, as both President Barack Obama and US Ambassador to Pakistan Richard Olson tended to do in their recent meetings with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in Washington and Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar in Islamabad respectively. But it will likely fuel the rising anger in Pakistan against the US, not the least because the sense of humiliation that attended the raid that killed Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad will return with a vengeance because of Hakeemullah’s being taken out. While that section of opinion in Pakistan that is convinced of the US’s desire and intention to sabotage ‘peace’ in Pakistan cannot be persuaded otherwise, there are niggling questions about the Hakeemullah episode. How did Hakeemullah Mehsud come to afford the palatial home near Miranshah where he was killed, a home said to be worth $ 120,000? Clearly, the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) chief had come into good fortune. The compound reportedly housed his family, and it can be conjectured that he may well have visited it before the last and fateful journey he made to his luxurious home. Is it the case, as is being speculated in parts of the media, that our security forces collaborated with the drone strike by providing ground intelligence on his movements? Whether these questions hold any water or not or are merely more of the proliferation of conspiracy theories in Pakistan, is difficult to determine. It is unlikely we will ever learn the truth about this affair. Meanwhile the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) Assembly has passed a resolution asking the federal government to stop NATO’s supply lines until the drone strikes stop. While reports say the federal government does not see the wisdom in annoying the US beyond what may be tolerable, the federal cabinet meeting to deliberate on the emerging situation was scheduled to take place at the time of writing these lines. The government is between a rock and hard place. On the one hand, there are apprehensions that once the TTP sorts out its succession issues and decides on the exact nature of the response to Hakeemullah’s killing, the government and people should brace for accelerated terrorist attacks all over the country. On the other, the government knows the enormous stakes and advantage gleaned from the prime minister’s recent visit to Washington in terms of helping Pakistan overcome its energy and economic crises. The cost of defiance of Washington beyond tolerance limits could prove prohibitively expensive. The political parties, with Imran Khan’s PTI in the lead on a white charger, want nothing less than ‘war’ against the US. These emotional and immature responses reflect the lack of political experience of the PTI leadership, and its KP provincial government may well become a casualty of its quixotic campaign to stop the NATO supply lines, by hook or by crook, with or without the federal government’s assent. But this is the least of our present worries, tightened security against the possible terrorist threat being enhanced by the looming approach of Muharram.

Daily Times editorial Nov 4, 2013

Talks strategy in tatters? After the killing of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) chief Hakeemullah Mehsud in a drone attack, the government’s talks strategy appears to be in tatters. Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar had claimed in his press conference the other day that the first steps toward s a dialogue were in the works when the drone struck. Such a claim can only be taken as the government’s start of concrete steps to bring the TTP to the negotiating table. It cannot be claimed, as Chaudhry Nisar asserted, to be the actual beginning of negotiations. How can one say with certainty that the TTP would have accepted the invitation for a dialogue? And if they did, would they resile from their demands to impose sharia according to their interpretation (implying throwing away the constitution), release all their prisoners and withdraw the army from FATA? All this is in the realm of the unknown. Categorical assertions such as those of Chaudhry Nisar and Imran Khan that the ‘peace process’ has been deliberately sabotaged by the US therefore remain more subjective opinion than unassailable objective fact. It is being speculated in the British press that the answer to the question why Hakeemullah was targeted now and not earlier lies in the fact that his travel to his house flushed him out of hiding and gave the drone warriors their best opportunity ever. While Chaudhry Nisar is trying desperately to distance the government from any complicity or approval of the drone strike, given the past record of cooperation by Pakistan in this endeavour while retaining deniability by protests, some level of cooperation may not be ruled out. Of course, if true, and even if not, the death of Hakeemullah will prove extremely awkward for Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his government to handle, since they now appear sandwiched between the body of domestic opinion, led by Imran Khan, that interprets the drone strike as sabotage of what they view as a peace process poised to proceed, and the US and its clout over Pakistan’s strategic, diplomatic, economic, etc, future. Angry as some people may be in and outside government on the drone strike, Islamabad is not in a position to annoy Washington beyond a point. It remains to be seen what the emergency cabinet meeting the prime minister has called today decides after being briefed on the developments. Stopping NATO supply lines, as Imran Khan insists, may not stop the drone strikes, as Information Minister Pervaiz Rashid argues. And the proposed step suffers from no clear idea of the timeline for such stoppage and what would be the next move if drone strikes did not stop. Can Pakistan sustain the pressure that will inevitably follow an indefinite stoppage, indefinitely? We should be cognizant of our vulnerabilities, especially on the economic front, and not get carried away by angry rhetoric. Meanwhile the TTP has it seems been unable to agree on a permanent chief and has chosen instead to go for what appears to be a compromise choice as interim leader. Vowing revenge, the TTP seems set to turn its back on the talks offer, prompting a high security alert in all the major cities of the country. In this space we have consistently argued that the talks proposal is not feasible for reasons that have nothing to do with drones. It represents the inherent weakness on display by the state against the terrorists by offering talks when the latter are stubbornly sticking to maximalist demands that amount to a virtual surrender by the state. The US’s drone strike on Hakeemullah Mehsud may well have driven the final nail into the coffin of the hopes for a negotiated settlement with the TTP, but the whole proposal and its chances of ‘success’ on terms acceptable to the state were always highly uncertain. The government has now, with the help of input from the security forces, to come up with the missing Plan B to tackle a dangerous, slippery enemy wedded to nothing less than the destruction of the democratic system of Pakistan

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.