Daily Times Editorial May 1, 2014

Cutting off defaulters Minister of State for Water and Power Abid Sher Ali (ASA) has inserted his hand into a hornet’s nest. His ministry was berated the other day by Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif for the unannounced increase in electricity load shedding, which in some areas is running at 18-20 hours per day. With tempratures rising on the onset of summer, tempers too have been put on an upward trajectory. Apparently ASA took the PM’s berating to heart, particularly his orders not to spare any defaulter. As a result, ASA ordered high government offices in Islamabad cut off for bills default. The list reads like an institutional who’s who: the Presidency, PM’s Secretariat, the Supreme Court, Parliament House, etc. Though most of these high profile consumers had their electricity restored by evening, this was not before they coughed up the cash they owed. If ASA is to be believed, the list of government offices that owe money reads like a rogue’s gallery. For example, Capital Development Authority of Islamabad owes Rs 2.36 billion, the Sindh government Rs 56 billion, Punjab government Rs 3.4 billion, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) and Balochistan governments Rs 2. 5 billion each, the Presidency Rs 2.8 million, Parliament Lodges Rs 20 million, and the list goes on. The minister says the DISCOs have to recover Rs 475 billion from defaulters and the government Rs 33 billion. It is obvious that the institutions on the list are powerful ‘big fish’ and it has only been possible to move against them because the PM has ordered an ‘indiscriminate’ action to speed up recoveries, failure to do so feeding into the burgeoning circular debt and as a result increased load shedding because about 3,000 MW of generation capacity is lying idle for lack of funds to purchase fuel, etc. One reflection of the indiscriminate nature of the drive is that not only electricity, gas defaulters are also being cut off, including the PM’s office! More than 100 government offices have reportedly been disconnected for electricity bill default in Islamabad alone. Meanwhile the Sindh government and Assembly have reacted to the disconnections in the province as well as what they say are inappropriate or even insulting remarks by ASA about the people of Sindh. It may be recalled that similar complaints surfaced when ASA started his disconnection drive in KP. Both provinces’ governments are complaining about ‘discrimination’ although given the action in the federal capital, that argument has been somewhat weakened. However, a word of advice to the doughty minister: the task you have taken up is inherently tough and you are not going to win any popularity stakes anyway, but you may not be doing your cause much good by inserting remarks about the people of provinces other than Punjab in your statements when all that is needed is a business like approach saying that no defaulter, high or low, government or private, will be spared in the interests of controlling if not ending the energy crisis. That would avoid smokescreens being thrown up by those on the receiving end of your drive centred on sub-nationalism. We have been arguing in this space that the biggest defaulter of electricity dues is the government itself, and the figures quoted by ASA bear this out. However, this should not lull us into thinking that defaulters do not exist in the private sector too. The government default reflects a culture of impunity and being above the law across ministries, departments, institutions and the provinces, since we are the ‘government’. Private sector (and perhaps even government default) means collusion between the consumer and the electricity staff. While ASA cleans up the Augean stables of government and private sector default mercilessly by simply cutting off all defaulters without discrimination until and unless they pay up, it would not hurt to revisit the widely held perception that it is easy to bribe electricity staff in order to get no or at least reduced bills. Obviously theft and default deprive the country of full generation capacity because of circular debt, and the honest consumer of the facility of uninterrupted power supply, which he/she thoroughly deserves. While welcoming therefore the very late but welcome drive against defaulters, it defies logic when ASA reveals that high density default areas are being subjected to 18-20 hours load shedding while less dense default areas are ‘only’ subjected to 6-8 hours. What is the basis for this? The honest consumers in the high default areas are unnecessarily being punished for no fault of their own, while the defaulters in less dense areas are getting away lightly. Far better to stick to the punishment of cutting off individual consumers rather than this novel ‘collective punishment’ approach.

Daily Times Editorial April 30, 2014

The anti-terrorist struggle A high-powered meeting of the political and military leadership chaired by Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif has once again taken stock of the dialogue and security process. From reports trickling out of the meeting, it appears that patience with the stalling tactics and failure to extend the ceasefire by the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is running out. The PM is believed to have emphasised to the meeting that dialogue and violence cannot go hand in hand and that talks while terrorist violence continues cannot succeed. Briefings on the talks and security situation were delivered in the meeting by Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar and the ISI chief respectively. Reports also speak of the PM lavishing high praise on the ISI’s role in protecting the country and its security. The need for such praise has to be placed in the context of the controversies that have swirled around the ISI in recent days. Whether the PM’s sentiments were heartfelt or an exercise in fence mending does not matter in the ultimate order of things. What is important is that the government is sending out a message of support to the military and its intelligence arm in the middle of the latter’s sensitivity regarding the perception that they are being unnecessarily put in the dock and unfairly criticised. What might help the process of ‘reconciliation’ that appears to be underway is the report that in the coming financial year, the armed forces’ budget will see an increase of 20 percent. While there is justification for such a hefty increase, taking both inflation and the tasks regarding internal security that the armed forces are being called upon to perform, questions remain where the extra money will come from and which sectors are likely to suffer ‘cuts’ to provide the increased allocation. Nevertheless, the government and military seem agreed that the talks process cannot be left as an open-ended project but must instead be pursued with a concise agenda, well defined parameters and definite timelines and targets to be achieved. Although reports speak of the PM once again emphasising that the economic gains the government has made or wants or to make are critically dependent on an improvement in national security, he still hoped against hope that the talks will yield positive results. Well, we hope the PM’s optimism is well placed and not simply the triumph of hope over reality. Only time will tell. The portents do not support his optimism. The military is continuing attacks against the Taliban under its mandate to retaliate against any attacks. Thus the armed forces pounded the Bobar area between South and North Waziristan the other day in retaliation for the bomb blasts in the area that killed three security personnel including an army officer a day earlier and also blasted another security forces vehicle carrying eight personnel. So far there have been no reports of casualties in the latter incident, but both taken together point to the threat that still lurks in and around the area, believed to be a stronghold of the two rival Mehsud factions of the TTP, the Shehryar and Sajna groups, and even to house training camps of the Uzbek Taliban. In fact reports of a looming offensive in the theatre have persuaded the Pakistani Taliban and foreign militants to relocate nearer or across the Afghan border to escape the impending wrath of the military. Since the government is still wedded to a dual track strategy of dialogue and action (the latter so far purely retaliatory and not proactive), the present confused impasse is likely to linger for some time. But the window of opportunity to tackle the homegrown Taliban threat will not remain open indefinitely. This year’s end will see the withdrawal of the bulk of the US/NATO forces from Afghanistan, arguably tempting the Taliban to go for a big push on Kabul. That fighting across the border will not only have the potential to spill over to our side, it could also provide the Pakistani (and foreign) Taliban the opportunity to relocate across the border, out of reach of the Pakistani forces, from where they could operate against us. Before that disadvantageous turn is reached, the government must set itself a timeline to give the TTP so long to come good on a ceasefire and cessation of violence as an earnest of their sincerity vis-à-vis a peaceful solution, beyond which the velvet glove should come off and the mailed fist be brought into play.

Daily Times Editorial April 24, 2014

Government-army-media triangle The Ministry of Defence has on Tuesday sought the revocation of the licence of a private TV channel over the Hamid Mir affair by moving a complaint to the National Electronic Regulatory Authority (NEPRA). It may be recalled that after the prominent journalist was shot in Karachi on Saturday, his TV channel broadcast his brother Amir Mir’s allegation that Hamid Mir had named the ISI and its chief Lieutenant-General Zaheerul Islam as being responsible if something happened to him. For the brother of the wounded journalist to have revealed this in the immediate aftermath of the incident in the heat of the moment is one thing, but for the TV channel to have gone on repeating the charge for hours afterwards without any evidence or proof was, to put it mildly, a lapse of editorial judgement. Does this mean that the defence ministry’s request should be granted? The question opens up a whole host of issues that Pakistanis and all our institutions need to reflect on at the present conjuncture. Freedom is a heady wine, and once tasted, the desire for more grows exponentially. This is what has transformed the media scene in Pakistan over the last decade or more. However, freedom if exercised without responsibility is no longer just an inebriant, in excess it becomes poison. Something along these lines has emerged in Pakistan in recent years. First, a certain myth that has gained currency and traction in Pakistan for some time needs to be laid to rest. During the 18th century, the press came to be dubbed the fourth estate in Europe, principally in Britain and France (which was undergoing its Revolution). Estates were categories of communities in society that could be treated as a group because of shared interests. Thus in France, the monarchy, aristocracy, peasantry, etc, were dubbed estates. The rise of the press in the 18th century (its role in the French Revolution is well documented) produced the title of fourth estate for it. Unfortunately this has been translated wrongly in Pakistan as the ‘fourth pillar of the state’. Wrong as the notion is, since the press (media) is not part of the state but arguably located somewhere between (and perhaps bridging) political and civil society as a watchdog of the people’s interests in an inherently adversarial relationship with the state, governments of the day, and authority in general, it has had the inadvertent effect, particularly since 2002, of giving the media the false notion of more power than the ground realities suggest. If this has gone to the heads of certain sections of the media, the nature of things would tend to dictate a correction is due sooner or later. We have argued in this space consistently that there is no such thing as freedom without responsibility, and any such untrammeled freedom cannot be long lasting. Unfortunately, along with the decline of the institution of professional editor, adventurism based on false notions of excessive empowerment has crept into sections of the media. Whatever the mistakes or lapses of such sections, the other tragedy is the manner in which the Hamid Mir affair has brought the split in the media on the basis of professional rivalry out into the open. Some media houses have chosen to use the opportunity of the difficulties the group Hamid Mir belongs to to attack it roundly on the basis of being anti-national, unpatriotic, and even anti-state. It is not for the media to act as prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner in such matters. The lack of solidarity amongst media houses and the journalists associated with them is likely in the long run to damage all of us in the profession. Since the defence ministry has chosen to take its complaint to NEPRA, justice demands that the process be allowed to play itself out according to the law and rules, and the channel be allowed to fight its case without others in the field nipping away at its heels. We may or may not agree with the approach and policies of one media group or the other or even individual journalists, but this should not blind us to the need to stand in solidarity with victim Hamid Mir and his media group that has collaterally been pinioned in the dock.

First Editorial April 23, 2014

Tackling the energy crisis It is a matter of great satisfaction that Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif inaugurated two combined cycle gas-fired turbines at Guddu Thermal Power Plant in Sindh of 243 MW each. A third turbine will be completed in May, boosting the capacity of the plant from the present 1,655 MW to 2,402 MW (an increase of 747 MW). The PM in his speech on the occasion promised that the era of darkness was about to end, the rule of light would soon be ushered in, and Pakistan would be transformed into a bright, shining country. Nawaz Sharif revealed that dozens of power plants were being set up with China’s help, which had committed billions of dollars in investment in the sector. The PM’s vow to complete all projects soon was underlined by his praise of the Chinese company that had completed the Guddu project seven months before schedule, saving almost the equivalent of the entire cost of the project, i.e. Rs 58.6 billion. Nawaz Sharif regretted the slow pace of progress on power projects in the past and emphasised that his government was working to make up for lost time. He said 21,000 MW would be added in the next eight years. Load shedding over the last 10 years, the PM said, had not only made life difficult for citizens, it had seriously undermined the country’s progress. The government was trying to enhance the efficiency of existing power plants, expedite work on ongoing projects (the Neelum-Jehlum long delayed project is an example), and set up new plants under public-private partnership. The Gaddani Power Park would add 6,600 MW and 1,320 MW would be added at Jamshoro. These are coal-fired plants being set up with the help of local and foreign investors and the Asian Development Bank respectively. Similar plants would be set up at Lakhra, Port Qasim and in Thar. Tarbela Extension-IV of 1,410 MW and Extension-V of 1,320 MW and the Diamer-Bhasha Dam of 4,500 MW are in the pipeline, although there are still funding difficulties in the last named. Private sector projects are being planned in Soki Kinari, Karot and Kohala. The PM pointed to his government’s retirement of Rs 500 billion circular debt early in its tenure, although this achievement has been dimmed by circular debt rising once again to Rs 300 billion. The government’s emphasis on thermal, gas and coal based power generation is a necessity to overcome the crippling energy deficit, but its planning must emphasise the cheaper forms of power generation as a priority if the electricity mix is to be nudged over time to become affordable. In 1994, when the second government of Benazir Bhutto initiated the Independent Power Projects (IPPs) based on thermal generation, the combined cycle gas-fired technology was already available with a cost one-third of fuel oil-based generation. That mistake gave us the present increasingly unaffordable energy mix over time. To the argument that the present looming gas deficit would have made that option unfeasible by now, it can be contended that imported gas supplies may still have proved cheaper. However, that is water under the bridge by now. While the government pursues thermal generation on a war footing, it is good that it is also pursuing hydel, coal, solar and renewable forms of energy. Only a nuanced policy that avails all options can meet demand, expand available energy to those deprived so far and make the mix affordable. In addition, the government needs to invest in the national grid to minimise line losses (amongst the highest in the world), cut off supply to defaulters (especially government ministries and departments that are the main culprits of this problem), and ensure the collection of dues to overcome the persistent problem of circular debt. One manifestation of this issue is the default that threatens Pakistan State Oil (PSO) unless it receives Rs 149 billion by next month, a default that would halt oil supplies and exacerbate the energy deficit during the long hot summer months when demand is at its peak. The energy crisis is serious, the solutions will take time, but as long as the government is moving in the right direction, there is hope for the economy and the people of a brighter future.

Daily Times Editorial April 22, 2014

The Army’s riposte Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Director General (DG) Major General Asim Bajwa came out all guns blazing on Sunday against what he called the regrettable and baseless allegations against the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and its DG Lieutenant-General Zaheerul Islam of being responsible for the murderous attack on prominent journalist Hamid Mir in Karachi on Saturday, in which fortunately, despite the best efforts of his attackers, he came out wounded but alive. General Bajwa said legal and constitutional action was being deliberated upon against this “shameful allegation” that resulted in the global gross insult and degrading of an army institution. He ascribed the attack to ‘miscreants’. He thanked the people and (sections of the) media for strongly condemning what he called this “shameful propaganda aimed at an unsuccessful attempt to malign the ISI” and standing by the army and its institutions, which were cognizant of all affairs and in the forefront for strengthening democracy and freedom of speech. However, he criticised the fact that the allegations against the ISI and its chief, without any proof, were broadcast with the DG ISI’s picture for a continuous eight hours on the group’s television channel. He welcomed the announcement by the government that a three-member judicial commission would be formed to investigate the matter and report within 21 days of it being nominated by the Chief Justice of Pakistan. It may be recalled that the government has also announced a reward of Rs 10 million to anyone providing credible information that could lead to the arrest of the accused. Meanwhile journalists’ bodies continued their countrywide protests against the attack. While Hamid Mir recuperates in hospital and awaits possible further surgeries, in all of which we pray and hope that he will come through hale and hearty, the treatment of the news of the attack by the group that employs him has given rise to a new controversy, to which General Bajwa referred. It is understandable that in the shock and heat of the moment after the news broke, his brother, Amir Mir, also a journalist, and the group’s TV channel continued to point accusing fingers at the ISI and its chief into the night. Ordinarily, given the state of our electronic media these days, this could have been ascribed to excitement and a lack of judicious editorial control, but for the accusations and allegations to have been repeated ad nauseam gives pause for thought. The question arises, who is in charge of the store when such things are happening? Only belatedly does it seem better sense prevailed and the group has published and broadcast a statement distancing itself from the accusations against the ISI, reiterating its respect for the army and its institutions in an attempt to undo the damage or at least control it. Damage control became necessary, even more so after Amir Mir’s claim that the New York-based Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) had been sent a video earlier by Hamid Mir laying out his allegation of ISI’s responsibility if anything happened to him was refuted by the CPJ. The US State Department has condemned the attack too, reiterating the critical need for freedom of expression in a democracy. While all thoughts return again and again to recuperating Hamid Mir, we must reflect on some of the lessons of this episode vis-à-vis responsible media. Since private TV channels arrived in 2002, ethical and responsible journalism has taken a back seat on most if not all these channels in the race to break the news first and thereby garner ‘ratings’ (a false and misleading criterion on examination, given their narrow and skewed base sample). A hysterical and sensationalist air permeates most if not all private TV channels without the realisation just how powerful the medium is and how devastating can be its impact if news is not presented soberly and responsibly. When one of its own was attacked, and that too a prominent figure, Hamid Mir’s group failed to rise to the occasion and standards required in such a situation. Post facto retreats are never quite as effective as responsible journalism in the first instance. Nevertheless, as fellow journalists, we hope the army will take a lenient view of the lapse, ascribe it to getting carried away in the heat of the moment, and move on, as General Bajwa indicated, to full cooperation with the judicial commission and its investigation. This time round, the commission will have the eyes of the whole world on it and hopefully will therefore produce a meaningful outcome, not the damp squib the commission on Saleem Shahzad turned out to be.

Daily Times Editorial April 21, 2014

Attack on Hamid Mir The attempted assassination of TV anchor and journalist Hamid Mir in Karachi on Saturday, April 19, 2014, is a grim reminder of the dangers facing media persons in Pakistan. Not for nothing has it been dubbed the most dangerous country in the world for journalists. Clearly, the schedule and travel plans of Hamid Mir were known to his attackers, given that he had just left the airport on the way to his office and was ambushed en route. His family and employers have been at pains to highlight a written message Hamid Mir had conveyed some time ago that if anything happened to him, the trail led to the ISI and particularly its chief, Lt-General Zaheerul Islam. ISPR has refuted the charge and described it as unfortunate and misleading when there is no proof of the assertion. Condemnation of the attack and calls for a thorough and independent investigation have come tumbling out from all quarters, including the government and military top brass. The latter, in particular, are obviously interested in clearing the name of the ISI. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has announced a three-member judicial commission will be set up to investigate the incident. He has also announced a reward of Rs 10 million to anyone providing credible information that could help track down the attackers. While these lines are being written, there are also reports of a high level meeting being held by the prime minister to discuss the issue. Meanwhile the Sindh Information Minister Sharjeel Menon has promised a thorough inquiry and investigation, but has asked for federal help in the endeavour. This is a reasonable demand since the entrails of whatever conspiracy lies behind the attempted murder of Hamid Mir could be difficult to trace at just a provincial level. Hamid Mir received three bullets, and the presence of mind of his driver allowed him to shake off the pursuing attackers and managed to get him to a hospital in time. Hamid Mir is reportedly recovering in hospital after a successful surgery to remove the bullets. We all wish him a full and speedy recovery. Journalist bodies countrywide have mounted protests against the attack, calling it not just an attack on Hamid Mir but a full, frontal attack on the media and freedom of expression. Everywhere the cry has gone up that such tactics and attacks meant to silence the media will not be allowed to succeed. Attacks on the media and journalists seem to be intensifying since the start of this year and acquiring a sinister pattern. Earlier attacks on the Express group and particularly its TV anchor Raza Rumi in Lahore, in which he was fortunately relatively unscathed but in which his driver was killed, point to the slate of possible suspects. In Raza Rumi’s case, the gang responsible has recently been rounded up in Lahore and identified as belonging to the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, a banned extreme sectarian group. However, given the controversy that has arisen as a result of the revelation of Hamid Mir’s allegations against the ISI, the matter assumes even more important dimensions requiring investigations that get to the bottom of the mystery. It may be recalled that some months ago reports spoke of a hit list of the Taliban that included media house owners, prominent journalists and even the unnamed editor of an English newspaper. Since Raza Rumi’s and Hamid Mir’s names were both reportedly on the hit list, it has by now acquired very sinister and important dimensions. Needless to say, the government and all state authorities not only need to cooperate in the investigation into this latest atrocity against a prominent journalist, the authorities and media houses also need to revisit the risks run by working journalists and chalk out security and other safety measures to safeguard those who strive to bring the truth into the light of day, a seemingly noble endeavour, but not without risk to life and limb from variegated enemies, as the track record of journalists killed, attacked and threatened in Pakistan over the years shows.

Daily Times Editorial April 19, 2014

‘Wait and see’ After the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan’s (TTP’s) refusal to extend the ceasefire that expired on April 10, both the government and the TTP have nevertheless reiterated their desire for the talks process to continue. However, the government’s Cabinet Committee on National Security (CCNS) after its meeting on Thursday underlined that the talks could only be continued if the TTP sticks to peace, otherwise force would have to be used (with an extra punch). Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif told the CCNS that Pakistan was facing formidable challenges domestically and far reaching developments in the region. And he called a cabinet meeting on Friday to discuss the finalised proposals of the CCNS. The thrust of these proposals is that all options will be explored and all resources employed to ensure peace and security. National security is of paramount importance if the economic gains made by the government since it came to power and those in the pipeline were to be consolidated. Relations with neighbours would be strengthened. In this context the important statement was that there would be no interference in the internal affairs of Afghanistan, whose people were congratulated for holding a successful presidential election, with Pakistan committed to supporting democracy in the war-torn country. Also, relations with India would be promoted (after, of course, the general elections taking place there). The CCNS endorsed the vision of putting Pakistan on the crossroads of opportunity rather than conflict. The issue of the release of Taliban prisoners also came under discussion. In the current pause that has arisen in the talks process, Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali intends to contact Maulana Samiul Haq and other members of the Taliban negotiation committee for an extension of the ceasefire. Chaudhry Nisar stated categorically that there could be no meaningful talks without a ceasefire. Maulana Samiul Haq and the Jamaat-i-Islami’s talks interlocutor Professor Ibrahim both advise patience, tolerance, and renewed efforts to get the talks back on track. The prime minister advised Chaudhry Nisar to address whatever grievances the TTP had in order to persuade them to extend the ceasefire and return to the negotiating table. The military on the other hand reportedly feels that the refusal to extend the ceasefire exposes the insincerity of the TTP vis-à-vis the talks. If the prime minister’s advice is heeded, these and other ‘differences’ between the civilian and military sides of the state should be resolved through the existing dispute resolution mechanisms, of which the CCNS offers scope for a free and frank discussion. Meanwhile the opposition in the Senate continues to harbour grave doubts and reservations about the government’s approach and strategy regarding the peace process. The question was raised in the upper house on Thursday what options the government had considered if the talks fail. The repeated comment was that the government’s approach smacked of dithering and lack of transparency in taking, at the very least, parliament into confidence. One cannot be sanguine about the TTP’s intentions or sincerity. However, such caveats do not apply to the government. Where the government can be faulted perhaps is in creating, through its ‘one step forward, two steps back’ peace process, a sense of drift or at the very least lack of strategic vision. If the CCNS outcome is examined, it is obvious that the government (and the military) have yet to move even one inch forward from their previous stated strategy of containment and retaliation towards the TTP. The containment idea implies bottling up the TTP in FATA, but who will guarantee there will be no repeat of the attacks in Islamabad and elsewhere in the country, given that it is widely believed (and has been endorsed by intelligence sources) that the TTP and its affiliates have sleeper cells dotted all over? As to retaliation, even with more punch, this is a passive reactive approach that leaves the initiative in the hands of the militants. Critics have been homing in on precisely this surrender of the political and military initiative to the extremists, with the government (and state) resembling nothing more than a punch-drunk boxer lashing out on the ropes against an opponent who is playing him for all it is worth. Strategic paralysis of this variety is a recipe for disaster.

Daily Times Editorial April 17, 2014

Democrats unite In the backdrop of the controversy that has arisen in recent days regarding the government’s frictions with the military, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif held a significant meeting with PPP co-chairperson Asif Ali Zardari to discuss, amongst other things, civil-military relations on Wednesday in Islamabad. The meeting was intended to reiterate the support for each other of the two largest mainstream parties in defence of democracy. Alarms have rung recently about the friction that emerged as a result of the statements of two federal ministers that evoked a response from the COAS General Raheel Sharif during his visit to the SSG headquarters and from the military after the subsequent Corps Commanders’ meeting. The alarm is understandable given the history of military intervention in Pakistan’s past. However, notwithstanding the indiscreet statements by the two federal ministers in the context of the Pervez Musharraf case, interpreted in military circles as humiliating for the army, the government, opposition and all democratic forces appear to be converging on the issue of ensuring the continuation of the democratic system and resisting any ‘adventure’. This was also stated by Senator Farhatullah Babar of the PPP in the upper house the other day. The fact that the two mainstream parties and all democratic forces are in agreement on defending democracy is a positive when seen in the backdrop of the Charter of Democracy signed between late Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif in exile in London in 2006, as well as the welcome restraint exercised during the tenure of the previous PPP-led government over five years by Nawaz Sharif, who reiterated many times that he would not destabilise the system irrespective of his differences with the PPP. This positive convergence of the democratic forces is often dismissed by the leader of another newly emerged party, Imran Khan of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf as a ‘muk-muka’ (deal) of the corrupt to shield each other’s misdoings. Imran Khan has not been through the struggle for democracy that has been central to Pakistan’s history since it came into existence. He has a black mark against him of collaboration with General Pervez Musharraf’s regime (he later regretted this and even apologized for it publicly). Those who have been through the struggle and suffered the consequences are therefore in a better place to realise the importance of the democratic forces standing together if Pakistan is to continue its journey along the democratic path. Perhaps, though, the alarm about ‘adventures’ is exaggerated. The military under former COAS General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani and now General Raheel Sharif is only too aware that neither internal nor global circumstances support a return to the military interventions of the past. Differences on policy or its implementation in the struggle against terrorism, and the perceived reservations of the army regarding its former COAS Pervez Musharraf being hauled over the coals in treason and other serious cases notwithstanding, can it be seriously argued that democracy faces any such threat today? Many of the attitudes on either side therefore owe more to history than the present. And what of that present? On Wednesday the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) shura (council) finally announced its unwillingness to extend the ceasefire that expired on April 10, citing the need for clarifications on many issues bedevilling the talks process. The TTP wishes to continue the talks despite its rejection of an extension in the ceasefire. Whether such a posture is acceptable to the government and the military, the latter on the frontline of the struggle and arguably the first to feel the impact of the restart of terrorist attacks by the TTP in the wake of its ceasefire rejection, is something that will only become clear in the following days. However, the prospect of renewed terrorist attacks on the military and citizens points to the critical need for the government and the military to cooperate and pull in the same direction in this struggle. The good news is that Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif has called a high level meeting on national security today (Thursday) in which the top brass of the military and government will participate. The hope is that any misunderstandings and unnecessary frictions that have arisen of late between the government and the military will be sorted out in a free and frank manner, informed by the sense of responsibility and harmony required amongst all state institutions to tackle the serious existential threat to state and society from the terrorists.

Daily Times Editorial April 15, 2014

Government-army tensions In a press conference on Sunday, Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar admitted that some tensions had arisen in recent days between the government and the army, but these were more in the nature of ‘misunderstandings’ and would soon be resolved. He argued that civil-military coordination and harmony in the 10 months since the present government took office have been better than ever before in our history. The government and the army are on the same page as far as the policy towards terrorism is concerned, he emphasized. If there are differences, they are more differences of opinion, not differences on the policy per se. The talks process is supported by the army, the minister clarified. Referring to the remarks of a couple of federal ministers on the Musharraf case that evoked a statement by the COAS regarding maintaining the dignity and interests of the military, Chaudhry Nisar said this was an ‘irritant’ that too would soon be smoothed over. On the controversy that has arisen of late regarding the freeing of non-combatant Taliban prisoners, Chaudhry Nisar asked the pertinent question that if the prisoners were released from internment centres under the control of the army, how was it possible that they were released without the consent of the army? The release of 19 prisoners so far would be followed by another 13, after the talks with the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) resume. Although the minister did not specify a date for the resumption of the talks, delay in which he ascribed to one of the members of the government’s negotiating committee being unavailable, sources spoke of the talks resuming very soon. There was no deadlock in the talks, Chaudhry Nisar argued. The minister’s remarks were at odds with the Taliban side’s intermediary Professor Ibrahim of the Jamaat-i-Islami. The professor’s view in an interview with foreign media on Sunday was that there are many odds against the talks/peace process, largely because of the trust deficit between the two sides. He also asserted that the government and the army were not on the same page as the military had serious reservations about the government’s approach. He also revealed that the released prisoners list had not been shared by the government. Were the government to share the list, it would assist in the release of the Taliban’s non-combatant hostages, prominent amongst whom are Shahbaz Taseer, Ali Haider Gilani and Professor Ajmal. An interesting aside regarding these three innocent hostages is the statement by Chaudhry Nisar that their release had not yet been taken up with the Taliban but would follow a resumption of the talks. That throws the release of Taliban prisoners in an even worse light: the government conceding the incremental release of prisoners without extracting at the very least the reciprocal release of hostages. Professor Ibrahim’s suggestion in this regard merits attention. The good professor also underlined the role of the infighting between TTP factions in creating a stalemate in the peace process, although the TTP spokesman Shahidullah Shahid stated that the infighting had nothing to do with his organisation. He said it was ‘merely’ a misunderstanding between the two factions and was on the way to being settled. It merits attention that the ‘misunderstanding’ between the Sajna group and followers of the Hakeemullah Mehsud faction has led to several dozen deaths and according to latest reports, is still continuing. Not only is factional fighting producing deaths amongst the militants, the age-old tactic of kidnappings in and around the tribal areas has seen a splurge of late. Along with this development, a militant group reportedly opposed to the peace process has had several members killed in Darra Adam Khel by the security forces. The lay of terror land shows contradictory features that are feeding into further confusion about where the process is headed. The ‘ceasefire’, which the TTP has so far adhered to (or so it claims), has yielded continuing attacks, not the least of which are the two attacks in Islamabad. Some Taliban factions have resorted to settling their rivalries through the barrel of a gun. There may not be a ‘deadlock’ in the talks because it is unclear whether, when and where the talks will resume. Despite numerous statements, clarifications, etc, by the government’s concerned ministers, confusion tends to be deepening and getting worse confounded.

Daily Times Editorial April 14, 2014

The political landscape Barely nine months into its tenure, the PML-N government has received a boost from the latest Gallup Pakistan survey, which claims an overall approval of the government’s performance, particularly in comparison with the previous PPP-led government (an improvement of 59 percent). First, the survey findings. The survey report says despite inheriting a fragile economy, deteriorating law and order, strained ties with neighbouring countries and uncontrollable inflation, the PML-N government managed to put things in order through independent and prudent policies. As many as 55 percent of respondents gave the government a favourable rating, compared to 40 percent unfavourable. The survey claims to be a nationally representative poll in the urban and rural areas of the country. The sample of respondents consisted of 2,596 adult men and women whose views were solicited through face-to-face interviews. The sample was selected through the probability sampling method with an error margin of 3-5 percent at 95 percent confidence level. The field work for the survey was conducted between January 6 to 13, 2014. For six key indicators, the government received positive comparative net performance ratings. On the economy, the government received a 48 percent comparative net performance rating, on Pakistan-India relations 22 percent, foreign policy 33 percent, terrorism control 31 percent, corruption control 36 percent and inflation control 20 percent. The net performance ratings for political leaders saw Nawaz Sharif leading with 18 percent favourable rating, Asif Ali Zardari minus 28 percent, Imran Khan at minus five percent, Alta Hussain minus 39 percent, Maulana Fazlur Rehman minus 21 percent and Asfandyar Wali Khan minus 34 percent. Outgoing Jamaat-i-Islami chief Munawar Hasan’s rating remained unchanged. On controlling inflation, terrorism and corruption, the government won favourable ratings over the previous government by 20, 31 and 36 percent respectively. Amongst provincial chief ministers, Punjab’s Shahbaz Sharif was rated ‘very good’ by 21 percent respondents and ‘good’ by 28 percent. Sindh Chief Minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah (like Shahbaz Sharif in his second consecutive tenure) obtained six percent ‘very good’, while both the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan chief ministers got a four percent ‘very good’ rating. While Gallup Pakistan’s survey results may bring satisfaction to some parties and leaders and disappointment if not anger to others, the survey’s findings should be treated with caution. The old maxim goes something like: there are lies, damn lies, and then statistics. Generalised sweeping conclusions cannot and should not be drawn from a narrow sample, let alone anointing the findings with the mantle of unassailable truth. Having said that, let us first and foremost concede that a favourable comparison with the previous PPP-led government is not saying much. That government bitterly disappointed many in its own ranks and supporters amongst the electorate, the latter having punished the party in the May 2013 elections with defeat at the polls, with the exception of the PPP’s solid stronghold of Sindh. Nevertheless, the laudatory findings of the survey regarding the present government may owe more to bias and hype (not to mention the unknowns at present of the sample spread and the manner of drafting the questions) than reality. The government is widely perceived as a business-friendly government that is relying on the business community (to whom the top leadership of the PML-N belongs) to pull the country’s economic chestnuts out of the fire. In the process, the implied if not stated approach seems still to rely on trickle down theories that have been almost universally discredited on the basis of decades of practical experience. The rich do not share their increased profits in a recovering or booming economy; they simply divert their surplus profits to even more conspicuous consumption, with little or no benefit to the ordinary citizen. That phenomenon is palpable in Pakistan, with working class and even middle class people groaning under the burden of unemployment, high inflation, insecurity of life and limb and with no chink of light at the end of what appears to be a very long dark tunnel. The terrorists are being appeased. Pakistan-India relations are on hold. Overall foreign policy sees relations with all neighbours fraught, great uncertainty and possible conflict looming over the Afghanistan horizon, and the project of post-withdrawal relations with the US and west riddled with troubling questions. The corruption issue has not yet yielded any major scandal, but the systemic corruption that is a bleeding wound for state and society remains untouched. How then, with this reality check, can we be sanguine about Gallup Pakistan’s findings?

Daily Times Editorial April 14, 2014

The political landscape Barely nine months into its tenure, the PML-N government has received a boost from the latest Gallup Pakistan survey, which claims an overall approval of the government’s performance, particularly in comparison with the previous PPP-led government (an improvement of 59 percent). First, the survey findings. The survey report says despite inheriting a fragile economy, deteriorating law and order, strained ties with neighbouring countries and uncontrollable inflation, the PML-N government managed to put things in order through independent and prudent policies. As many as 55 percent of respondents gave the government a favourable rating, compared to 40 percent unfavourable. The survey claims to be a nationally representative poll in the urban and rural areas of the country. The sample of respondents consisted of 2,596 adult men and women whose views were solicited through face-to-face interviews. The sample was selected through the probability sampling method with an error margin of 3-5 percent at 95 percent confidence level. The field work for the survey was conducted between January 6 to 13, 2014. For six key indicators, the government received positive comparative net performance ratings. On the economy, the government received a 48 percent comparative net performance rating, on Pakistan-India relations 22 percent, foreign policy 33 percent, terrorism control 31 percent, corruption control 36 percent and inflation control 20 percent. The net performance ratings for political leaders saw Nawaz Sharif leading with 18 percent favourable rating, Asif Ali Zardari minus 28 percent, Imran Khan at minus five percent, Alta Hussain minus 39 percent, Maulana Fazlur Rehman minus 21 percent and Asfandyar Wali Khan minus 34 percent. Outgoing Jamaat-i-Islami chief Munawar Hasan’s rating remained unchanged. On controlling inflation, terrorism and corruption, the government won favourable ratings over the previous government by 20, 31 and 36 percent respectively. Amongst provincial chief ministers, Punjab’s Shahbaz Sharif was rated ‘very good’ by 21 percent respondents and ‘good’ by 28 percent. Sindh Chief Minister Syed Qaim Ali Shah (like Shahbaz Sharif in his second consecutive tenure) obtained six percent ‘very good’, while both the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan chief ministers got a four percent ‘very good’ rating. While Gallup Pakistan’s survey results may bring satisfaction to some parties and leaders and disappointment if not anger to others, the survey’s findings should be treated with caution. The old maxim goes something like: there are lies, damn lies, and then statistics. Generalised sweeping conclusions cannot and should not be drawn from a narrow sample, let alone anointing the findings with the mantle of unassailable truth. Having said that, let us first and foremost concede that a favourable comparison with the previous PPP-led government is not saying much. That government bitterly disappointed many in its own ranks and supporters amongst the electorate, the latter having punished the party in the May 2013 elections with defeat at the polls, with the exception of the PPP’s solid stronghold of Sindh. Nevertheless, the laudatory findings of the survey regarding the present government may owe more to bias and hype (not to mention the unknowns at present of the sample spread and the manner of drafting the questions) than reality. The government is widely perceived as a business-friendly government that is relying on the business community (to whom the top leadership of the PML-N belongs) to pull the country’s economic chestnuts out of the fire. In the process, the implied if not stated approach seems still to rely on trickle down theories that have been almost universally discredited on the basis of decades of practical experience. The rich do not share their increased profits in a recovering or booming economy; they simply divert their surplus profits to even more conspicuous consumption, with little or no benefit to the ordinary citizen. That phenomenon is palpable in Pakistan, with working class and even middle class people groaning under the burden of unemployment, high inflation, insecurity of life and limb and with no chink of light at the end of what appears to be a very long dark tunnel. The terrorists are being appeased. Pakistan-India relations are on hold. Overall foreign policy sees relations with all neighbours fraught, great uncertainty and possible conflict looming over the Afghanistan horizon, and the project of post-withdrawal relations with the US and west riddled with troubling questions. The corruption issue has not yet yielded any major scandal, but the systemic corruption that is a bleeding wound for state and society remains untouched. How then, with this reality check, can we be sanguine about Gallup Pakistan’s findings?

Daily Times Editorial April 11, 2014

The case of the exploding guavas The bomb explosion in the wholesale and fruit market on the periphery of Islamabad on Wednesday yielded a gory casualty count because of the crowded nature of the venue. At last count, 24 people were killed (some torn to shreds by the blast) and over 129 injured. The temporary distraction of the United Baloch Army’s claim of responsibility aside, the Taliban went to some lengths to deny any part in the carnage. The spokesman of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) Shahidullah Shahid waxed indignant, calling it tragic that innocents were killed and that such attacks are haram (forbidden). One must say the TTP has a very developed sense of irony, since it is not exactly innocent when it comes to killing innocent people by all manner of grisly means. The attack came a day before the extended ceasefire of the TTP was to expire. On Thursday reports spoke of the Taliban leadership meeting amidst calls by some factions for renewing attacks in the face of the government’s enigmatic ‘silence’ and slow progress on the TTP’s demands. Ending the ceasefire would simply remove the fig leaf of an ostensible ceasefire in the middle of what increasingly appears to be a TTP tactic of ‘fighting while talking’. While this may have become obvious to a great many people, the government continues to insist on its talks strategy’s ‘successes’. Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar is by now wholly adept at issuing hollow statements after every tragedy of this kind that the perpetrators will be brought to justice and compensation paid to the victims. One may be justified in asking; have the perpetrators of the Islamabad courts attack been apprehended? How much compensation has been paid to the victims of that attack? The interior minister is increasingly coming in for flak, not the least by the opposition, including the Leader of the Opposition Syed Khursheed Shah, who has taunted the interior minister on his claim that Islamabad is a ‘safe city’. Information Minister Pervaiz Rasheed on the other hand has a novel take on the event. He thinks the space for the terrorists has been squeezed by the government’s talks strategy, that is why people who would normally have been thought to be behind such incidents (the TTP, for example) are denying any role. If that thought brings comfort to the information minister and helps him sleep more soundly, good luck to him, but the rest of the citizens of Pakistan are not convinced by this line of reasoning. Denial has very much been part and parcel of the TTP’s arsenal since the talks process began. Attacks have not ceased despite the so-called ceasefire, and it is the citizens who continue to suffer from the inability of the government to see through the TTP’s ruse. As to the blast itself, it is being reported that the bomb was placed in some crates containing guavas transported from Sharaqpur. The Sheikhupura police has claimed the arrest of the goods transport company’s owner and his son, and is said to be gathering details on nine guava farms in the area (no doubt to assess their respective fruits’ sweetness). With due respect, neither the police nor the government seem to have a handle on the nature and character of the terrorism facing the country. Nor does their head-in-the-sand attitude to dealing with the terrorists inspire much confidence. Peace is desirable for all of us in this benighted land, but peace cannot be had by merely wishing for it, or beggars would ride. Even its erstwhile close ally in supporting the talks process, the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf has now come out with a critique of the government’s inability to protect citizens. The task of tackling terrorism and jihadi insurgency, protecting the people and the country’s assets is inherently a difficult task. But the government’s approach of handing the initiative to the terrorists through the show of ‘ceasefires’, ‘talks’ and ‘peace’, when none of these descriptions fit the bill, has meant an inherently difficult task has been rendered all but impossible. The government would be well served by listening to the security forces’ advice on the correct strategy against the terrorists, particularly since the very effective strikes against them that made them sue for a ceasefire have demonstrated the capability of the armed and security forces to root out the problem once and for all. The restraining hand of the government must be tempered by such professional advice.

Daily Times Editorial April 10, 2014

Sibi train bombing The bombing of a passenger train at Sibi on Tuesday in which 17 people were burnt to death, including six women and four children, and 40 injured, serves to highlight the continuing tragedy of Balochistan. The United Baloch Army (UBA) claimed responsibility and warned of more such attacks, advising people not to travel by trains. The UBA says the attack was in retaliation for the major operation in Kalat district on Monday, in which the security forces claimed to have killed 40 insurgents belonging to the Baloch Republican Army (BRA) and the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA). All three groups, the UBA, BRA and BLA are Baloch nationalist insurgent groups waging a guerrilla war that initially was seen as a struggle for the rights of the Baloch people, a long standing problem, but over time has seen a hardening of attitudes on all sides, including the exponential growth of separatist sentiment. A strike called by the Baloch National Front (BNF) on Tuesday saw many towns throughout the province shut down in protest at the operation, with claims by the BNF that those killed were non-combatants, including women and children. Since the media is not allowed to report freely from many areas of the province, it is difficult to assess the truth or otherwise of all these claims and counter-claims. Nevertheless, if there is even a grain of truth in the reports, it only underlines the bloody struggle simmering in Balochistan, without any end in sight. The very nature of guerrilla struggle envisages a conflict between two sides of unequal strength. The weaker force, the guerrilla force, will therefore perforce attack soft targets. These include, in the context of Balochistan, infrastructure such as railways, highways, electricity and gas lines. Inherent in some of such attacks is the possibility of collateral non-combatant casualties. Similarly, when the security forces conduct operations, there is no gainsaying the possibility of collateral damage. Ironically, President Mamnoon Hussain happened to be visiting Quetta on the day of the Sibi incident. He talked about the usual formula of exploiting Balochistan’s immense untapped mineral resources to bring prosperity and development to the most underdeveloped province of the country. This conventional approach to a complex issue misses the wood for the trees. Without a political solution to the ongoing insurgency, it is unlikely development alone will bring peace to the troubled province. The election of a ‘nationalist’ chief minister in last year’s general elections had led to hopes that Dr Abdul Malik Baloch would manage to open channels of communication with the Baloch insurgent leadership in exile and in the mountains to seek a negotiated solution to Balochistan’s long running resentment at being marginalised and deprived of its rights throughout the 66-year history of the country. However, by now it is clear that the security forces in Balochistan, led by the Frontier Corps, have their own take and approach to the problem and are not amenable to letting up on their operations to open up space for a possible political negotiation with the insurgents, which may lead to a political solution to the Balochistan conundrum. Dr Malik himself has said in interviews in recent days that the ‘development’ approach to Balochistan’s problems is unlikely to work if the examples of major projects like the Saindak copper and gold project run by the Chinese are taken into account. These projects have not yielded major benefits to the province, either in the shape of a share of the profits (the major chunk goes to the Chinese companies running such projects, while the federal government receives the bulk of the remainder) or local employment opportunities. In the light of these remarks, the potential of Gwadar port is not likely to yield very different outcomes. Recent initiatives to provide jobs to Baloch youth are unexceptionable in themselves, but they skirt the main issue, which is the simmering, and at times open resentment of the Baloch people at what they perceive is hard treatment by the state. Nationalist and even separatist sentiment cannot be crushed by force. After all Balochistan is going through its fifth insurgency since Pakistan came into being. The pattern is that insurgencies surge, attempts are made to crush them by force, the guerrillas nevertheless survive, and eventually the two sides come to some (temporary) compromise. The potential of Balochistan, its integration into the mainstream through extension of the province’s due rights, embracing the Baloch people as equal citizens of the state, reconciliation, are the way forward. Each insurgency takes a toll of the people and the security forces. A new path, a new initiative has become the inescapable necessity that history dictates. It is time for the tragedy to end.

Daily Times Editorial April 9, 2014

Army’s warning It seems that COAS General Raheel Sharif’s visit to the headquarters of the Special Services Group (SSG) at Ghazi Base in Tarbela proved uncomfortable in some respects and elicited a statement from him that has set the cat among the pigeons. General Sharif was subjected reportedly to the concerns and complaints of the officers and men at Ghazi Base about the criticism being heaped on the military by disparate quarters. In particular, since he belonged to the SSG, former commando and General (retd) Pervez Musharraf’s ‘humiliation’ was of particular concern, interpreted as eroding the dignity, respect and morale of the military. The statement by General Sharif released by ISPR spoke of the challenges facing the country, notwithstanding which the army would uphold the sanctity of all institutions while preserving its own dignity and institutional pride. Forensic analysis of the statement, its meaning and import aside, basically the well known concern of the military at the ‘treatment’ being meted out to their former COAS rankles more and more. This sensitivity in the ranks is something no commander can ignore. Therefore the statement of General Sharif can be taken as a message intended to boost the under pressure morale of the army and fire a warning shot across the bows of all its ‘critics’. The unstated but perhaps equally important cause of not so hidden resentment on the part of the military as a whole is the controversial approach of the government to the Taliban. The military has acted with exemplary restraint in keeping a public posture of support to the government’s much touted peace-through-talks process. However, rumblings in the ranks are ‘visible’. Logically, two reasons suggest themselves why the current scenario troubles the military. One, the military has suffered deaths and casualties at the hands of the very people the government is treating with so much respect as to raise the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) almost to the position of an equal stakeholder in the state. This is obviously not going down well. Second, the issue of exchange of prisoners is so far a one-sided process, in which the government has released, and intends to release, Taliban prisoners in small batches after reviewing their cases. In fact the task is big, since reports speak of the TTP having submitted a list of around 800 prisoners they claim are non-combatants, including women, children and the elderly, who they claim are fit cases for release. The government has reportedly now decided to set up a committee to review all these cases in order to expedite the process. In return, despite demands, the TTP have yet to free a single hostage in their custody. While the general public and the Sindh Assembly through a resolution the other day are demanding the release of Shahbaz Taseer, Ali Gilani and Professor Ajmal, no one is talking about the military and security forces’ prisoners in the custody of the TTP and affiliated groups. It should not be forgotten that 23 Frontier Constabulary hostages were mercilessly beheaded and their heads used as footballs, a grisly scene released on video, by the Taliban not so long ago. The rest of the hostages remain at risk until and unless the TTP shows some signs of willingness to release them. In return for the concession of release of their prisoners in batches, the TTP has yet to reciprocate the gesture. The military may have reservations about this one-sided bargain, particularly since the extension the TTP granted in the ceasefire runs out tomorrow (April 10). What will follow is therefore dogged by much uncertainty, as is the general outcome of the talks. The military’s sensitivity on the criticism it says is being unduly heaped on it in recent days is on the agenda of the Corps Commanders meeting today. In a related development, two ministers of the government, Khwaja Saad Rafique and Khwaja Asif, both of whom have been in the forefront of severe criticism of Musharraf during his trial and incarceration, were at pains the other day to deny that their stance on Musharraf should be interpreted as criticism of the army as an institution. Given the delicate situation facing the country, in which the possibility of the talks failing and the need to take other measures looms overhead, the civilian and military leaderships should exercise greater restraint and care in their pronouncements to avoid unnecessary misunderstandings. After all, if terrorism is to be tackled, both wheels of the state need to be pointing in the same direction.

Daily Times Editorial April 7, 2014

Afghan elections The importance of Afghanistan’s presidential election for the future of the country was never in doubt. Although the Taliban had threatened to disrupt the polls, categorising them as a ‘foreign plot’, it seems after Saturday’s vote that they failed. In the run up to election day on April 5, despite a spate of attacks against foreigners (election monitors, aid workers, journalists), they were unable to cow down the electorate from turning out. The turnout says it all: around seven million or 58 percent of the 12 million registered voters joined long lines queuing to cast their vote. Interestingly, the apprehensions that the Pashtun belt, where the Taliban are believed to have their stronghold, joined the rest of the country in what has been described as a slap in the face of the terrorists. The former Taliban ‘capital’ of Kandahar, which saw a low turnout and no women voting in the previous 2009 election, witnessed the same long lines at voting centres as in the rest of the country. Ironically, Afghan observers viewed the problem of ballot papers running out in many parts of the country, including Kabul, as a sign that more people wanted to vote than had been anticipated. The turnout and the relatively peaceful polls, with minor attacks in some provinces failing to dent the general picture, point to the historic emergence of a new political culture in the war-torn country, underlining the first democratic transition in Afghanistan’s history, a past darkened by violent and bloody changes. Security concerns led to some 959 voting centres having to be closed out of the 6,423 all over the country. There was no certainty on the eve of the polls who might emerge the winner amongst the three leading candidates: Abdullah Abdullah, Zalmai Rassoul and Ashraf Ghani. Preliminary results are expected on April 29. If no candidate gets more than 50 percent of the votes cast, a run off round between the two leading contenders is scheduled for late May. So although there is much to celebrate in the victory of the ballot over the bullet in this election, there is still many a slip, not the least of which could be rigging and fraud allegations that marred the 2009 presidential election and dented its credibility. Whoever the new incumbent in the presidential palace turns out to be after this relatively protracted process, he will face considerable challenges. For one, he will be faced almost immediately after taking office to deal with the stalled Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) that outgoing President Hamid Karzai refused to sign despite it being endorsed by a Loya Jirga convened by Karzai himself. Relations between Karzai and the US have reached an all time low, dealing the critical BSA a deadly blow, The importance of the BSA lies in its terms allowing some residual presence of western troops in a training and support role. The fate of the BSA could also impinge on military and economic aid to Afghanistan, without which the country could struggle. Although the 400,000 personnel of the Afghan army, police and intelligence services deployed on election day to provide security came through with relatively flying colours, the drying up of western military and economic assistance could exacerbate the difficulties of the new president, even more so after the western troops withdraw in bulk by the end of 2014. The Taliban may be expected to ratchet up their challenge to the post-election, post-withdrawal dispensation, and any failure to receive western aid could redound in their favour. Needless to say, if any lessons have been learnt from the experience of the west more or less abandoning Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal in 1989, they are that the peace of the country, region and the world critically depends on supporting the country through this critical transition over the next few years, until such time as the country is able to stand on its own feet. Pakistan’s interest lies not in once again trying to ‘conquer’ Afghanistan through jihadi proxies, but supporting our neighbour in its quest for peace and development, not the least because enlightened self-interest suggests both peace and war in Afghanistan inevitably impact Pakistan too.

Daily Times Editorial April 6, 2014

TTP conundrum Talks with the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) increasingly seem to be heading for a dark and narrow alley without light at the other end. Perhaps that is why Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, speaking at the death anniversary of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto on Friday accused the government of the PML-N at the Centre of pushing the country back into the dark ages by pursuing these talks. Or perhaps what he meant was the possible outcome of the talks, if it favours the Taliban, would be a ‘dark’ time ahead. Bilawal also criticized the Punjab government for allegedly sheltering terrorists in the province. As far as the PPP’s ‘home’ province of Sindh is concerned, he made reference to the recent spate of attacks on and the demolition of Hindu temples in a land famed for its tolerance by saying he and his party would not remain silent on the issue. While Bilawal was railing against the PML-N government’s approach to the terrorists, reports increasingly speak of the unhappiness of the armed forces at the policy of seeking peace through negotiations with the fanatical TTP, with special reference to the release of 19 ‘non-combatant’ Taliban prisoners. The objection appears to centre round the ‘unilateral’ nature of the release, without reciprocity from the TTP of releasing civilian and security forces’ personnel being held by them. In the top level meetings on Friday, reports say the concern of the armed forces has been conveyed to the civilian leadership. Given the one-to-one meetings with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif of not only COAS General Raheel Sharif but also Chief of the Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Tahir Rafiq Butt on Friday, the indications are that it is not only the army that has reservations about the course the government is embarked upon, but the air force too, which is credited with changing the mind of the TTP about merrily going on conducting attacks and killing prisoners in their custody after the air force struck their bases and compelled them to announce a ceasefire. For one, the definition of ‘non-combatant’ has been questioned. It may be recalled the interior ministry has classified the 19 prisoners released as ‘petty criminals’, not involved in terrorism or militant actions. However, it is being argued by knowledgeable analysts that those who help, facilitate, act as logistics mules or the eyes and ears of the terrorists cannot be called non-combatants without stretching the meaning of the term to absurdity. The second concern is that those released, and those about whom release is being contemplated (a far larger number from all accounts), need to be monitored after being freed to ensure they do not go back and join the ranks of the terrorists. Whether the intelligence and security forces have the capability and capacity to do this in the midst of the myriad tasks the situation in the country demands against terrorism is open to question. What would be unacceptable is if some time down the road, it was discovered that those released strengthened the hands of the terrorists. Third, the question of reciprocity rankles, since both civilian and security forces’ hostages in the hands of the Taliban have yet to see freedom. All the TTP has to offer is the extension of the ceasefire that expired on March 31 to April 10. We should bow our heads in gratitude to the TTP for this ‘generosity’ while we await with bated breath what may follow if the ceasefire is not extended beyond the latest deadline. The Taliban demands for the release of about 800 people claimed to be non-combatants and the free zone in FATA cannot be met, and the former, even if a review reveals certain individuals fit to be released, cannot be met in the few days remaining. The uncertainty looming over the process of negotiations with the TTP is in sharp contrast with the ‘exuberant’ optimism of the government and Taliban sympathizers in the negotiation committees. It would be best to be prepared in case the process unravels and other options have to be resorted to, including the ultimate option of the use of force. The country, the government, the armed forces cannot allow themselves to be caught napping.

Daily Times Editorial April 5, 2014

The right and left hand Reports on Thursday that the government has released 19 non-combatant prisoners produced some unnecessary confusion. The confusion owed more to lack of coordination and communication between branches of the government than anything else. Eventually the confusion was sorted out, but it left a strange taste in the mouth. Initial media reports presented the release as having been ordered by the prime minister (PM) as part of efforts to keep the peace process going. Since the PM’s Secretariat knew nothing about any such release, it initially denied the PM had issued any such orders. It would have been better if the Secretariat had first checked with the interior ministry, whose purview the peace talks and the security situation is, before rushing to the media with a denial. The interior ministry then responded to the denial by issuing a statement clarifying that 19 non-combatants in custody belonging to the Mehsud tribe had indeed been released by it since they were cleared of any involvement in militancy or terrorism. The detainees, according to the ministry’s statement, had been released in three batches, three on March 21, five on March 25, and 11 more on March 28. In addition, reports spoke of the impending release of another 100 such detainees. It took a meeting between the PM and Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali, if reports are to be believed, to clarify the fog. The whole brouhaha can be rightly ascribed to the right hand of the government not knowing what the left hand was up to. Given the sensitivity of the talks process, and how delicately it is poised after the month long ceasefire by the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has ended, it would serve the purposes of the government better if such pronouncements were carefully handled to avoid this kind of unnecessary controversy. One of the compelling reasons also for being careful in this regard is that parts of the media cast the affair in the hues of the PM overruling the advice of the military that prisoners should not be released, especially those responsible for the deaths of military officers and soldiers. Such reports unnecessarily put the government on the back foot, from where it has then to try and manage the fallout of a perception gained that the military still calls the shots on the matter of dealing with the militants. The facts belie such speculation. From all accounts, the military is fully on board as far as the government’s moves are concerned, and is willing to see if the government’s strategy of peace through talks can succeed, while at the same time keeping its powder dry in case it does not. The military may have offered firm advice against the ‘free zone’ in South Waziristan demanded by the TTP and rejected the release of combatants, but this hardly constitutes a difference of opinion or a civil-military divide on the issue. The gesture of releasing some non-combatants and contemplating the release of more is a move to generate goodwill and reciprocity from the TTP. So far, of course, despite lip service to the reciprocal release of non-combatants such as Shahbaz Taseer, Ali Haider Gillani and Professor Ajmal, in the custody of the TTP or affiliated groups, no such conciliatory gesture has been forthcoming from the TTP. Perhaps patience is the watchword for what is intrinsically a most sensitive affair and rush to judgment should be avoided. A protracted process rather than sudden gains is what we are perhaps undergoing. If the resolutions of the Central Executive Committee of the PPP, meeting on the eve of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s death anniversary in Garhi Khuda Buksh are taken note of, they assert, inter alia, that no extra-constitutional solution to the problem of terrorism would be acceptable. They also demand that the government take all the political parties into confidence on the peace process. This is a justified demand and would also help the government if its moves enjoy the support and confidence of the political class as a whole. Ironically, the PPP wants the government to ensure the release of the three non-combatant prisoners mentioned above, now that the shoe is on the other foot. It should be recalled that the PPP could not make much headway in this regard while it was in power. Nevertheless, the best approach to the talks/peace process is to wish it well without putting all one’s eggs in that basket.

Daily Times Editorial April 4, 2014

The Musharraf conundrum Former Chief of Army Staff (COAS) and president Pervez Musharraf’s case has become a hot potato for all concerned. After the Special Court trying him on treason charges passed the buck for the removal of his name from the Exit Control List (ECL) to the executive, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif consulted his senior ministers and the armed forces on the issue. Reports say most PML-N ministers appeared to be against letting Musharraf fly to the Gulf to attend to his ailing mother, fearing the government would lay itself open to charges of a ‘deal’. Certainly if Khwaja Asif and Khwaja Saad Rafique’s public take on the matter is referred to, it would appear as though the government speaks with one voice in rejecting Musharraf’s request. However, appearances can sometimes be deceptive. ‘Deals’ are the staple of Pakistan’s political menu, especially if the mother of all deals to allow Nawaz Sharif to go into exile in Saudi Arabia after he had been convicted by a kangaroo court is kept in mind. If Musharraf’s expectation was that the government, and particularly the prime minister, would return the favour, he would be disappointed by the interior ministry’s rejection of his request, citing serious cases ongoing against him in the courts. It appears by now that both the executive and the judiciary are reluctant to grasp the nettle, preferring to play ‘football’ or ‘ping-pong’ with the difficult decision by throwing the ball into each other’s court. Reports say Musharraf’s legal team would now approach the Supreme Court (SC) and possibly the Sindh High Court on the issue. Meantime habitual petitioner Shahid Orakzai has been his usual quick-off-the-mark self by moving the SC against any attempt to let a treason accused leave the country. Reports and speculations regarding the intervention of Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states in the conundrum point to our Arab friends’ inordinate influence on Pakistan’s internal affairs, as well as the clout they enjoy with the present (and past) dispensations. The sum total of these speculations, flying in the face of the general run of reportage and opinion that Musharraf may not be allowed to leave and have to face the music, is that Pakistan will ultimately bend to these external actors’ desire to see Musharraf go. The only basis for such a move would be humanitarian considerations regarding his ailing mother, with the possibility of a presidential pardon thrown in if the judiciary refuses to play ball. Perceptive observers regard the indictment of a former military dictator on treason charges for the first time in Pakistan’s military interventions-afflicted history as no less than a historic development. However, extreme scepticism follows whether the matter will go any further than the moral victory over the once all-powerful dictator and the message it sends from a transforming Pakistan to future military adventurers. It should not be forgotten that the resignation of General Jahangir Karamat as COAS under the last Nawaz Sharif government may well have produced the reaction from the armed forces when the next COAS, Musharraf, was dismissed by the prime minister. It is needless to point to what followed: a military coup that followed the pattern of a shelf life of almost 10 years, the track record benchmark for military dispensations in our history. The military, unhappy reportedly at Musharraf’s insistence on returning to the country despite his parent institution’s advice to stay away, nevertheless might find it difficult to swallow the further humiliation of its former chief, including the prospect, if the trial is allowed to run its course, of a possible death sentence or life imprisonment. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would surely not be unmindful of the lessons learnt from his last attempt/s to assert civilian supremacy over the armed forces. This time round, a more pragmatic assessment of the limits of civilian assertion may be the underlying wisdom informing his actions. The collateral advantage for Nawaz Sharif would be that he would emerge from the bruising episode in the colours of a reformed statesman keeping the interests of the country uppermost, rather than a vindictive politician bent upon burying the ghosts of the past.