Religious Militancy: A Big Challenge To Pakistan Stability – OpEd

[third eye]

Not everything written is correct, however the recommendations are worth a read.

Religious Militancy: A Big Challenge To Pakistan Stability - OpEd Eurasia Review

By Amna Razzaq

A big challenge that Pakistan is confronting among several other problems is increasing religious militancy and terrorism.

Militants are challenging the writ of the state and are spreading in the mainstream of the country. Terrorists are killing innocent people and targeting women, children and senior citizens of the state without any discrimination. Our society is terrorized and captioned by these militant attacks and everybody is vulnerable, people lost faith in government as the government seems ineffective in providing security to the masses. No place is safe from these terrorist attacks; our educational institutions, public places, security agencies and even mosques are becoming the victims of these militant attacks.

If we look back, we come to know that these Taliban and Al-Qaeda militants came into Pakistan after the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Afghanistan; these militants formed alliances with local tribesmen and initiated various terrorist activities in tribal belt and now these activities are spreading in the main cities of Pakistan, posing a serious threat to Pakistan security and stability.

However, some of the reports tell that this Taliban movement was launched and initiated by youth i.e. the youngsters were taught at Pakistani madrassas that those who are violating the teachings of Islam should be killed. The religious students are prepared for so-called jihad as the leaders and management of the madrassas adopt the technique of brain washing of these teen-agers.

In the beginning, these militants were backed by the intelligence agencies of Pakistan, but post 9/11 attacks, Pakistan became a front-line ally of United States in war against terrorism and provided every kind of assistance to US in this war. Resultantly, our own tribal people gone against the government for this assistance in war against terror and they accused the government for killing of thousands of innocent pushtuns in FATA and hence that Pushtun society made alliance with Taliban and provided safe heavens to these militants. In this entire situation, we become the victim of terrorist attacks in our country.

Moreover, we have also been gifted with drone attacks in our tribal areas by US; US is exploiting our sovereignty by doing drone attacks; the US intervene our territory and launched OBL raid without our permission, this and some other likely acts such as Remand Davis case and Salala attack, are against the sovereignty of Pakistan.

Reports and news also provide evidences that international community is also supporting these so-called religious militants, which is serious challenge for Pakistan government. These religious militants are interpreting Islam in a quite different way; their teachings contradicts that of the teachings of Islam; these militants commit terrorist attacks in the name of Islam; however Islam strongly condemns the killing of innocent people, women and children, and terms the likely people as coward and cruel who target women and children. Islam teaches us the lesson of love, prosperity and peace; in contrast these militants’ Islam leaves a negative connotation internationally, hence leaving an impact on non-Muslims that Islam is the religion of terror and not of peace.

This religious terrorism is threatening the stability of tribal areas. The root cause of militancy involves national as well as international elements, making the current scenario more complicated and more threatening. Some evidences show that India and some other countries are backing the terrorist activities in Pakistan; side by side they also provide them with weapons and financial aid. Furthermore, our society is divided into different sects who pose a severe challenge on the part of security forces. The leaders of religious organizations and religious political parties plan killings and use the youth bulk for this purpose by motivating this innocent youth on religious passion and hence launch terrorist activities in this way.

This religious militancy is a serious challenge for the government and security agencies as the terrorists are spreading in big and settled cities of the country. What is happening in Karachi offers a good example of terrorism. There government is failed to provide security and to maintain law and order in the city.

Therefore if this militancy goes unchecked, this would be a next severe challenge for our sovereignty and integrity. The time demands us to root out the extremism and fundamentalism; otherwise to counter this challenge we would fail to safeguard our dear homeland from these terrorists.

Here I would like to put forward my recommendations;

At this stage of economic turnaround, we need to keep up the thrust of socio-economic development by effectively in order countering these militants.

All the political parties, security forces, armed forces and our intelligence agencies and establishment should come forward with effective plans and agenda to eradicate extremism from the country.

For this all the parties should come on the dialogue table and work sincerely to counter this severe challenge to stability of Pakistan.

Here I like to quote senior defence analyst of Pakistan Dr.Riffat Hussain’ solution to the root cause of fundamentalism and extremism in our country. “The only hope of saving Pakistan from the religious extremists, the feudal tribal mafias, the corrupt bureaucrats, and the various types of opportunists and fortune-hunters is the emergence of an educated group of persons who understand Islam to be a religion of justice and compassion, of knowledge and reason, of openness and peace.”

Hence to take out our country from this challenge, we all have support our forces against these militants so as to make our country a prosperous and safe one.

 

[niaz]

A very rational and well written article on this subject.



False fault lines


Amir Zia
Monday, May 06, 2013
From Print Edition

The writer is editor The News, Karachi.

What are the dividing ideological frontiers in the fight against religious extremism and terrorism in Pakistan? Have distinct battle lines been drawn between liberal secularists and Islamists? Is it only the former who oppose Al-Qaeda and its local allies, including the Taliban and their narrow interpretation of Islam and tactics of violence and terrorism? Is it a fact that all religious-minded people and various Islamic schools of thought support these militant non-state actors? Is the impression correct that all right-wing and religious elements want Pakistan’s armed forces to unilaterally end the operation against these militants?

Some right-wing politicians, opinion makers and analysts would certainly like us to buy this paradigm. Similarly, there are those liberals and secularists who want to simplify this protracted conflict on these so-called ideological lines. These two subjective interpretations distort the reality but, unfortunately, they dominate the narrative on the national media.

This debate has acquired a fresh intensity in the run-up to the May 11 elections against the backdrop of a surge in violence, and especially after Army Chief Ashfaq Parvez Kayani’s recent speech in which he focused on the internal security challenges, calling for a united national consensus against those who defy the constitution and attempt to impose their narrow world view under the garb of Islam.

However, the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam, the Jamaat-e-Islami and those analysts who tend to agree with these parties have been quick to shoot down General Kayani’s remarks, saying that the war against militants who are responsible for attacks on key military installations – including the GHQ – and the killing of thousands of security personnel and civilians in suicide bombings and other terrorists attacks remains an ‘American War’. An impression has been given that General Kayani’s speech must have made Pakistani secularists and liberals jump with joy.

Ironically, on the other side of this great divide, the Pakistan People’s Party, the Muttahida Qaumi Movement and the Awami National Party and their cheerleaders are also portraying this conflict as liberals or secularists against militants and their right-wing supporters. Yes, these three parties have suffered colossal losses at the hands of terrorists who escalated attacks on their leaders and workers ahead of the elections. It is also a fact that these parties remain unable to carry out their election campaigns openly – unlike their rivals, the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf. But this ‘us-versus-them mentality’ remains an oversimplification of a rather complex issue.

The first fallacy that has been created by extremists and their allies is that it is the Pakistani state and its institutions that triggered the conflict with ‘God-fearing, good Muslims’ at the behest of the US. But the facts are very different. The Pakistani state, even under the former military ruler Pervez Musharraf, only wanted to stop the misuse of its territory as a safe haven for militants from across the world and for orchestrating terrorism aimed at other countries as well as within Pakistan. The actual American War remains on the other side of the Durand Line in Afghanistan – and not in Pakistan. Islamabad stands justified in its efforts to establish the writ of the state on Pakistani territory and get the country out of the self-destructive path of being bracketed with militant non-state actors.

There have been several attempts and at least five peace accords with the Pakistani Taliban to abolish safe havens for foreign militants and terrorist groups, and stop the use of Pakistan’s territory as their resting, recruiting, training, planning and fund-raising facility. As a responsible member of the international community, Pakistan is obligated to do this. But the policy of negotiations and appeasement by the former military-led government did not achieve the desired goal.

The 2007 Lal Masjid episode proved a watershed event as armed and trained militants battled with the security forces for more than a week in the heart of the federal capital. The then government had no choice but to use force against these militants who challenged the writ of the state, tried to create a state within the state and resorted to street vigilantism. Any country – democratic or undemocratic – would have opted for a similar course of action to quell this kind of revolt.

In a nut-shell, it is these militants, who imposed conflict on Pakistan. The state had no choice but to respond for self-preservation.

The second major erroneous belief is that only Pakistani liberals and secularists support the war against terrorism. No, along with liberals and secularists, a vast majority of right-wing and religious-minded people also oppose the Taliban and their narrow interpretation of Islam. Religious scholars and clerics belonging to almost every Islamic school of thought including Barelvis, Deobandis, Ahl-e-Hadis, the Sunnis and the Shias, have condemned the Taliban’s acts of violence, their defiance of Pakistan’s constitution and democracy, and brutal tactics of killings and mass murders.

Maulana Hasan Jan, a respected Deobandi cleric, who defeated Khan Abdul Wali Khan in his home constituency of Charsadda in the general elections, was killed by the Taliban because he condemned suicide bombings and declared them to be against the sacred principles of Islam. There have been many other such incidents in which religious scholars were silenced and even forced to leave the country for opposing the alarmingly narrow world view of militants, which is incompatible with modernity and progress.

Many right-wing parties, including the PML-N, also support efforts to curb terrorism, extremism and violence in the society, though during their election campaigns they have kept a meaningful silence in public over this issue.

Then we have various brands of nationalists in Sindh, Balochistan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and parts of southern Punjab who also oppose the Taliban and the likes of Al-Qaeda.

Last but not the least is the institution of the Pakistani armed forces, which in no way can be branded as secular or liberal. It represents all the diverse shades of Pakistan and is a vanguard of Pakistan’s struggle against extremism and militancy. Confusing the war against militants as that of liberals and secularists versus Islamists or religious-minded people is a deliberate distortion of facts, and it is dangerous for the country’s cohesion and unity.

General Kayani hit the bull’s eye when he said that “there is no room for doubts when it comes to dealing with rebellion against the state.”

“We as a nation need to forge consensus towards evolving a clear policy through mutual consultations. Considering this war against terrorism as the war of the armed forces alone can lead to chaos and disarray that we cannot afford,” he said in his speech on April 30 (Youm-e-Shuhada).

It is necessary to remove the cobwebs of confusion about the legitimacy of this conflict, which has been imposed upon us by the extremists. The handful of religious parties and their affiliate analysts should raise themselves above short-term political interests and back the armed forces in this war against terrorism.

The first step for them should be to condemn all those forces that resort to violence, terrorism, suicide attacks targeting civilians, political rivals and security personnel in the name of Islam. There should also be a consensus that any force or group raising weapons against the state, challenging its writ or openly defying the country’s constitution should be dealt with the proverbial ‘iron hand’.

But do the Jamaat-e-Islami, the JUI-F and the PTI have the courage and the intellectual honesty to act this way? Pakistan wants an answer. These forces should not disappoint the people again by siding with those responsible for brutalising our society and killing more than 50,000 people. They must act in the national interest. . A small, organised minority cannot be allowed to take this nation of more than 180 million people hostage.

Email: amir.zia@thenews.com.pk

False fault lines - Amir Zia

 

[niaz]

I would be intellectually dishonest if I fail to post a different point of view published the same day in the same Newspaper.



Is it really our war?


Ayaz Wazir
Monday, May 06, 2013
From Print Edition


Pakistan is passing through a phase of democratic transition. Wary of the status quo, a majority of people are looking forward to voting for a positive change in the coming elections. Amid this air of optimism, the recent speech by the Chief of Army Staff, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani to commemorate Martyrs’ Day (Youm-e-Shuhada) is of immense importance because of the subjects he touched upon.

Gen Kayani spoke in somewhat detail about the two core issues of democracy and militancy. His recipe for strengthening the foundations of democracy was to rise beyond personal, ethnic, linguistic and sectarian biases in the coming election and vote on the basis of honesty, sincerity, merit and competence. If this is done there would be no reason to fear dictatorship. Elsewhere in the speech as well, the COAS did not shy away from using the word dictatorship again to convey a grim message in a subtle manner about reasons to fear a see-saw between democracy and dictatorship.

The army chief also said that the issue of tackling militancy required unity between the nation and the armed forces. For that we need to be on the same page as this is our own war and nobody else’s, the chief declared. One hopes the actual achievement of this unity is as simple as its desire.

In fact, this is what has divided us from day one when the former dictator imposed the war on Pakistan making the country a frontline ally without consulting anyone in the nation. He also declared it ‘our war’, but the nation did not agree with him because there was no correlation in what he was saying and what was happening on the ground. His words and actions differed as did the armed forces and the nation on the subject.

As an institution, the army had to obey its chief’s command and he took full advantage of that for personal reasons – in the process pitting the armed forces against its own people. The nation just watched in an aloof manner leaving it to them to deal with the situation themselves. And because of this distance and lack of support – vital in such warlike circumstances – the armed forces could not achieve what they wanted.

Had the dictator taken the nation into confidence instead of surrendering on one telephone call, we would not have suffered the immense losses that we did both in terms of men and material. Now that the dictator is no longer at the helm of affairs and is likely to pay for his actions we must move on to what the incumbent chief has recently said in order to set the right course for ourselves.

Nobody with a sane mind wants to see militancy thrive at the cost of the nation. Everybody wants to see terrorism being defeated and an end to the killing of Pakistanis by fellow Pakistanis. We are all craving to see an end to this blood and gore of bomb blasts, suicide attacks, military operations and the use of tanks, gunship helicopters and jet fighters to spill blood on Pakistani soil. Nobody wants to see fellow Pakistanis disappear suddenly, only to reappear in body bags.

We would all like to see the enemy of one Pakistani treated as an enemy of all Pakistanis, the enemy of one institution as an enemy of all other institutions – where there are no exceptions whatsoever in dealing with the enemy. This is what has been missing till now and this is what should not happen again if we are to be united to fight this war.

Now that the army chief has declared before the nation that the war on terror is our own war going back on his words will not be that easy for him. The alternative would be too dangerous and too expensive a path for the country to follow. So let us take his words seriously and hope that his troops in the field will abide by his declaration because actions, as they say, speak louder than words.

Fostering and promoting militancy in the country is in nobody’s interest. Neither is provision of safe havens to militants – any and all. Providing shelter and sustenance to them for possible use somewhere at some stage as proxies is a highly dangerous game that always spirals out of control. Let us be very clear on that. Doing this only earns worldwide condemnation for a country leave alone the question of these indoctrinated possible proxies getting out of hand and wreaking havoc in pursuit of their own misguided agendas. It is not possible for them to prosper without the help and assistance of people or institutions strong and powerful enough to resist pressure and deflect action against them by other lawfully constituted authorities.

After the army chief’s address let bygones be bygones and let us make a new beginning. Let us take his statement at face value and come forward to extend the help and support that he requires from the nation for restoration of peace and stability in the country. In return what the nation expects of him is complete impartiality. The nation expects him to treat the blood of the civilians as sacred as that of soldiers. The two are products of the same soil and cannot be easily separated.

The only difference between them is that one is wearing a uniform and performing a duty at a distant place while the other is at home performing the duty of looking after his family. It is the command from the very top that makes all the difference. A wrong command leads them to where the dictator left them but a right decision not only patches up all differences within no time but leads them to gain victory together. And for that to happen honesty and sincerity are what a commander must posses and display.

What happened and what is still happening in the country is all due to the wrong policies we followed. We need to bury the past and begin afresh with a clean slate. We may differ on tactics but we cannot afford to differ on strategy if we want the two, the nation and the army, to be united in this war that we are faced with. Let us prove wrong the perception that we are fighting someone else’s war. Let us also prove that we are not following a policy of strategic depth across our western borders.

These are some of the most important points on which we need to unite. If we agree on this there is no reason why we can’t be on the same page and work together to defend our borders. Then no one will have any reservations in standing rock solid behind the armed forces in fighting this common war. The ball is in your court, Sir. Take the lead and turn your words into action and you will find the nation standing right behind you.

The writer is a former ambassador. Email: waziruk@hotmail.com
Is it really our war? - Ayaz Wazir