What's new

Politics: Sialkot through the National Security lens

Xestan

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 25, 2009
2,366
2
3,513
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
POLITICS: SIALKOT THROUGH THE NATIONAL SECURITY LENS
Ejaz Haider Published December 19, 2021 -

Supporters of Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan at a protest in Lahore on October 22 | AP

Supporters of Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan at a protest in Lahore on October 22 | AP

Recently, a foreign diplomat asked me about the threat posed by the agglomerated Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). My response was that the manner and haste with which the government had gone into talks with the group was a greater threat than any capacity the TTP had to generate violence and which the state could and must counter.

He then asked me about Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP). My response was that TLP was, and remained, a much bigger threat.
The reason is simple. When the state had to confront the TTP phenomenon, it showed little initial understanding and even less capacity to deal with the group’s terror tactics and attacks. Over some years, and after much punishment, the state has developed a much greater capacity to pre-empt such attacks or react to those that go through.

This capacity is not just a function of how the state can employ a combination of intelligence and kinetic operations, though that combination is a vital component of the state’s capacity. The other aspect — in some ways equally, if not more, important — is the ability of the state to isolate such groups. That is a function of public buy-in.
The horrific Sialkot incident is not just a law and order problem and has implications that are far graver than the threat posed by the TTP. But the state’s lack of capacity in confronting the TLP as a mindset prevents a strategic response

These are the two prerequisites — isolating a group and getting public buy-in — that help the state not just to use force against the TTP (or the Baloch terrorist conglomerate) but translate it into utility of force.

Neither prerequisite obtains in TLP’s case. Unlike the TTP or the Baloch Raaji Aajoi Sangar (BRAS) alliance, TLP’s ideology — which uses the Prophet’s (PBUH) honour as its central tenet — is grounded in the society and cuts across other denominational differences. Also, as Umair Javed, a sociologist, noted in his November 1, 2021 Dawn article, the TLP “is a movement that is more rooted in urban and peri-urban Punjab than any previous religio-political one.”

This means two things. One, that the TLP makes demands using markers that have societal acceptance and brands the state’s response as heavy-handed to justify its own violence, presenting it as reactive and not proactive. Second, the state, for all its rhetoric, cannot use force against the group and its supporters because the TLP uses its democratic right to protest.

Let me put it another way. When Prime Minister Imran Khan says the state will not allow the TLP to march on the capital, he is skating on thin ice. His party, when in opposition, marched on the capital and indulged in hooliganism and vandalism on more than one occasion. Similarly, when the TLP marched on the capital the first time, Khan and other PTI leaders cheered on the group as it humiliated the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) government. The issue of ideology becomes more complicated, because the state itself has nurtured this ideology over decades and, more recently, helped convex its violent expression through the TLP, albeit for reasons of political machinations.

If one were to use a national security lens, not just in terms of hard security but employing a broader definition of it, the TLP proffers a bigger and more complex threat than does the TTP and other such groups. Consider.

People now have a reference to a group they have seen perpetrate violence and get away with it...

It was no coincidence that some perpetrators of the ghastly incident in Sialkot not only openly justified their barbarism before television cameras, but raised the TLP slogan. They may or may not be members of the group, but that does not matter. What is of grave concern is the fact that people now have a reference to a group they have seen perpetrate violence and get away with it, because the state cannot develop a response to democratic violence. The Sialkot incident nearly created a diplomatic crisis between Pakistan and Sri Lanka, two countries that enjoy cooperative relations across a broad spectrum of interests, including defence.

The Rajco Industries, one of the top exporters of sports apparel to the European Union, brings in foreign exchange. It is one of the beneficiaries of the Generalised Scheme of Preferences-Plus (GSP+) granted by the EU to Pakistan.

Despite two resolutions in the EU parliament earlier this year demanding the withdrawal of the GSP+ for Pakistan, the EU Commission has extended the facility until 2022. But, as reports suggest, among the various conventions signed by Pakistan to sustain the status, the issues of human rights and freedom of expression, including religious freedoms, continue to draw criticism from the EU. The withdrawal of GSP+ facility could be a blow to Pakistan’s exports and, by extension, its economy. It could also lead to other restrictive measures (including on travel) with negative consequences for Pakistan across a broad range of sectors.

The issue of religious sentimentalism is a fault-line that has been, and can be, exploited by hostile external actors. It is a force-multiplier because it has a cascading effect. The TLP’s violent marches and demand that Pakistan sever diplomatic relations with France have already created a situation. The spontaneous mob that killed Priyantha Kumara, the Sri Lankan general manager of Rajco Industries, is another incident with external dimensions.

It also gives hostile elements an opportunity to orchestrate more such incidents against foreign nationals working in Pakistan. Put another way, this is not just a law and order problem wedded to other socio-economic and religious factors, but has to be approached from a strategic perspective.

The state’s responses, as noted above, are complicated by the socio-religious nature of the problem. The problem is further complicated by a host of laws (the blasphemy laws, for instance) that have not only helped create the present mindset, but which allow mobs to rely on them. Note the reference by PM Khan to vigilantism. That’s a poor reference to what lynch mobs are doing. They aren’t taking the law into their hands, they are flouting the law and acting as common criminals. Yet, in a deeply ironic way, the term vigilantism does describe what’s happening on the ground.

The police in Sialkot acted with alacrity. District Police Officer Omer Saeed, a fine professional, had to act fast not only to track, trace and arrest the main culprits and others in the mob, he had to approach a number of religious groups and civic bodies to ensure that none made a statement supportive of the lynching. This is important, because we saw what happened after Mumtaz Qadri was arrested.

While in this case the TLP distanced itself from the act because of a wave of horror and condemnation that followed Kumara’s lynching and desecration of the body, it could have swung the other way.

In the case of the TTP, given the state’s capacity, the external world considers Pakistan’s countermeasures as necessary and supports them. With TLP — using the term not just to denote a group but a mindset — the state’s lack of capacity becomes an issue with not just internal but external dimensions.

As I wrote elsewhere, referring to Jim Crow laws in the southern states of the United States and the consequent lynch mobs, a problem that gets grounded in a society — whether racial superiority or, in this case, an ever-widening definition of blasphemy — is a hard nut to crack. It demands immediate attention to long-term approaches.

The first needs to be top-down: ruthless crackdown on those who hold such views and participate in acts of violence and hate propaganda; the second, bottom-up: a mass movement of the victims and their allies that succeeds in dismantling the social and legal legitimacy of the violence directed against them.
Right now, it doesn’t appear that either is forthcoming.

The writer is a journalist with interest in foreign and security policies. He tweets @ejazhaider

Published in Dawn, EOS, December 19th, 2021


 

Peaceful Civilian

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 18, 2011
11,845
8
13,009
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I am not against table talk but government should do negotiation with position of strength. You can't do negotiation with weak writ of state. Every second month or 3rd month some mob Comes in Islamabad and forces government to accept demand.
It's not good to have negotiation when other party has stick, and stone in hands and when mob like TLP has history of violence, this is not acceptable to accept demands in any society otherwise it's just a banana republic!
 

graphican

ELITE MEMBER
Jul 21, 2009
12,450
48
20,675
Country
Pakistan
Location
Australia
I am not against table talk but government should do negotiation with position of strength. You can't do negotiation with weak writ of state. Every second month or 3rd month some mob Comes in Islamabad and forces government to accept demand.
It's not good to have negotiation when other party has stick, and stone in hands and when mob like TLP has history of violence, this is not acceptable to accept demands in any society otherwise it's just a banana republic!

The way government gave TTP hope that they matter more than they thought, is the crux of the problem we're talking about. Pakistan defeated TTP effectively that they used to hide their identity knowing they'll suffer if called themselves TTP - but then suddenly it's an opportunity and there's an incentive in being TTP. There may be financial benefits (Indian money coming in again) and political leverages if they continue to be an entity and they claim they exist.

Pakistan's intention may be right, it may be the right opportunity and time to negotiate but the way it is going is harmful to the state. Thus far only TTP has gained something out of this episode.
 
Last edited:

Peaceful Civilian

ELITE MEMBER
Oct 18, 2011
11,845
8
13,009
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Pakistan's intention may be right, it may be the right opportunity and time to negotiate but the way it is gong is harmful for the state than beneficial. Thus far only TTP has gained something out of this episode.
There is role of media too. Pakistan interest should come first at any cost , but few of them are busy just for rating of program/channel. I just wish government deal TLP with iron hand if they block roads and comes again. Imran Khan need to take off
gloves, Irrespective of outcome in media or fear of bloodshed, just restore the writ of state and talk with position of strength.
I believe political parties also don't have right to block roads. This trend should stop now! They can gather in stadium or park but they feel proud to block roads.
TLP is doing everything against the national interest. It's a violent party involved in killings of dozens of our policemen. If we don't Move this organization in banned terrorist organization list, then we are planting bomb for other incidents.
 

R Wing

SENIOR MEMBER
May 23, 2016
3,232
10
5,181
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
I am not against table talk but government should do negotiation with position of strength. You can't do negotiation with weak writ of state. Every second month or 3rd month some mob Comes in Islamabad and forces government to accept demand.
It's not good to have negotiation when other party has stick, and stone in hands and when mob like TLP has history of violence, this is not acceptable to accept demands in any society otherwise it's just a banana republic!

This is the first rule of power and strategy --- even a child knows this. But our state apparently never has known it.

The reason is clear. Pakistan and its long-term interests are not the primary concern of our mil and pol leaders. They care much more about short-term stability during their terms in office. And the country keeps suffering in the same cycles over and over again.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom