What's new

WAS THIS OUR WAR? GENERAL TARIQ KHAN (RETIRED)

PanzerKiel

MILITARY PROFESSIONAL
Dec 5, 2006
2,949
160
18,366
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Lt. General (R) Tariq Khan, Ex-Head of Pakistan’s Central Command, opines that it has taken Pakistan many lives and a lot of treasure to achieve peace. It is time to consolidate the concept of how this State ought to function in the future. He asks "will madrassas, maulvis and extremists be allowed to continue to destabilize this nation as they have been doing since 1947?"



‘To accept the legitimacy of state is to embrace the necessity for war. Political theory would be fine in a perfect world, but in an uncertain one, it is a dangerous gamble’. L.K. Samuels

The air was filled with the acrid smell of explosive material, blood and battle; there was mayhem and chaos as people ran about trying to escape from the horror of battle. It was the summer of 2010 at the foothills of Damadola. The country side that would ordinarily be blooming with daisies and other colourful flowers, was instead, strewn with the debris of war. The old man sat on his charpoy outside his smoking mud hut, indifferent to the chaos around him, as if he had resigned himself to the inconsistencies of destiny and fate. I walked up to him and looked into his deep blue watery eyes and asked him aggressively, ‘Is there no Pushtun blood in your veins that you so easily allowed these people to kidnap your children – young boys and girls?” He got up slowly and took a step towards me, holding on to my chin, he said, ‘But where were you before all this happened?’ Implicit in his question was the accusation, that we, the State had abandoned them.

Where we went wrong?
We the State had allowed the Uzbeks, the Tajiks, the Arabs, Africans, the Chechens and numerous other criminals from almost all over the world to come and settle down, here amongst the tribal belt and hijack the tribes. They decapitated the mushers, (leaders) usurped the tribal way of life, commandeered spaces, collected revenue by force and governed the area through coercion, force and terror, while the State was conspicuous in its absence. Some agencies flew the Taliban Flag or then the Afghan flag – notably Bajaur. The State was not visible anywhere.


The tribal belt was effectively a no-go area but as we made our way through the Agencies, liberating them from the hold of militant gangs that labelled themselves as Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan (TTP,) we vowed that we would not allow this to happen again. We built sixty forts in the heartland of the FATA belt and organized the permanent presence of the Frontier Corps amongst the tribes. Aurakzai, which had never been accessed now had a Head Quarter in Kalaya. The commanding officer of a Wing of the Swat Scouts, was killed as he led an assault for the recapture of Kalaya, having lost it the night before to a massive attack launched from across the border.

As this conflict is almost behind us, I see confusion and doubt in people’s mind as to what was the nature and character of this conflict. The first, that is getting great mileage these days is that, ‘military means are not a solution’, and the second, is that ‘this was never our war’. In the first instance, based upon my understanding, nowhere, ever, has there been a recognized institution or an establishment, that has propagated in any way, that the military instrument is a method to resolving a crisis. There is never a black or white scenario where State Policy can be pursued either by war or by diplomacy; one at the exclusion of the other. War is defined as the continuation of policy by other means (Clausewitz).

In Statecraft, a policy is framed and to execute it diplomacy and politics always have a lead role. Having failed to apply itself, the State has the prerogative to apply the military instrument with the sole view of creating an appropriate environment to return to the diplomatic/political instrument. In the end all conflicts will always be resolved by a political settlement – mutually agreed to or then coerced by one of the sides from a position of strength. To expect a military solution to resolve any conflict is to lean on absolutism and expect a total annihilation of the opposition where there is no last man left standing. This is not only impractical but never advocated.

Thus, I am surprised how this equation has crept into our political argument and reasoning; when it was never even a question but then having come up as one, to being debated, as if there was an opposing opinion that even existed. Even the US in Afghanistan, having used the military instrument continued to search for a political settlement by structuring a constitution, holding elections and then propping up an artificial government. It failed for so many reasons and the US left rather than continue to use the military instrument which they could have if they had wanted to. Nevertheless, the military instrument is necessary at times and at places but only to provide policy a chance to implement itself through diplomacy and politics – when to apply it is a judgement call of the leadership at that time.

Was this our war?
In the second case, doing the rounds that ‘this was not our war’, it would be pertinent to examine the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373, unanimously adopted on 28th September, 2001. People who are not aware, should note that any unanimous resolution passed by the United Nations, automatically becomes part of the National Laws of respective countries. However, in this case, it was specifically mentioned in one of its articles that National Laws to be adjusted to accommodate the directions and instructions of Security Council Resolution 1373. Some of the most telling articles in the resolution were, first, that all nations to ensure terrorists are hindered and at that time the Taliban were declared terrorists; second, was to amend immigration laws and the third was to redefine refugee status; these were some amongst many others. One does not have to agree with the resolution but the choice then was to fight on behalf of the Taliban against a Coalition of 68 countries.

Furthermore, India would be given an opportunity to cut Pakistan to size with global support by air and sea. Pakistan’s choices were to be either recognized as part of the solution or then fight the world as part of the problem – that was the choice. President Pervaiz Musharaf, having safeguarded Pakistan’s interest by aligning it with the globe rather than against it, went further, to protect its interests.

First, he ensured, no troops served under ISAF or US command and any troops deployed remained under Pakistani leadership only. We were the only country in the Coalition that had that privilege. Second, he also made sure that no Pakistani troops were ever deployed outside Pakistani territory; neither in Afghanistan nor in Iraq, contrary to the other 68 nations contributing to the Coalition. Pakistan Army only operated in its own territory.

Pakistan a base of US?
Then there is question of providing bases. Jacacobad, was an F 16 Base and had US maintenance personal on it even before 9/11. Its status was changed to become a recovery base for the USAF. The other base, Shamsi, technically was given on lease to the UAE, who further allowed the US to operate drones and surveillance aircraft from it. Pakistan of course looked the other way but knew what was happening. Other than this Pakistan provided its land lines of communication to access Afghanistan since the latter was landlocked. However, being part of the War effort this was the least Pakistan could have done to have remained on the right side. Yet, in hindsight Pakistan could have done much better in regulating and controlling the passage of these vital logistic supplies and here it had erred badly. None of these activities caused any kind of backlash or an uptick in militancy, which was already established in the FATA regions and was already in the process of commandeering spaces even before 9/11.

The violent Pakistan
Most people think terrorism, violence, extremism and militancy began in Pakistan after 9/11. This is naivety and indifference to historical facts. Pakistan was born out of violence right from its inception where thousands were killed on the eve of 1947 during the partition. Prime minister Liaquat Ali Khan was assassinated by an Afghan in 1951, the Bengal Civil War saw thousands killed from 1952 up to 1971, the Baluchistan Insurgency from the 1960s and still ongoing, ethnic violence in Sind starting with the Karachi riots of 1985-86.

The Pathan-Mohajir conflict in 1988 known as the Qasba-Aligarh massacre and the Pucca Qilla massacre in 1998, MQM versus the State in 1991, numerous target killings, kidnapping for ransom and forced bhatta collection. Then there was the religious violence starting with the anti-Ahmadi movement in 1950, ‘56 and ‘70. The Rabwa incident in 1974. Justice Munir’s report must be read in this particular case. The numerous attacks on the Christian and Hindu minorities through put Pakistan’s existence. Sectarian violence in 1985-89, killing 300 shias and further 1468 were killed from 1989 to 2003. Militant organizations were organized to perpetuate violence: Sipah e Muhammed, Tehriq e Nifaz e Fiqh Jaffaria, Tehreek e Jaffaria, Anjum Sipah Sahabah, Lashker e Jhangvi, Lashker e Taiba amongst many more.

These went on a killing spree against one another, unabated, unchecked and never prosecuted. It led to the Gilgit massacres of 1998 where 800 people were killed in a day. When you look at the history of Pakistani society, radical, extreme and violent, ready to take up for sectarian, religious, ethnic or separatist causes, then the figure of 80,000 over the last 20 years pales before the self-inflicted savagery done to our own people by ourselves. To now sanctimoniously lament that we lost billions and so many lives implies we were a peaceful State where stability and constancy was our identity. It never was. Governments now are trying to hide the true nature of their lack of political will, poor governance and weak attitude towards violent extremism by blaming Pakistan’s current situation on the War on Terror which is a gross untruth.

Holy war!
After 9/11, the conflict focused in and around the FATA regions which added to the already violent disposition within the country. However, militancy, as we see it in the FATA areas was a product of the organized resistance to Soviet Occupation of Afghanistan. It involved $ 3 billion each from Saudi Arabia and the USA to fund a resistance movement. It attracted Jihadists from the world over who were fascinated with the narrative that Pakistan spun and the US as well as the Saudis encouraged, the narrative of the Holy War. On the withdrawal of the Soviet Occupation Forces, Iraq invaded Kuwait (1990) and the Berlin Wall went down in 1989.

The aftermath of the Afghan war against foreign occupation was forgotten and Pakistan was abandoned to handle the thousands of extremist militants, who returned to FATA and settled in along with 4 million refugees, all by itself. The militants assumed that having won the war, they were not to be subjected to any laws, national, local or even customary. Having wedded into the tribes, they claimed relationships and invoked the tribal custom of ‘protection to guests’ and merrily lived their lives undisturbed and without interference.

Into this unholy mess, militants from all over saw a lucrative opportunity. Groups such Hizb e Tahrir, (1953) Sipah Sahaba (1985), Lashker e Jangvi (1996), Jaish e Muhammed, (Alleged to be part of Operation Topac since 1980) Lashkar e Taiba (1987) etc. jumped onto the band wagon under different labels and found friendly havens in the relatively safe regions of FATA. They had built up an association with the Afghan Mujahidin and their foreign elements over the years. FATA now became a staging area against targets inside mainland Pakistan years before 9/11. This unholy alliance between the local tribes (more or less coerced), international Jihadist Groups and erstwhile militant groups from Punjab set up an organized violent campaign securing vast swathes of tribal territory. Subsequently, Al Qaeda (AQ), saw an opportunity and took over these militant groups, exploiting the situation to their own advantage.

Unlike Afghan Taliban whose agenda did not stretch beyond Afghanistan, Al Qaeda had global ambitions. Al Qaeda was a product of the Maktab al Khidmat, a bureau that Abdullah Yusuf Azam set up in early 1980s as a coordination center to recruit and induct Arabs to fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan. After Azzam was killed somewhere 1989, he was succeeded by Osama Bin Laden who gradually ensured the evolution of this organization into Al Qaeda. The AQ leaders, such as Sheikh Essa, decided to establish the erstwhile FATA as their strategic backyard. AQ moved in a planned manner making the political agents of these tribal agencies irrelevant and totally dependent on the local militias. Men like Nek Muhammad and Baitullah Mehsud were given money and weapons.

Within a few years, Al Qaeda established its stronghold. Tahir Yaldochev, the co-founder of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) was a major AQ player. Sheikh Essa Al Misri, instructed him to convince Baitullah Mehsud that the real fight was against Pakistan Army while those who are fighting in Afghanistan are deviants. However, Mullah Umar sent a message through his emissary, Maulana Dadullah, to all the militant groups in Pakistan that they must stop all attacks against the State of Pakistan. His actual words were: “Immediately stop attacks on Pakistani security forces. This will lead to chaos and cannot be termed as Islamic Jihad. Jihad is being waged in Afghanistan so leave your place and come to Afghanistan to join the jihad against the Americans and its infidel allies“.

The message was ignored by all militant groups. Almost 50,000 fighters incl Chechens, Uzbeks, Arabs had gathered in the two Waziristans. A fatwa was broadcasted by Tahir Yaldochev which made fighting the Pakistan Army a holy obligation that took on a higher obligation than fighting against the unholy West.

Enter TTP
This led to the formulation of the Tehrik Taliban Pakistan with Baitullah Mehsud, as the Chief, operating from Ladha and surrounding areas and assisted by Maulvi Faqir of Bajaur and Hafiz Gula Bahader of Miran Shah in 2007. War was declared on Pakistan in January 2008 by the Mehsud Tribe under Baitullah Mehsud. Subsequently, Pakistan defeated Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and its factions after clearing 46,000 sq km of Combat Zone, securing 3500 Kms of Lines of Communication and establishing the writ of the Government. The defeated TTP, amounting to about 6500 fled to Kunar Valley of Afghanistan and were reorganized under the auspices of RAW, CIA and the NDS and merged with Jamaat ul Ahrar (JuA) and Hizb ul Ahrar (HuA).

A pledge of allegiance was undertaken by the head of the TTP, Mufti Abu Mansour Asim, alias, Noor Wali Mehsud. They also established ties with The Islamic State, known as IS Khorasan Province (ISKP) which is at war with the Afghan Taliban. First group of militants for ISKP was formed by TTP leader, Hafiz Saeed Khan on July 14, 2012. Some other armed groups also joined the newly structured ISKP.

The Government of Pakistan was reluctant to deal with these groups prior to 9/11 because they lacked the political will and were worried of the backlash. This was always the case and in this State’s indifference to violent extremism, it was always the people who suffered. Finally, on account of signing up as part of the War on Terrorism, the Government was forced to act. International pressure ensured that the State would finally do the right thing. Some capacity building was also built up and the State finally decided to deal with the scourge of militancy. Yet, the process began with the Government offering the foreign elements to either lay down arms and register themselves or then be prepared to return to their respective countries. They refused and instead insisted that they had a right to wage Jihad and that they would do it from Pakistani territory. Yet the Government went into a series of negotiations – each one of them failed in time though huge concessions were offered to the militants.

The Government even handed over Swat Valley and its unsuspecting people to Sufi Muhammed with the false sense of giving peace a chance. It failed and the militants sensing victory, wanted to take over even more area – militants were sighted in the Marghalla hills – Islamabad was threatened. Finally, the State was obligated to take the fight to the militants and kinetic operations started in 2008 but that too only after Baitullah Mehsud declared war on the State in January 2008. The operations led to clearing the entire area and establishing the writ of the Government. This was all Pakistani territory, occupied by foreign resistance fighters supported by local criminal elements, who had labelled themselves as the TTP. The people of FATA were hostage to this aberration, abandoned while the government had acted apathetically and indifferently all this time. The alternative was to abdicate any authority over this space and forfeit the territory as integral to the Pakistani State. How can one now say that this was not our war and that too, say it with a straight face?

Now having got to where we are, the usual games have begun. Attempts at creating splinter groups and causing a break up amongst the TTP by negotiating with those elements who are inclined to deal. This has never worked. It’s just like creating MQM to contain Jamiat e Islam and then when MQM got larger than life, creating MQM H. We keep doing these things. Not negotiating with TTP is not what is recommended but that it should be done through a sensible plan. First, all of TTP as a whole should negotiate and not elements. If elements are accommodated, they are usually given concessions and one will soon find them driving down the border towns in black vigos with armed masked men. They become the local touts and aman-committees and once again, our local population is handed over to these criminals.

The second point: any negotiations must be preceded by the TTP leadership holding the Pakistan flag, announcing their allegiance to the State and the Constitution. Thirdly, the tribal agencies where the maximum damage was done and other stake holders, such as the parents of the APS School victims) must be given the lead role in establishing a Jirga (Reconciliatory Council). The Government must only be seen as a coordination body facilitating reconciliation and not as the judge, eager to forgive and forget.

Enough is enough!
The State has fought this war to liberate its areas from the scourge of militancy. Many lives have been sacrificed and a lot of treasure exhausted. It is time to now consolidate the concept of how this State ought to function in the future. Will madrassas, Maulvis and extremists be allowed to continue to destabilize this nation as they have been doing since 1947? Here now is the opportunity when State must lay down the law, governance has to be firm and not tentative. This country has no place for the likes of Mullah Aziz Burqa or heroes such as Mumtaz Qadri who murdered the very person he was supposed to protect. This country can no longer afford mobs such as the TLP or leaders who sell God and exploit religion for their own selfish pelf and privilege. We have had enough!!!

Writer, Gen. Tariq Khan, retired as head of Pakistan’s Central Command and has led Frontier Corps to victory against TTP. He has written and lectured extensively on the issues related to Afghanistan, United States and Taliban. The views expressed in the article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Global Village Space.

 

R Wing

SENIOR MEMBER
May 23, 2016
2,533
8
3,556
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Lt. General (R) Tariq Khan, Ex-Head of Pakistan’s Central Command, opines that it has taken Pakistan many lives and a lot of treasure to achieve peace. It is time to consolidate the concept of how this State ought to function in the future. He asks "will madrassas, maulvis and extremists be allowed to continue to destabilize this nation as they have been doing since 1947?"



‘To accept the legitimacy of state is to embrace the necessity for war. Political theory would be fine in a perfect world, but in an uncertain one, it is a dangerous gamble’. L.K. Samuels

The air was filled with the acrid smell of explosive material, blood and battle; there was mayhem and chaos as people ran about trying to escape from the horror of battle. It was the summer of 2010 at the foothills of Damadola. The country side that would ordinarily be blooming with daisies and other colourful flowers, was instead, strewn with the debris of war. The old man sat on his charpoy outside his smoking mud hut, indifferent to the chaos around him, as if he had resigned himself to the inconsistencies of destiny and fate. I walked up to him and looked into his deep blue watery eyes and asked him aggressively, ‘Is there no Pushtun blood in your veins that you so easily allowed these people to kidnap your children – young boys and girls?” He got up slowly and took a step towards me, holding on to my chin, he said, ‘But where were you before all this happened?’ Implicit in his question was the accusation, that we, the State had abandoned them.

Where we went wrong?
We the State had allowed the Uzbeks, the Tajiks, the Arabs, Africans, the Chechens and numerous other criminals from almost all over the world to come and settle down, here amongst the tribal belt and hijack the tribes. They decapitated the mushers, (leaders) usurped the tribal way of life, commandeered spaces, collected revenue by force and governed the area through coercion, force and terror, while the State was conspicuous in its absence. Some agencies flew the Taliban Flag or then the Afghan flag – notably Bajaur. The State was not visible anywhere.


The tribal belt was effectively a no-go area but as we made our way through the Agencies, liberating them from the hold of militant gangs that labelled themselves as Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan (TTP,) we vowed that we would not allow this to happen again. We built sixty forts in the heartland of the FATA belt and organized the permanent presence of the Frontier Corps amongst the tribes. Aurakzai, which had never been accessed now had a Head Quarter in Kalaya. The commanding officer of a Wing of the Swat Scouts, was killed as he led an assault for the recapture of Kalaya, having lost it the night before to a massive attack launched from across the border.

As this conflict is almost behind us, I see confusion and doubt in people’s mind as to what was the nature and character of this conflict. The first, that is getting great mileage these days is that, ‘military means are not a solution’, and the second, is that ‘this was never our war’. In the first instance, based upon my understanding, nowhere, ever, has there been a recognized institution or an establishment, that has propagated in any way, that the military instrument is a method to resolving a crisis. There is never a black or white scenario where State Policy can be pursued either by war or by diplomacy; one at the exclusion of the other. War is defined as the continuation of policy by other means (Clausewitz).

In Statecraft, a policy is framed and to execute it diplomacy and politics always have a lead role. Having failed to apply itself, the State has the prerogative to apply the military instrument with the sole view of creating an appropriate environment to return to the diplomatic/political instrument. In the end all conflicts will always be resolved by a political settlement – mutually agreed to or then coerced by one of the sides from a position of strength. To expect a military solution to resolve any conflict is to lean on absolutism and expect a total annihilation of the opposition where there is no last man left standing. This is not only impractical but never advocated.

Thus, I am surprised how this equation has crept into our political argument and reasoning; when it was never even a question but then having come up as one, to being debated, as if there was an opposing opinion that even existed. Even the US in Afghanistan, having used the military instrument continued to search for a political settlement by structuring a constitution, holding elections and then propping up an artificial government. It failed for so many reasons and the US left rather than continue to use the military instrument which they could have if they had wanted to. Nevertheless, the military instrument is necessary at times and at places but only to provide policy a chance to implement itself through diplomacy and politics – when to apply it is a judgement call of the leadership at that time.

Was this our war?
In the second case, doing the rounds that ‘this was not our war’, it would be pertinent to examine the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1373, unanimously adopted on 28th September, 2001. People who are not aware, should note that any unanimous resolution passed by the United Nations, automatically becomes part of the National Laws of respective countries. However, in this case, it was specifically mentioned in one of its articles that National Laws to be adjusted to accommodate the directions and instructions of Security Council Resolution 1373. Some of the most telling articles in the resolution were, first, that all nations to ensure terrorists are hindered and at that time the Taliban were declared terrorists; second, was to amend immigration laws and the third was to redefine refugee status; these were some amongst many others. One does not have to agree with the resolution but the choice then was to fight on behalf of the Taliban against a Coalition of 68 countries.

Furthermore, India would be given an opportunity to cut Pakistan to size with global support by air and sea. Pakistan’s choices were to be either recognized as part of the solution or then fight the world as part of the problem – that was the choice. President Pervaiz Musharaf, having safeguarded Pakistan’s interest by aligning it with the globe rather than against it, went further, to protect its interests.

First, he ensured, no troops served under ISAF or US command and any troops deployed remained under Pakistani leadership only. We were the only country in the Coalition that had that privilege. Second, he also made sure that no Pakistani troops were ever deployed outside Pakistani territory; neither in Afghanistan nor in Iraq, contrary to the other 68 nations contributing to the Coalition. Pakistan Army only operated in its own territory.

Pakistan a base of US?
Then there is question of providing bases. Jacacobad, was an F 16 Base and had US maintenance personal on it even before 9/11. Its status was changed to become a recovery base for the USAF. The other base, Shamsi, technically was given on lease to the UAE, who further allowed the US to operate drones and surveillance aircraft from it. Pakistan of course looked the other way but knew what was happening. Other than this Pakistan provided its land lines of communication to access Afghanistan since the latter was landlocked. However, being part of the War effort this was the least Pakistan could have done to have remained on the right side. Yet, in hindsight Pakistan could have done much better in regulating and controlling the passage of these vital logistic supplies and here it had erred badly. None of these activities caused any kind of backlash or an uptick in militancy, which was already established in the FATA regions and was already in the process of commandeering spaces even before 9/11.

The violent Pakistan
Most people think terrorism, violence, extremism and militancy began in Pakistan after 9/11. This is naivety and indifference to historical facts. Pakistan was born out of violence right from its inception where thousands were killed on the eve of 1947 during the partition. Prime minister Liaquat Ali Khan was assassinated by an Afghan in 1951, the Bengal Civil War saw thousands killed from 1952 up to 1971, the Baluchistan Insurgency from the 1960s and still ongoing, ethnic violence in Sind starting with the Karachi riots of 1985-86.

The Pathan-Mohajir conflict in 1988 known as the Qasba-Aligarh massacre and the Pucca Qilla massacre in 1998, MQM versus the State in 1991, numerous target killings, kidnapping for ransom and forced bhatta collection. Then there was the religious violence starting with the anti-Ahmadi movement in 1950, ‘56 and ‘70. The Rabwa incident in 1974. Justice Munir’s report must be read in this particular case. The numerous attacks on the Christian and Hindu minorities through put Pakistan’s existence. Sectarian violence in 1985-89, killing 300 shias and further 1468 were killed from 1989 to 2003. Militant organizations were organized to perpetuate violence: Sipah e Muhammed, Tehriq e Nifaz e Fiqh Jaffaria, Tehreek e Jaffaria, Anjum Sipah Sahabah, Lashker e Jhangvi, Lashker e Taiba amongst many more.

These went on a killing spree against one another, unabated, unchecked and never prosecuted. It led to the Gilgit massacres of 1998 where 800 people were killed in a day. When you look at the history of Pakistani society, radical, extreme and violent, ready to take up for sectarian, religious, ethnic or separatist causes, then the figure of 80,000 over the last 20 years pales before the self-inflicted savagery done to our own people by ourselves. To now sanctimoniously lament that we lost billions and so many lives implies we were a peaceful State where stability and constancy was our identity. It never was. Governments now are trying to hide the true nature of their lack of political will, poor governance and weak attitude towards violent extremism by blaming Pakistan’s current situation on the War on Terror which is a gross untruth.

Holy war!
After 9/11, the conflict focused in and around the FATA regions which added to the already violent disposition within the country. However, militancy, as we see it in the FATA areas was a product of the organized resistance to Soviet Occupation of Afghanistan. It involved $ 3 billion each from Saudi Arabia and the USA to fund a resistance movement. It attracted Jihadists from the world over who were fascinated with the narrative that Pakistan spun and the US as well as the Saudis encouraged, the narrative of the Holy War. On the withdrawal of the Soviet Occupation Forces, Iraq invaded Kuwait (1990) and the Berlin Wall went down in 1989.

The aftermath of the Afghan war against foreign occupation was forgotten and Pakistan was abandoned to handle the thousands of extremist militants, who returned to FATA and settled in along with 4 million refugees, all by itself. The militants assumed that having won the war, they were not to be subjected to any laws, national, local or even customary. Having wedded into the tribes, they claimed relationships and invoked the tribal custom of ‘protection to guests’ and merrily lived their lives undisturbed and without interference.

Into this unholy mess, militants from all over saw a lucrative opportunity. Groups such Hizb e Tahrir, (1953) Sipah Sahaba (1985), Lashker e Jangvi (1996), Jaish e Muhammed, (Alleged to be part of Operation Topac since 1980) Lashkar e Taiba (1987) etc. jumped onto the band wagon under different labels and found friendly havens in the relatively safe regions of FATA. They had built up an association with the Afghan Mujahidin and their foreign elements over the years. FATA now became a staging area against targets inside mainland Pakistan years before 9/11. This unholy alliance between the local tribes (more or less coerced), international Jihadist Groups and erstwhile militant groups from Punjab set up an organized violent campaign securing vast swathes of tribal territory. Subsequently, Al Qaeda (AQ), saw an opportunity and took over these militant groups, exploiting the situation to their own advantage.

Unlike Afghan Taliban whose agenda did not stretch beyond Afghanistan, Al Qaeda had global ambitions. Al Qaeda was a product of the Maktab al Khidmat, a bureau that Abdullah Yusuf Azam set up in early 1980s as a coordination center to recruit and induct Arabs to fight against the Soviets in Afghanistan. After Azzam was killed somewhere 1989, he was succeeded by Osama Bin Laden who gradually ensured the evolution of this organization into Al Qaeda. The AQ leaders, such as Sheikh Essa, decided to establish the erstwhile FATA as their strategic backyard. AQ moved in a planned manner making the political agents of these tribal agencies irrelevant and totally dependent on the local militias. Men like Nek Muhammad and Baitullah Mehsud were given money and weapons.

Within a few years, Al Qaeda established its stronghold. Tahir Yaldochev, the co-founder of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) was a major AQ player. Sheikh Essa Al Misri, instructed him to convince Baitullah Mehsud that the real fight was against Pakistan Army while those who are fighting in Afghanistan are deviants. However, Mullah Umar sent a message through his emissary, Maulana Dadullah, to all the militant groups in Pakistan that they must stop all attacks against the State of Pakistan. His actual words were: “Immediately stop attacks on Pakistani security forces. This will lead to chaos and cannot be termed as Islamic Jihad. Jihad is being waged in Afghanistan so leave your place and come to Afghanistan to join the jihad against the Americans and its infidel allies“.

The message was ignored by all militant groups. Almost 50,000 fighters incl Chechens, Uzbeks, Arabs had gathered in the two Waziristans. A fatwa was broadcasted by Tahir Yaldochev which made fighting the Pakistan Army a holy obligation that took on a higher obligation than fighting against the unholy West.

Enter TTP
This led to the formulation of the Tehrik Taliban Pakistan with Baitullah Mehsud, as the Chief, operating from Ladha and surrounding areas and assisted by Maulvi Faqir of Bajaur and Hafiz Gula Bahader of Miran Shah in 2007. War was declared on Pakistan in January 2008 by the Mehsud Tribe under Baitullah Mehsud. Subsequently, Pakistan defeated Tehreek e Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and its factions after clearing 46,000 sq km of Combat Zone, securing 3500 Kms of Lines of Communication and establishing the writ of the Government. The defeated TTP, amounting to about 6500 fled to Kunar Valley of Afghanistan and were reorganized under the auspices of RAW, CIA and the NDS and merged with Jamaat ul Ahrar (JuA) and Hizb ul Ahrar (HuA).

A pledge of allegiance was undertaken by the head of the TTP, Mufti Abu Mansour Asim, alias, Noor Wali Mehsud. They also established ties with The Islamic State, known as IS Khorasan Province (ISKP) which is at war with the Afghan Taliban. First group of militants for ISKP was formed by TTP leader, Hafiz Saeed Khan on July 14, 2012. Some other armed groups also joined the newly structured ISKP.

The Government of Pakistan was reluctant to deal with these groups prior to 9/11 because they lacked the political will and were worried of the backlash. This was always the case and in this State’s indifference to violent extremism, it was always the people who suffered. Finally, on account of signing up as part of the War on Terrorism, the Government was forced to act. International pressure ensured that the State would finally do the right thing. Some capacity building was also built up and the State finally decided to deal with the scourge of militancy. Yet, the process began with the Government offering the foreign elements to either lay down arms and register themselves or then be prepared to return to their respective countries. They refused and instead insisted that they had a right to wage Jihad and that they would do it from Pakistani territory. Yet the Government went into a series of negotiations – each one of them failed in time though huge concessions were offered to the militants.

The Government even handed over Swat Valley and its unsuspecting people to Sufi Muhammed with the false sense of giving peace a chance. It failed and the militants sensing victory, wanted to take over even more area – militants were sighted in the Marghalla hills – Islamabad was threatened. Finally, the State was obligated to take the fight to the militants and kinetic operations started in 2008 but that too only after Baitullah Mehsud declared war on the State in January 2008. The operations led to clearing the entire area and establishing the writ of the Government. This was all Pakistani territory, occupied by foreign resistance fighters supported by local criminal elements, who had labelled themselves as the TTP. The people of FATA were hostage to this aberration, abandoned while the government had acted apathetically and indifferently all this time. The alternative was to abdicate any authority over this space and forfeit the territory as integral to the Pakistani State. How can one now say that this was not our war and that too, say it with a straight face?

Now having got to where we are, the usual games have begun. Attempts at creating splinter groups and causing a break up amongst the TTP by negotiating with those elements who are inclined to deal. This has never worked. It’s just like creating MQM to contain Jamiat e Islam and then when MQM got larger than life, creating MQM H. We keep doing these things. Not negotiating with TTP is not what is recommended but that it should be done through a sensible plan. First, all of TTP as a whole should negotiate and not elements. If elements are accommodated, they are usually given concessions and one will soon find them driving down the border towns in black vigos with armed masked men. They become the local touts and aman-committees and once again, our local population is handed over to these criminals.

The second point: any negotiations must be preceded by the TTP leadership holding the Pakistan flag, announcing their allegiance to the State and the Constitution. Thirdly, the tribal agencies where the maximum damage was done and other stake holders, such as the parents of the APS School victims) must be given the lead role in establishing a Jirga (Reconciliatory Council). The Government must only be seen as a coordination body facilitating reconciliation and not as the judge, eager to forgive and forget.

Enough is enough!
The State has fought this war to liberate its areas from the scourge of militancy. Many lives have been sacrificed and a lot of treasure exhausted. It is time to now consolidate the concept of how this State ought to function in the future. Will madrassas, Maulvis and extremists be allowed to continue to destabilize this nation as they have been doing since 1947? Here now is the opportunity when State must lay down the law, governance has to be firm and not tentative. This country has no place for the likes of Mullah Aziz Burqa or heroes such as Mumtaz Qadri who murdered the very person he was supposed to protect. This country can no longer afford mobs such as the TLP or leaders who sell God and exploit religion for their own selfish pelf and privilege. We have had enough!!!

Writer, Gen. Tariq Khan, retired as head of Pakistan’s Central Command and has led Frontier Corps to victory against TTP. He has written and lectured extensively on the issues related to Afghanistan, United States and Taliban. The views expressed in the article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Global Village Space.

Perhaps he should ask the ISI and GHQ why they appease, manipulate and use extremist elements when it is politically convenient.

As if GHQ operates under the sort of civilian authority that it should --- security decisions are made almost exclusively in one man's chair, along with his senior comrades, and they clearly have decided to NOT destroy these monsters. I don't mean this in the finger-pointing sense that the West implies (proxy groups, etc. --- I actually think we need those, but with more sophistication), rather the disproportionate political involvement of the armed forces in engineering and influencing domestic currents. It is a huge distraction.

We also seemed to have adopted an unrealistic security policy based more on utopian delusions than realpolitik. What is our plan to raise the cost for the backers of terrorism in Pakistan? Do we have any way to deter Indian support of militancy in Pakistan? Or are we going to keep getting out people killed, at max going for Pakistani (e.g. Baloch) commanders in Afghanistan while the Indian security establishment remains unharmed. The answer that we don't like is: yes, the Generals --- meant to protect us at all costs --- have accepted this "new normal" status quo in exchange for an imagined and impossible stability. But the world doesn't work that way. The playground bully does not stop till it learns that there are consequences --- consequences that we are unable to unwilling to implement. The best kit, armor, tactics, etc., can't win you a better reality if the strategy isn't sound. This strategy fails every test of gaming and deterrence theory (and reality, as the stats of deaths of Pakistanis at the hands of Indian-backed groups VS deaths of Indians at the hands of Pakistan-backed groups shows).

But, of course, even in retirement, nobody can really point out the elephant in the room. Nobody can disagree with what he's saying --- but almost all sane people know this already. The problem is that people are (rightly) fearful of identifying is that the appeasement itself has come from not just civilian governments but this man's (and your) own institution.
 

Xestan

SENIOR MEMBER
Sep 25, 2009
2,262
3
3,272
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Lt. Gen. (R) Tariq Khan was one of the few high ranking officials in the army back in those days, who saw where the problem was. We could not give concessions to one group of terrorists and expect them to not bite us in the back later on. I like how he mentioned Lashkar-e-Taiba as well, because LeT and Jaish-e-Muhamamd also proved to be a breeding ground for terrorists who later on turned against Pakistan state (Ref: Ilyas Kashmiri).

There are ISI reports about increase in militant activities in FATA from mid and late 90s. Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's assassination attempt was also traced back to FATA. There were several blasts and killings in the 90s but nobody cared because it was no-man's land.

Fast forward to 9/11, as the General has written, all those who were already occupying out territory started to kill our civilians and soldiers. I still remember that day in summers of 2003 where 50 of our troops were martyred in a day in Waziristan, and then came that infamous fatwa from Lal Masjid about their burial. Look at where we are today, we still let those mullahs threaten us in the Capital.

There hasn't been more damage to Pakistan's CT campaign from anything but the confusion of narrative and our current Prime Minister has been a torch-bearer of that.

On a side note; you might want to edit the word Maulvis because a mod was threatening to ban people for using that in TLP thread.
 

AgnosticIndian

FULL MEMBER
Dec 19, 2020
360
-4
281
Country
India
Location
India
I still remember that day in summers of 2003 where 50 of our troops were martyred in a day in Waziristan, and then came that infamous fatwa from Lal Masjid about their burial.
these feel like missing chapters. the history of the War in FATA/KPK seems to start in 2004 with a little background of Tora Bora battle. no mention of anything behind that anywhere. and what's the story of handing Swat? is he talking of the 2009 Sharia bill? it appears not, it seems to be before 2008. but I find no mention of Sufi Muhammad being in charge of anything before that.

any recommendations on where I can read up on these events?
 

HAIDER

ELITE MEMBER
May 21, 2006
25,411
11
25,814
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
I am really surprised when people call Zia ul haq and his clan the great master mind , chest thumping .call a great defeat of super power ... lolzz... .They all obey the foreign order to prolong there luxurious rule ... They dump Pakistan into religious extremism .... it was never our war .. ... Now whole nation is paying the price of this curse ... TTP,Lej,ISIS,IS, TLP all now so powerful in Pakistan... they are beyond control ...Same elements killed our young soldiers .....

@Imran Khan , @Meengla and rest enjoy how he single handedly destroyed Pakistan ...

 
Last edited:

Tomcats

FULL MEMBER
Jan 24, 2020
1,112
0
1,238
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
@PanzerKiel
Thanks for sharing this great piece, it should be a sobering reminder of what really went wrong and should also be eye opening for many members here on what the War on Terror was. People need to accept facts for what they are be it cold and frank, instead people chastise others for posting constructive criticism or any news which one does not take fancy of.
 

Vapnope

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 11, 2015
5,315
15
9,304
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
these feel like missing chapters. the history of the War in FATA/KPK seems to start in 2004 with a little background of Tora Bora battle. no mention of anything behind that anywhere. and what's the story of handing Swat? is he talking of the 2009 Sharia bill? it appears not, it seems to be before 2008. but I find no mention of Sufi Muhammad being in charge of anything before that.

any recommendations on where I can read up on these events?
Inside alqaida and Taliban by Late Saleem Shehzad is a treasure trove.
 

AgnosticIndian

FULL MEMBER
Dec 19, 2020
360
-4
281
Country
India
Location
India
Inside alqaida and Taliban by Late Saleem Shehzad is a treasure trove.
looking very interesting. I grabbed a digital copy and reading a first parts of preface, it already talks about Pakistan's disgruntled retired officers masterminding 26/11. sad to see some still refusing to accept it.

I thank you for the recommendation.
 

Vapnope

SENIOR MEMBER
Nov 11, 2015
5,315
15
9,304
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
looking very interesting. I grabbed a digital copy and reading a first parts of preface, it already talks about Pakistan's disgruntled retired officers masterminding 26/11. sad to see some still refusing to accept it.

I thank you for the recommendation.
Before we derail the thread, read all of it and you will know that it wasn't PA who did that.
 

AgnosticIndian

FULL MEMBER
Dec 19, 2020
360
-4
281
Country
India
Location
India
Before we derail the thread, read all of it and you will know that it wasn't PA who did that.
I didn't say that, it was obviously not PA. everyone knows who it was, and who's reaping what. not really derailment, since these are intimately connected, but I understand, I won't say more.
 

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


Top Bottom