What's new

A divided nation | Peace or War with Taliban?

Pakistan & TTP | Peace or War ?


  • Total voters
    70
There is no denying that the ultimate goal for all parties concerned here is to bring peace to the region that the common folks so desire. We have been working with Pakistani authorities and the military to achieve that. The fact remain that the enemy has been on attack even after the APC in Pakistan. The death of General Sana of Pakistani Army, the attacks on the church and the Qissa Khawani Bazaar happened just after that. If the enemy had been serious about peace they would have ceased their attack, but did they?

Peace and stability in Pakistan is simply vital to the region’s peace and stability. We simply cannot over accentuate Pakistan’s importance in the region. We stand by Pakistan in its efforts to bring peace to its people. The U.S. state department spokesman said: "The issue of whether to negotiate with TTP is an internal matter for Pakistan.” The official further added: “More broadly, the United States and Pakistan continue to have a vital, shared strategic interest in ending extremist violence so as to build a more prosperous, stable, and peaceful region.”


Abdul Quddus
DET-United States Central Command
www.centcom.mil/ur
 
.
There is no denying that the ultimate goal for all parties concerned here is to bring peace to the region that the common folks so desire. We have been working with Pakistani authorities and the military to achieve that. The fact remain that the enemy has been on attack even after the APC in Pakistan. The death of General Sana of Pakistani Army, the attacks on the church and the Qissa Khawani Bazaar happened just after that. If the enemy had been serious about peace they would have ceased their attack, but did they?

We know who the TTP are, we don't need to be read the story again.
Here are some basic facts I want to lay out to you, irrelevant of who was killed, what the state of negotiations was and so on:

The peace talks are now facing yet another hurdle and it may prove to be a massive one in the long run, can we be sure that the next TTP leadership will be half as less crazy as the last, it's an unnecessary gamble. Right when all factions of the TTP were divided on peace or no peace and the terms of the peace, now they are all united. Whereas before the Pakistani nation was united, the APC showed a general consensus for peace, this was nothing less than an assassination. You knew where he was ans we knew too, the timing is uncanny, eh?

Those are the background facts, now you can try swing that any way you like.
 
.
Neither peace talks , nor a war can settle this issue . We have been ignoring simple facts since long and concenterating on philosophies and theories which have no connection to the ground realities . Most likely , Of all the friends commenting here , none has ever been to the tribal areas and had a chance to live with the tribal men and tried to understand their culture and way of thinking . They are simple people , with very simple concepts about life , religion , friend , enemy etc.
If you want to defeat them by force , you will have to kill all of them (something technically impossible unless you are gengis khan) .. Because they will not surrender , you can destroy them , but you cant defeat them . Other option is Peace talks .. That is also not going to do any good as you can not accept their twisted version of Islam as your state constitution ... This leaves us with only one option ! WE LIVE OUR WAY AND LET THEM LIVE THEIR WAY ..... grant them max self autonomy(in pracitce , It has been like this since long) and let them implement their sharia in their part of land .. If the local people do not have any problem with that then why should we have any problem ? We will have to grant full autonomy to all the provinces and administrative areas if we need to save our federation . centre must have only three powers ; defence , foreign policy and currency . Every province should be independent in making its law and controlling its economy .If pakhtuns are happy with Islamic laws , let them make Islamic laws for themselves. If punjabis want secularism , let them make punjab a secular province (or state). If followed , this can put an end to all the major domestic problems that our country is facing today
 
.
Neither peace talks , nor a war can settle this issue . We have been ignoring simple facts since long and concenterating on philosophies and theories which have no connection to the ground realities . Most likely , Of all the friends commenting here , none has ever been to the tribal areas and had a chance to live with the tribal men and tried to understand their culture and way of thinking . They are simple people , with very simple concepts about life , religion , friend , enemy etc.
If you want to defeat them by force , you will have to kill all of them (something technically impossible unless you are gengis khan) .. Because they will not surrender , you can destroy them , but you cant defeat them . Other option is Peace talks .. That is also not going to do any good as you can not accept their twisted version of Islam as your state constitution ... This leaves us with only one option ! WE LIVE OUR WAY AND LET THEM LIVE THEIR WAY ..... grant them max self autonomy(in pracitce , It has been like this since long) and let them implement their sharia in their part of land .. If the local people do not have any problem with that then why should we have any problem ? We will have to grant full autonomy to all the provinces and administrative areas if we need to save our federation . centre must have only three powers ; defence , foreign policy and currency . Every province should be independent in making its law and controlling its economy .If pakhtuns are happy with Islamic laws , let them make Islamic laws for themselves. If punjabis want secularism , let them make punjab a secular province (or state). If followed , this can put an end to all the major domestic problems that our country is facing today


This proposal is based on the presumption that all Pashtuns are happy with living as Dark Age Islamic Emirate. This could be true in some parts of FATA but many in other parts are not; for example ANP, which has very deep roots in the KPK is a secular party.

Besides, 18th amendment has already granted the much awaited autonomy to the Provinces. Taliban consider democracy 'Un-Islamic' and would force their brand of Islam on the region under their control thru brute force. Additionally, Taliban already have a different flag; what do you propose should be done if after assuming power, TTP decide to break away and form a new country?
 
Last edited:
.
This proposal is based on the presumption that all Pashtuns are happy with living as Dark Age Islamic Emirate. This could be true in some parts of FATA but many in other parts are not; for example ANP, which has very deep roots in the KPK is a secular party.

Besides, 18th amendment has already granted the much awaited autonomy to the Provinces. Taliban consider democracy 'Un-Islamic' and would force their brand of Islam on the region under their control thru brute force. Additionally, Taliban already have a different flag; what do you propose should be done if after assuming power, TTP decide to break away and form a new country?

There are no presumptions involved !! I said that IF Pashtuns want Islamic laws , let them make Islamic laws for themselves ... Its not for me , or anyone else to decide the way Pashtuns have to live . Let them decide , and ofcourse democratically ; the will of the majority , Laws have to be made by the elected assembly any ways.

FATA is a different story . Local people believe that Pakistan Army and American drones have done them greater harm than the Taliban , who against the common perception , are considered outsiders as well by the locals(with a few exceptions) . But they are not against implementation of Shariah , and in this regard they prefer Taliban .

18th ammendment does not grant enough self autonomy to the provinces. Taliban is not our only problem . We have other issues as well , like baluchistan issue , which may be dormant for the time being , but has a much higher anti-federation potential

And finally one thing should be very clear , If people of FATA , through majority , decide to be "not a part of Pakistan" , then use of force against them would be un-democratic and result only in life losses on both sides. Historically FATA has never been a part of Indian sub continent , All the areas ,north of river Indus were held by the British only to ensure the safety of British India (The same old strategic depth theory) , these buffer zones (Independent Afghanistan b/w The crown and the soviets , and then a frontier tribal zone;a buffer area b/w Afghanistan and British India) were meant to avoid a direct land contact with the soviet union .They had different status than rest of india in British govt. and they enjoyed max self autonomy ('FCR' which allowed considerable power to govern to local nobles so long as these nobles were willing to meet the needs of the British ). We have to realise that times have changed . The british are gone , so are the soviets .
 
Last edited:
.
There are no presumptions involved !! I said that IF Pashtuns want Islamic laws , let them make Islamic laws for themselves ... Its not for me , or anyone else to decide the way Pashtuns have to live . Let them decide , and ofcourse democratically ; the will of the majority , Laws have to be made by the elected assembly any ways.
...

However, as @niaz points out, the talibs do not want democracy, which they believe to be an evil and satanic concept. They prefer a medeival theocracy, with them deciding how everybody else should live.

Also, and this is a different point, there is the very pertinent question of individual rights and freedoms. When you phrase it as "let pashtuns decide how they want to live", you are assuming that all pashtuns are one entity, rather than a collection of individual people. What if even one pashtun wants to live differently? Should their state make laws that prevent that from happening? Yes, freedom to choose is an awesome thing - but that should be at individual level, not governmental level, which is through force (laws). Which is why a state that respects individual freedoms to choose, instead of a state that makes laws that dictate how people can dress or eat or behave, is a far superior form of government.

If, as you might believe, all pashtuns want exactly the same thing, then why make laws for it anyway? They will all do what they want, so why legislate laws on how they should live?

I'll give you an example - if all pashtun women want to wear the headscarf or burkha or niqab, then let them wear it - there is no need for a law that says they should wear it. But if you make that a law, then if even one woman doesn't want to wear it, she will be forced to wear it.

So if somebody (or everybody) wants to live according to islam, let them have the freedom to do so. But let them not take away other people's freedom to NOT live so, by legislating it into law. Laws are about coercing other people's behaviour, not about one's own behaviour. Some laws are necessary to ensure a peaceful societty for all - like a law against murder or theft, because murder or theft affects other people. But forcing religious practices and way of life on other people is not moral. Whether somebody else should live according to islam (whatever they mean by that) should not be their concern.

Look at it another way - is there anything preventing an individual pashtun in that region from living an islamic way of life for himself or herself? Maybe they don't have the freedom to impose that way of life on other people - so what? Isn't that exactly how it should be? 
...
And finally one thing should be very clear , If people of FATA , through majority , decide to be "not a part of Pakistan" , then use of force against them would be un-democratic and result only in life losses on both sides. Historically FATA has never been a part of Indian sub continent , All the areas ,north of river Indus were held by the British only to ensure the safety of British India (The same old strategic depth theory) , these buffer zones (Independent Afghanistan b/w The crown and the soviets , and then a frontier tribal zone;a buffer area b/w Afghanistan and British India) were meant to avoid a direct land contact with the soviet union .They had different status than rest of india in British govt. and they enjoyed max self autonomy ('FCR' which allowed considerable power to govern to local nobles so long as these nobles were willing to meet the needs of the British ). We have to realise that times have changed . The british are gone , so are the soviets .

This part is interesting. Here I am not disputing or disagreeing with your, but just asking a question; would you be OK with those areas seceding from pakistan and being a new country? And would you say that about balochistan as well?

I'm sure most other pakistanis on this forum will not want that.
 
.
However, as @niaz points out, the talibs do not want democracy, which they believe to be an evil and satanic concept. They prefer a medeival theocracy, with them deciding how everybody else should live.
Also, and this is a different point, there is the very pertinent question of individual rights and freedoms. When you phrase it as "let pashtuns decide how they want to live", you are assuming that all pashtuns are one entity, rather than a collection of individual people. What if even one pashtun wants to live differently? Should their state make laws that prevent that from happening? Yes, freedom to choose is an awesome thing - but that should be at individual level, not governmental level, which is through force (laws). Which is why a state that respects individual freedoms to choose, instead of a state that makes laws that dictate how people can dress or eat or behave, is a far superior form of government.

You have to understand a very basic point here , You are talking about secularism . Secularism and Islam are not compatible . Islam is not a religion only , it is a complete code of life . Unlike secularism , Islamic system holds that all muslims are bound by divine laws and religion is not a "personal thing" and all the evil in any islamic society should be put to an end forcibly . In a Islamic state , society is supposed to be guided by Divine laws (as set by Koran and Hadith) . In simple words , In a Islamic system , Its for Allah to make laws and our duty is to implement them only !! . The constitution of Pakistan says that Only Allah is the sovereign and no law can be made in the country that contradicts Islamic laws . So this is a totally different discussion that should Pakistan be a secular state or should it be a Islamic Republic !! Here again , majority of Pakistanis want Pakistan to be a "Islamic Republic" , irrespective of the practice of the religion on personal levels
And one has to "stereotype" a group for the sake of generalisation . When we say let the Pakhtuns decide , It means what "the majority" decides . Laws , ofcourse , cant be made after considering the opinion of each and every individual


This part is interesting. Here I am not disputing or disagreeing with your, but just asking a question; would you be OK with those areas seceding from pakistan and being a new country? And would you say that about balochistan as well?
I'm sure most other pakistanis on this forum will not want that.

It does not matter that what do the most of the Pakistanis want(Including myself) , what matters is "what the Pakhtuns or Balochis want " and as long as we ignore this , and believe in use of force to silence anyone who does not agree with us , we are surely going on the wrong path which may ultimately lead to "secession" . So their grievances should be addressed and a positive approach must be adopted before its too late !!


.
 
Last edited:
.
You have to understand a very basic point here , You are talking about secularism . Secularism and Islam are not compatible . Islam is not a religion only , it is a complete code of life . Unlike secularism , Islamic system holds that all muslims are bound by divine laws and religion is not a "personal thing" and all the evil in any islamic society should be put to an end forcibly . In a Islamic state , society is supposed to be guided by Divine laws (as set by Koran and Hadith) . In simple words , In a Islamic system , Its for Allah to make laws and our duty is to implement them only !! . The constitution of Pakistan says that Only Allah is the sovereign and no law can be made in the country that contradicts Islamic laws . So this is a totally different discussion that should Pakistan be a secular state or should it be a Islamic Republic !! Here again , majority of Pakistanis want Pakistan to be a "Islamic Republic" , irrespective of the practice of the religion on personal levels
And one has to "stereotype" a group for the sake of generalisation . When we say let the Pakhtuns decide , It means what "the majority" decides . Laws , ofcourse , cant be made after considering the opinion of each and every individual




It does not matter that what do the most of the Pakistanis want(Including myself) , what matters is "what the Pakhtuns or Balochis want " and as long as we ignore this , and believe in use of force to silence anyone who does not agree with us , we are surely going on the wrong path which may ultimately lead to "secession" . So their grievances should be addressed and a positive approach must be adopted before its too late !!


.



I am surprised at this argument. Basically what you are saying is that we should allow province to secede if desire it.

KPK (Then NWFP) joined Pakistan thru a referendum held in July 1947. Red Shirts of Bacha Khan declined to take part but ordinary public voted overwhelmingly in favour of joining Pakistan. Thus KPK joined Pakistan without any coercion. FATA also joined Pakistan without any compulsion.

Case in Baluchistan was different. Shahi Jirga representing Pashtun areas joined with Quetta, only place where referendum was held to join Pakistan. Most of the rural Baluchistan was ruled by the Sardars like a fief and no referendum was held there. Pakistan took military action against Kalat in 1948. Therefore one can say that argue that all the Baluch were not in favour of joining Pakistan.

There is no other to determine what majority of Pashtuns or Baluch want except having a ‘referendum’ as whether the people want to remain part of the federation or want to secede. It is also a fact that the “State” is an entity in itself and will resist any attempt to break it up.

Do I take it from you that you are in favour of break-up of Pakistan? What would happen to Pashtun areas of Baluchistan who want to remain with Pakistan, would you then divide Baluchistan?
 
.
I am surprised at this argument. Basically what you are saying is that we should allow province to secede if desire it.

If you truly believe in democracy , Then if a province desires to secede and the majority of population of that province show a consent , then it should be granted sovereignty .. "Qubec Sovereignty movement" and the referendums of 1980 & 1995 in canada can serve as an example .
As far as my personal opinion is concerned , I believe that western democracy is not for us . We are a confused nation . We want to adopt democracy fully but at the same time are not ready to let go the religion (like Turkey did in 20`s) . Either we should quit western democracy and adopt some socialist kind of Islamic govt . , or we should segregate religion from the constitution .


KPK (Then NWFP) joined Pakistan thru a referendum held in July 1947. Red Shirts of Bacha Khan declined to take part but ordinary public voted overwhelmingly in favour of joining Pakistan. Thus KPK joined Pakistan without any coercion. FATA also joined Pakistan without any compulsion.
Case in Baluchistan was different. Shahi Jirga representing Pashtun areas joined with Quetta, only place where referendum was held to join Pakistan. Most of the rural Baluchistan was ruled by the Sardars like a fief and no referendum was held there. Pakistan took military action against Kalat in 1948. Therefore one can say that argue that all the Baluch were not in favour of joining Pakistan

Its all history and has become significantly irrelevant to prevailing conditions of our time


Do I take it from you that you are in favour of break-up of Pakistan? What would happen to Pashtun areas of Baluchistan who want to remain with Pakistan, would you then divide Baluchistan?

No ,I am not in a favour of break up of Pakistan at all . My point is that the use of force and oppression may ultimately result in such unfortunate incidents ..
We should develop a friendly atmosphere and try to regain the trust of the Baluchis and Pakhtuns , Its our only chance .
 
.
Only Allah know what is in anyone’s’ heart. Therefore I would not comment whether you are really in favour of break-up of Pakistan or not.

Firstly, one must understand that we are not a true democracy, we are a Republic and there is a clear difference. In a true democracy every item of public interest is voted by the citizens. In a Republic it is the representatives of the people (MNA’s & MPA’s) who vote. It is therefore not necessary that the parliament resolutions truly represent the will of the people. For example in the UK, whether people want to stay in the European Union or not; cannot be decided by the Parliament. For this there must be a referendum to determine what people really want.

I may have misunderstood you but from your argument it appears that in your opoinion majority of FATA, Pashtun & Baluchis want to secede. This could only be a presumption and totally untrue. Take the example of Swat, GOP agreed to ‘Niazame e Adl’ of Sufi Mohammed. This was not what an ordinary Swati wanted but what Sufi Mohammed and his thugs wanted.

I repeat that one cannot know the will of the people without a free and open referendum. Ordinary man on the street is scared of his life so he is not going to openly speak out against Taliban or Baluch Liberation Army. When you take action, you are fighting the people who terrorize ordinary public thru brute force.

I am therefore not against ‘Talks’ with Taliban, but I believe that TTP will not mend their ways as long as people like Imran Khan, Munawwar Hassan & Fazlur Rahman continue propagating Taliban agenda. Action of the above Honourable Gentleman sends out the message that TTP are justified with Pak Army siding with the enemies of Islam and therefore culpable. You may have noticed MrTaliban Khan has not commented on Munawwar Hassan's views on Hakimullah Mehsud being Shaheed. PTI MPA's walked out of the Sind Assembly when there was a vote against JI leader. Doesn't one infer from this the PTI leader agrees with JI views. PTI, JI & JUI may be playing politics but in fact they are playing with life & death of the State of Pakistan.

I believe TTP will only listen to reason if they think they are losing. I admit at not being very articulate, besides, English is not my mother tongue and putting my view across is not easy.

Here is an article by a professional writer referring to Taliban.



Nadir HassanThursday, November 14, 2013


11-14-2013_214246_l_akb.jpg
In one of his more unfortunate lapses of syntax, Pervez Musharraf once declared, “Extremism bohat extreme ho gaya hai.” At the time he was dismissed as yet another lush who should have known when to hold his tongue but it now may be time to give the man credit for his foresight. The extremists indeed have become too extreme.

Elsewhere in the world, death and taxes are the two constants. Since none of us ever bother contributing to the national exchequer, death and military coups are our constant companions. If there were one thing we could rely on it is that a military coup would be accompanied by the full-throated support of the Jamaat-e-Islami. The only time the party was relevant was when it needed a vote of confidence from the men in uniform, and not from actual voters. Sure, the JI could sound a bit outlandish but we knew they would tone it down when power beckoned.

Munawar Hasan tried to change all that with just one statement. Even those genetically predisposed to disapprove of everything the army does – us dogs to the PPP’s Pavlov – retched at the sight of him declaring that soldiers killed by the Taliban weren’t martyrs. Had the JI and its cohorts been consistent and not crowned Hakeemullah Mehsud a martyr just a couple of days earlier we could have nodded our heads and deluded ourselves into thinking that they were just eschewing unnecessarily divisive religious rhetoric. But the party has picked a side and it’s the wrong one.

There will be lots of people explaining this away by claiming that the JI has changed, that Munawar Hasan is more ideological than his predecessor Qazi Hussain Ahmed. That interpretation will not be true. The JI has always occupied the most extreme right-wing space it could while still being considered mainstream. The problem is that the range of acceptable opinion in the country has shifted in a more stridently intolerant position.

Hating the Americans was always kosher but only when that most sacred of cows – the military – wasn’t affected. Now our men in uniform are acceptable collateral damage in the righteous cause of hating the white man. The JI hasn’t formulated that rule; they are only following a public that has been trained in the language of anti-Americanism.

The military needs to accept part of the blame for the outrage being directed towards them for being the stooges of the US. After the Russians departed Afghanistan and the military was left to sit in its playpen without shiny new toys it directed a lot of rage towards the heathens, thinking it could turn the faucet on and off when it suited them. Now that the drip has turned into a flood, old allies like the JI are seeking higher ground.

Just look at the evolution of the Taliban to see how the military has brought this on itself. Rawalpindi always viewed them in a condescending way, as people they could control when they needed proxies to fight the atheistic Soviets but would eventually be brought in line. Eventually, though, the students graduate and no longer look up to their former teachers. The military funded and armed the forebears of the Taliban when the Russians were our biggest enemy, continued patronising them when they were the only alternative to the uncontrollable Northern Alliance but then divorced them when the US came threatening in 2001.

They didn’t realise, or didn’t care, that the descendants of the mujahideen’s descendants didn’t buy the realpolitik logic of having only permanent interests and not permanent friends. The more the permanent state tried to distance itself from the Taliban, the more stringent it became and the more it lashed out against its former masters. So, after 9/11 we moved from the extreme but slightly pragmatic Nek Muhammed to the unyielding and brutal Baitullah Mehsud and then the bloodthirsty Hakeemullah Mehsud.

Now, with the killing of Hakeemullah, the Taliban has devolved to the most primitive state possible. Maulana Fazlullah is the man who ordered a hit on a teenage girl and then, upon reflection, decided that merely damaging her brain wasn’t enough. He wanted more. Yet, there are many in this country who have swallowed the anti-Americanism the military strategically offered when it suited them and are now busy revising his history.

Fazlullah became known as Mullah Radio when he used his illegal FM station to decry vaccinations as a US plot to make our boys infertile. The revisionists are anachronistically blaming the anti-vaccine hysteria on Shakil Afridi even though Fazlullah preceded the jailed doctor by many years. Soon our avowedly liberal parties will see the value of appeasing him, just as the ANP tried to do when he controlled Swat.

A Nizam-e-Adl for the country may be just what we need to wake us from our comfortable slumber. No matter how many of our own people get slaughtered, we somehow find a way to deflect the blame towards a shadowy enemy. For the JI and its ilk, the enemy is drones and the country that operates them. For some, it’s the Taliban who they consider to be a foreign cancer that’s invaded our body.

The mushy middle will always find it easy to adopt a pox-on-both-their-houses stance. There is certainly a lot of blame to go around since the US has hardly been a benevolent actor either. We can curse our bad luck and wonder what we did to deserve players as brutal in their uncaring way of waging war as the US and the Taliban. It may be time we got a good dose of realism from Julius Caesar who would surely say that the fault for our current predicament, dear Pakistanis, lies not in the stars but in ourselves.

The writer is a journalist based in Karachi. Email: nadir.hassan@gmail.com
A pox on our house - Nadir Hassan
 
Last edited:
.
Only Allah know what is in anyone’s’ heart. Therefore I would not comment whether you are really in favour of break-up of Pakistan or not.

Firstly, one must understand that we are not a true democracy, we are a Republic and there is a clear difference. In a true democracy every item of public interest is voted by the citizens. In a Republic it is the representatives of the people (MNA’s & MPA’s) who vote. It is therefore not necessary that the parliament resolutions truly represent the will of the people. For example in the UK, whether people want to stay in the European Union or not; cannot be decided by the Parliament. For this there must be a referendum to determine what people really want.

I may have misunderstood you but from your argument it appears that in your opoinion majority of FATA, Pashtun & Baluchis want to secede. This could only be a presumption and totally untrue. Take the example of Swat, GOP agreed to ‘Niazame e Adl’ of Sufi Mohammed. This was not what an ordinary Swati wanted but what Sufi Mohammed and his thugs wanted.

I repeat that one cannot know the will of the people without a free and open referendum. Ordinary man on the street is scared of his life so he is not going to openly speak out against Taliban or Baluch Liberation Army. When you take action, you are fighting the people who terrorize ordinary public thru brute force.

I am therefore not against ‘Talks’ with Taliban, but I believe that TTP will not mend their ways as long as people like Imran Khan, Munawwar Hassan & Fazlur Rahman continue propagating Taliban agenda. Action of the above Honourable Gentleman sends out the message that TTP are justified with Pak Army siding with the enemies of Islam and therefore culpable. You may have noticed MrTaliban Khan has not commented on Munawwar Hassan's views on Hakimullah Mehsud being Shaheed. PTI MPA's walked out of the Sind Assembly when there was a vote against JI leader. Doesn't one infer from this the PTI leader agrees with JI views. PTI, JI & JUI may be playing politics but in fact they are playing with life & death of the State of Pakistan.

I believe TTP will only listen to reason if they think they are losing. I admit at not being very articulate, besides, English is not my mother tongue and putting my view across is not easy.

Here is an article by a professional writer referring to Taliban.


The writer is a journalist based in Karachi. Email: nadir.hassan@gmail.com
A pox on our house - Nadir Hassan


As usual @niaz sahab; you have put forth sincere and well thought out views. One does not have be a professional writer or proficient in English to do so.

Talking to the TTP or anybody is not prohibited, after all they are ones country-men. But the critical point is: what should be the basis of those talks? what are common grounds that such talks can stand on? Unless these are reasonable and substantial; what can the talks lead to?

The State has an over-riding responsibility to its Citizens who obey the Rule of Law, who accept the Constitutional Basis of the State, who contribute to Peace and Order BEFORE accepting any responsibility towards its Citizens who do not.

There is yet no indication that the TTP is on the losing side inspite of recent setbacks.
Rather they have smelt an opportunity to regroup and recoup some lost strength, seeing the divided Polity and the confused Administration. That is probably the reason why they showed some inclination to come to the negotiating table initially. Right now, the State has to hunker down; get its Forces together; try to garner as much support as possible and work to whittle down the strength of its adversary further down and then offer negotiations on what can be reasonably negotiated.
How can the State negotiate away the basis of its very existence?
 
.
@niaz
Brother your Patriotism is appreciable . Patriotism is something healthy , Jingoism and Chauvinism are not !!
But I am afraid that the situation may may not be as "simple" as you have presented . "The Balochistan Crisis" is a collective outcome of certian causing factors , both "Intrinsic" as well as "Extrinsic". Niether all the "Intrinsic factors" are corelated , nor are the all Extrinsic Factors . The Balochistan Issue demands a compehensive , kind of "Root Cause Analysis" for its understanding .

The Iranian interests in the region contradict with ours . UAE is concerned over the devolopment of the coastal areas of Balochistan , as it may challenge their "Free Port Based Economy" . Chinese seek a "Further Western" port for economic purposes as well as a Naval Base close to the Middle East main Ports . Gawadar serves as an "Ideal" for them !! . The Americans and the Indians see this chinese ambition as a "Strategic Threat" . In short , The geo-political location and the vast natural resources of Balochistan have attracted the attention of a few "Giants" . All of them have their own interests in the region which contradict with the interests of the others . But one thing is common , they all want balochistan to be weak and unstable to serve their purpose . The 2012 US resolution on Balochistan very well explains it !!

In a statement from his office , US congressman , Dana Rohrabacher, who was also the Chair of the House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, said, “The Baloch, like other nations of people, have an innate right to self-determination. The political and ethnic discrimination they suffer is tragic and made more so because America is financing and selling arms to their oppressors in Islamabad.” According to the text of the motion " ‘revolts’ in 1958, 1973 and 2005 “indicate continued popular discontent against Islamabad’s rule, and the plunder of its vast natural wealth while the province remains the poorest in the country.”
It is US policy to “oppose aggression and the violation of human rights inherent in the subjugation of national groups as currently being shown in Iran and Pakistan against the aspirations of the Baloch people,”
Our Foreign Office has strongly condemned the resolution terming it as “highly irresponsible and a blatant interference in the domestic issues of the country,” adding that it is a violation of international laws

This American resolution is a perfect example of Americans trying to exploit the situation for their own benefits . So we have to fix the Domestic problems first . once done , The Extrinsic factors will become ineffective simultaneously . But it may not be easy . CIA has been involved and is quite influential in quetta for over three decades now . They will never want stability in balochistan . They give financial support and provide weapons to the Baloch separatists . RAW , which works for indian interests , are only underdogs . And now the Indians and Americans have their base camps in Afghanistan as well which has worsened the situation.So its technically impossible to bring stability in Balochistan unless The Americans and Indians are "cleared off" the afghan soil . The "strategic depth theory" is not as bad as criticised by Pak media , It is essential for our very existence !!

At the same time , and more importantly , we need to address the grievances of the Baloch people .
They have a strong feeling of deprivation , and its not for no reason . Pak govt . has always maintained the policy of "least interested" in the Baloch people . "A bunch of corrupt leaders from Balochistan" has always been the priority of our govt . And whenever the Baloch people demanded their rights , we used brutal force to silence them .
General Tikka Khan`s infamous atrocities in Baluchistan in 1970 , earned him the title of "Butcher of Balochistan" . No body ever mentioned the human right violations and the war crimes he committed in Balochistan . When he died in 2002 , He received a state burial with full military honors and his funeral was attended by thousands of people, including the entire top brass of the Pakistan Army. What now do you expect from the victims of his crimes and their families ? Unfortunately Tikka Khan and most of his army men involved in war crimes against balochis were from Punjab!! The punjab hatred among the Baloch people is deeply rooted .
In Eastern Pakistan , an army officer , who was kind to locals was believed to be "Benovelent Baloch"(irrespective of his ethnicity) as the bengalis believed that someone from Punjab can never be kind to them . So we should consider this fact that why punjabis are mostly disliked by non Punjabis in Pakistan . More than half of our national assembly members are from Punjab . More than half of the bureaucrates are from Punjab . Army is dominated by Punjabis . The general living standard of a Punjabi is far higher than that of a Baluch (not even comparable) . On the other hand there has never been a three star Baloch general in Pak Army . Sui , Balochistan has provided natural gas to the houses and Industries all across Punjab and Sindh for 60 years but unfortunately , sui area itself was not given this facility . This list of "injustice done" may go on infinitely !!
So we should realise that we are responsible for this strong feeling of deprivation of the people of Balochistan
Honestly we donot consider Baloch people to be our equal in our daily life . On a trip to interior Balochistan , I was surprised to see the Pak Army checkposts who stop Baloch people and dont let them pass , holding them for hours without any reason and to just "mentally tune stubborn Balochis" as a army man said laughing .
Thats what is being exploited . BLA does the target killing of high profile Punjabis in Quetta in the name of baloch nationalism . Most of punjabis have already left Quetta and the common balochis do not have any sympathies for punjabis . And then there are the terrorists of LeJ , who taking advantage of law and order situation , are killing their own enemies ; The Shia .
Another card being played by the BLA and the foreign hands behind them is that of "Missing Persons" . It gives them a good chance to cry victim and accuse Pakistan Army of human rights violation . Though ver much exaggerated by the BLA, its not possible to rightout deny that there are no such activities being carried out by our agencies in Balochistan against the balochis on foreign payroll.
A lot has to be done if we are sincere to Pakistan as Balochistan makes up almost half of the area of Pakistan .

The challenges that we face in the tribal area and NWFP are totally different . Though the main players might be the same , the situation there is not connected to the Baluchistan Crisis in general
 
Last edited:
.
Firstly, one must understand that we are not a true democracy, we are a Republic and there is a clear difference

In contemporary usage, the term democracy refers to a government chosen by the people, whether it is direct or representative . I think you have used "true democracy" for "direct democracy" . Republic is a preffered form of democracy . This again is a totally different discussion .


I am therefore not against ‘Talks’ with Taliban, but I believe that TTP will not mend their ways as long as people like Imran Khan, Munawwar Hassan & Fazlur Rahman continue propagating Taliban agenda. Action of the above Honourable Gentleman sends out the message that TTP are justified with Pak Army siding with the enemies of Islam and therefore culpable. You may have noticed MrTaliban Khan has not commented on Munawwar Hassan's views on Hakimullah Mehsud being Shaheed. PTI MPA's walked out of the Sind Assembly when there was a vote against JI leader. Doesn't one infer from this the PTI leader agrees with JI views. PTI, JI & JUI may be playing politics but in fact they are playing with life & death of the State of Pakistan.
I believe TTP will only listen to reason if they think they are losing.

There is a problem here . You are criticising PTI , JUI & JI , but the people of KPK have elected them as their representatives . Imran Khan has always been against the use of force and his agenda of "peace talks" was quite clear . People still elected his party which means that people of KPK are in favour of "Negotiations" and not "War" .
use of force is not a very good option . It should be seen as "the last option only" when everything else fails (most likely scenario)

The article by Nadir Hassan is an average article , nothing extra ordinary about it
 
.
I keep telling Pakistanis, the Americans are coming for you , they will never allow Gwadar port and a direct access pipeline to china. The only way they can avoid this from happening is to bring DEMOCRACY :D to Baluchistan .
 
.
I read a reply here about how the pakistani taliban and the people in their native regions in pakinstan should be allowed to have a referendum on autonomy, if 'one wants to practice real democracy'..

Here's an article describing what the taliban you pakistanis sheltered are really like according to western intelligence sources, what they hide from the more moderate pakistani people that they want to seem to be 'reformers' for, and who the taliban now seem to have pushed into a dangerous political game that's only called 'peacetalks', but since the taliban -and sorry to have to remind you again- have also stated that they want their version of Islam to 'become the norm for all of Pakistan', let the following enlighten you as to what they'll 'reform' moderate pakistanis into:

Afghanistan: Proud, Heavily Armed and Short-Tempered

November 16, 2013: The Taliban is less of a problem than generally thought. The idea of a Pushtun religious sect (which is what the Taliban is) taking over the country does not work. It was tried and failed in the 1990s. Back then the Taliban were still fighting other factions when the Americans showed up in October 2001 and the anti-Taliban factions quickly defeated the Taliban (with American help). But the Taliban did not disappear, the leaders and many followers simply fled to Pakistan, where the Pakistani government (technically American allies) quietly granted the Taliban (and al Qaeda) its leadership sanctuary. What brought the Taliban back to southern Afghanistan was the heroin business.

Western nations want the Afghan government to destroy the opium crops and shut down the heroin trade. Many Afghans were willing to do this because more and more Afghans were getting addicted to the cheaper opium (which is scrapped off the poppy plants and most is refined into heroin). Between 5 and 10 percent of the Afghan population is addicted, mainly to opium and heroin. Up to 40 percent of those in some police units were found to have been users. Far more people are users without becoming addicts but it’s the addicts that get the most attention because they are considered a major problem for families and neighbors. Addicts will steal or kill to feed their addiction and all that addiction makes the drug gangs and their Taliban allies very unpopular. As Afghanistan became more prosperous after 2002 (because of peace and lots of foreign aid), the number of addicts in Afghanistan grew. It’s now over a million, mostly in the south and in the large cities. Most Afghan religious, tribal, and political leaders (including the Taliban) are hostile to the drugs and what it does to so many Afghans. Only about ten percent of Afghans benefit directly from the drug trade and a nasty side effect is easy access to cheap opium and ending up with many addicts in your family. The Taliban technically forbids its members to use drugs but looks the other way at many young gunmen it hires who want to get high and will do so no matter what. The Taliban has been living off the drug gangs for two decades now and justify this by promising to return to the system they imposed during the 1990s, when the gangs were forced to export nearly all their production and were severely punished if any of the opium or heroin got out to the locals. That restriction disappeared along with the Taliban in late 2001. It only worked back then because the Taliban offered security for the drug gangs in return for cash and keeping the drugs away from Afghans. Some in the current Afghan government see that as a possible option once the Westerners are gone, even though the Western donors have made it clear that the aid will disappear (and the bombs will return) if Afghanistan turns into a “narco state” (the national government is on the drug gang payroll). Many current government officials are already bribed by the drug gangs and the Afghans will keep wheeling and dealing with drug lords and foreign diplomats in order to keep the cash, and not the bombs, coming. But the aid donors can still get some action against the drug gangs. A full blown narco state leaves the drug gangs alone and taxes them.

Although poppy production (measured by the area planted) increased 14 percent last year, the Afghan share of the worldwide heroin trade was only 75 percent and declining. Northern Burma is making a comeback (it was the main source until the 1980s, when production was forced out and moved to Pakistan and then Afghanistan). The Burmese competition is driving down prices and the drug gangs are trying to make up for the lost income. These Burmese tribes had once produced most of the world’s opium but had their operations shut down by a vigorous government offensive in the 1980s. Opium production shifted to the Pushtun tribes (first in Pakistan, then across the border to Afghanistan). By the 1990s 90 percent of opium and heroin was coming from Afghanistan. As a result of the Burmese resurgence, Afghanistan now has only 75 percent of the world heroin market. The producer income per kilo (2.2 pounds) for heroin has been declining and is likely to decline more as the Burmese tribes continue to increase production. Cash is the most effective weapon the drug gangs have and it is starting to weaken. But the gangs are not going away as long as they are profitable.

Government attacks and Taliban demands for more money are also hurting drug gang profits. The poppy farmers notice this most. Last year they could get $163 a kilogram for opium, but this year it’s only $143 a kilo. So farmers are increasing land used for growing poppy by 36 percent for next year’s crop. More of the land for growing poppy is outside the traditional growing areas in Helmand and Kandahar provinces. That’s where over 90 percent of the poppy used to be grown but now only 72 percent is. The rest has moved to other southern provinces where there is more hostility to the drug operations.

The government has been unable to sustain efforts to destroy poppy plants. This is dangerous work and 102 people were killed doing this last year and 143 so far this year. The growers offer bribes to local police to halt or sabotage the eradication efforts and that has led to a large reduction in province-level poppy eradication efforts. Meanwhile, the drug gangs are having other problems producing crops. In 2007, there were 193,000 hectares (483,000 acres) of land growing poppy. Eradication efforts reduced this to 154,000 hectares by 2012, but in the last year it has rebounded to 209,000 hectares. But more land used to grow poppy has not meant more opium. Last year 5,500 tons of opium were produced, compared to 3,700 tons in 2012. In 2007, 7,400 tons were produced. The reduction in actual opium production is the result of poor weather, plant diseases, eradication efforts, and farmers using marginal land for the poppy crops (so food could be grown on the more productive land). Threats from the drug gangs and Taliban only go so far. The farmers live or die depending on what they can grow (or buy locally) and having enough to eat is the primary goal. Income from poppy cultivation is down because the drug gangs in Afghanistan and northern Burma (and a few other areas) are producing so much heroin that the market is saturated and prices are dropping. There is no cartel organization to control worldwide heroin production like there is for oil so producers will keep turning out more opium and heroin until it becomes unprofitable. It’s a long way from that, but the reduced income produces disagreements among the various groups involved (farmers, refiners, smugglers, distributors) and more violence within the drug industry.

In the few districts where poppy is grown, it is very profitable for the growers and drug gangs. A hectare of poppy produces about 3.8 kg (8.3 pounds) of heroin. Farmers earnmore per hectare of poppy plants than for any other crop grown in Afghanistan.Actually, the middlemen, often tribal leaders, make far more per hectare, and thefarmers often end up in debt if the poppy crop fails (for any number of reasons,including government anti-drug efforts). When sold in a Western town or city, the heroinfrom that hectare of Afghan poppies brings in over ten times as much money. There'slots of money for the middlemen, including the Taliban. Most of the poppies are grownin Taliban country. The Taliban tax the farmers, and other middlemen, 10-20 percent.This is Big Money, which buys lots of guns, government officials, and other useful stuff.

At the consumer level heroin brings in about $70 billion a year. While only about 10 percent of that ends up in Afghanistan, that is a significant chunk of the GDP. But only about 15 percent of the drug income that stays in Afghanistan goes to the farmers who grow poppies. The rest goes to various middlemen who spread it around to ensure their survival. Two years ago the drug trade was 15 percent of GDP, but now that has fallen to under 10 percent. Part of the change was continued growth of the non-drug economy. In response to these business pressures, the drug gangs continue trying to establish poppy production closer to the borders, which makes it easier to smuggle the heroin out and makes it more difficult for the government to go after drug production. Nearly all drug production is still concentrated in a few districts of Kandahar and Helmand provinces down south. These areas have become battlegrounds and it gets harder and harder to keep production going. But the rest of Afghanistan is still quite hostile to drug production (and any more of their young men becoming addicts). Efforts to get poppy production going elsewhere tend to fail because local police and warlords respond violently to that sort of thing.

Drugs also determine where the Taliban are most dangerous. Most Taliban activity occurs in two (Kandahar and Helmand) of the 34 provinces. Some 40 percent of the Taliban violence is in 10 Kandahar and Helmand districts (out of 398 in the entire country). Why that concentration of Taliban activity? It’s because of the heroin. The Taliban put most of their effort into protecting the districts where some 90 percent of the heroin in Afghanistan is produced. The other areas cursed with Taliban presence are ones that smuggling routes (to get the heroin to the outside world) go through. The Taliban don’t like to talk about this and they terrorize local media to stay away from it. International media avoids it as well, but on the ground it’s all about drugs and the huge amount of cash they provide for the drug gangs and their Taliban partners.

Corruption and poor government continue to be a major problem which the drug trade is simply part of. The only battle that counts in Afghanistan is the struggle against corruption, but controlling the drug trade is part of that fight. It is the general dishonesty, larceny, and use of violent threats instead of consensus and persuasion that makes Afghanistan such a hellish place and allows the drug gangs to thrive. The Islamic conservatives promise that submission to Islam in all things (the religious dictatorship the Taliban ran in the late 1990s) will solve all these problems. The Taliban approach did not work and too many Afghans know it (many from personal experience). The failure of the Taliban to run the country effectively put the spotlight on another problem: a lack of enough people trained to actually operate a large government (or any other kind of organization). Efficiently running a large organization takes a lot of people with specific skills. Low education levels, and a general lack of large organizations, means Afghanistan simply doesn’t have enough people to effectively operate a national government and all the large bureaucracies that includes. This is a problem that is not quickly overcome, since you cannot govern Afghanistan with a lot of foreign bureaucrats (even if you just call them “advisors”). Afghans are very touchy about that sort of thing. Afghans may be poor and ill-educated but they are also proud, heavily armed, and short-tempered. So all that foreign aid is easier to steal (for your family and tribe) than to spend efficiently for the common good.

Many Afghans are not willing to risk everything to try and establish civil society (rule of law), if only because they cannot see sufficient Afghans capable of operating that sort of government. A functioning democracy is essential to build a civil society but that requires a lot of people who know what they are doing and what to do in the first place. So instead there is a lot of cheating during elections, as local warlords and tribal chiefs ensure they do not lose any power. A lot of Afghans are not happy with that but the traditionalists are still the one type of social organization that works in Afghanistan. The existing tribal coalition system is threatened by democracy and is not quietly stepping aside. The ancient ways still find wide acceptance, especially in the countryside. Besides, those who are most eager to accept modern ways often simply migrate. Not every budding democrat has the cash or courage to leave and the democrats (or those seeking a better way) may be the majority in Afghanistan. But the traditionalists are heavily armed and determined to keep the old ways. This sustains the corruption (stealing is good, as long as it's not from family or tribe), tribalism (who else can you really trust), drug gangs (based on tribal and family ties), and the Taliban (the most traditionalist group).

It’s not all gloom and doom. The U.S. has had some success in driving Islamic terrorists out of Afghanistan. Several years of attacks by American and Afghan Special Forces, along with growing use of UAVs have hurt the Haqqani Network in eastern Afghanistan. It’s reached the point where one of the most powerful tribes in the area (the Zadran, which the Haqqani family belongs to) recently cut its ties with the Islamic terrorist group. There are very practical reasons for the split. For one thing, the Haqqani Network has become more bandit than Islamic radical defenders of Islam. That’s because the Haqqani Network is a large organization and there are bills to pay. The years of American pressure have cut income drastically and forced the organization to pay more attention to financial matters at the expense of everything else. So the Haqqani have become more gangster threat to the tribes who long supported them than a defender of the tribes from outside interference. This change was a long time coming, for it had been no secret that the Haqqani Network survived for decades because of Pakistani support and bases in Pakistan that were never attacked by the Pakistanis (the American UAVs were another matter). The Zadran switch was not a surprise in eastern Afghanistan, as many Zadrani already believed (and kept silent about) that the Haqqani Network had turned into gangsters. Many other tribes in eastern Afghanistan had already gone on record with that belief.

moral of the story: peacetalks with the taliban (as they are now, drugproducing&selling meglanomaniacs shoving a false devine mandate, guns, and harmful drugs in your faces) are in my opinion very dangerous for your health, your level of freedom and the actual level of respect that Allah has for you..
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom