What's new

How to clear the mess by Imran Khan

Awesome

RETIRED MOD
Joined
Mar 24, 2006
Messages
22,023
Reaction score
5
How to Clear the Mess

Thursday, April 23, 2009
By Imran Khan

The reason why there is so much despondency in Pakistan is because there is no road map to get out of the so-called War on Terror - a nomenclature that even the Obama Administration has discarded as being a negative misnomer. To cure the patient the diagnosis has to be accurate, otherwise the wrong medicine can sometimes kill the patient. In order to find the cure, first six myths that have been spun around the US-led “Global War on Terror” (GWOT) have to be debunked.

Myth No. 1: This is Pakistan’s war

Since no Pakistani was involved in 9/11 and the CIA-trained Al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan, how does it concern us? It is only when General Musharraf buckled under US pressure and sent our troops into Waziristan in late 2003-early 2004 that Pakistan became a war zone. It took another three years of the Pakistan army following the same senseless tactics as used by the US and NATO forces in Afghanistan (aerial bombardment) plus the slaughter at Lal Masjid, for the creation of the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). If our security forces are being targeted today by the Taliban and their suicide bombers, it is because they are perceived to be proxies of the US army. Iran is ideologically opposed to both Al Qaeda and the Taliban yet why are its security forces not attacked by terrorists? The answer is because their President does not pretend to be a bulwark against Islamic extremism in return for US dollars and support.

Michael Scheuer (ex-CIA officer and author of the book Imperial Hubris), writing in The Washington Post in April 2007, cited Musharraf’s loyalty to the US even when it went against Pakistan’s national interests by giving two examples: the first was Musharraf helping the US in removing a pro-Pakistan Afghan government and replacing it with a pro-Indian one; and, the second, for sending Pakistani troops into the tribal areas and turning the tribesmen against the Pakistan army. To fully understand Musharraf’s treachery against Pakistan, it is important to know that almost a 100,000 troops were sent into the tribal areas to target around 1000 suspected Al-Qaeda members - thus earning the enmity of at least 1.5 million armed local tribals in the 7 tribal agencies of Pakistan.

The most shameful aspect of the lie that this is our war is that the government keeps begging the US for more dollars stating that the war is costing the country more than the money it is receiving from the US. If it is our war, then fighting it should not be dependent on funds and material flowing from the US. If it is our war, why do we have no control over it? If it is our war, then why is the US government asking us to do more?

Myth No. 2: This is a war against Islamic extremists ó an ideological war against radical Islam

Was the meteoric rise of Taliban due to their religious ideology? Clearly not, because the Mujahideen were equally religious - Gulbadin Hekmatyar (supported by the ISI) was considered an Islamic fundamentalist. In fact, the reason the Taliban succeeded where the Mujahideen warlords failed, was because they established the rule of law - the Afghans had had enough of the power struggle between the warlord factions that had destroyed what remained of the country’s infrastructure and killed over 100,000 people.

If the Pushtuns of the tribal area wanted to adopt the Taliban religious ideology then surely they would have when the latter was in power in Afghanistan, between 1996 and 2001. Yet there was no Talibanisation in the tribal areas. Interestingly, the only part of Pakistan where the Taliban had an impact was in Swat where Sufi Mohammad started the Shariat Movement. The reason was that while there was rule of law (based on the traditional jirga system) in the tribal areas, the people of Swat had been deprived of easy access to justice ever since the traditional legal system premised on Qazi courts was replaced by Pakistani laws and judicial system, first introduced in 1974. The murder rate shot up from 10 per year in 1974 to almost 700 per year by 1977, when there was an uprising against the Pakistani justice system. The Taliban cashed in on this void of justice to rally the poorer sections of Swat society just as they had attracted the Afghans in a situation of political anarchy and lawlessness in Afghanistan. It is important to make this distinction because the strategy to bring peace must depend on knowing your enemy. Michael Bearden, CIA station chief in Pakistan from 1986 to 1989, wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine that the US is facing the same Pushtun insurgency that was faced by the Soviets in Afghanistan. According to him, as long as NATO is in Afghanistan, the Taliban will get a constant supply of men from the 15

million Pushtun population of Afghanistan and the 25 million Pushtuns of Pakistan. In other words, this Talibanisation is not so much religion-driven as politically-motivated. So the solution to the problem in the tribal belt today does not lie in religion and “moderate” Islam but in a political settlement.

Myth No. 3: If we keep fighting the US war, the super power will bail us out financially through aid packages.

Recently, the Government’s Adviser on Finance stated that the war on terror has cost Pakistan $35 billion while the country has received only $11 billion assistance from the US. I would go a step further and say that this aid is the biggest curse for the country. Not only is it “blood money” for our army killing our own people (there is no precedent for this) but also nothing has destroyed the self-esteem of this country as this one factor. Moreover, there is no end in sight as our cowardly and compromised leadership is ordered to “do more” for the payments made for their services. Above all, this aid and loans are like treating cancer with disprin. It enables the government to delay the much needed surgery of reforms (cutting expenditures and raising revenues); and meanwhile the cancer is spreading and might become terminal.

Myth No. 4: That the next terrorist attack on the US will come from the tribal areas.

First, there is an assumption, based purely on conjecture, that the Al Qaeda leadership is in the tribal areas. In fact, this leadership could well be in the 70 % of Afghan territory that the Taliban control. More importantly, given the growing radicalisation of the educated Muslim youth - in major part because of the continuing US partiality towards Israeli occupation of Palestinian land - why can it not follow that the next terrorist attack on the US could come either from the Middle East or from the marginalised and radicalised Muslims of Europe, motivated by perceived injustices to Islam and the Muslim World.

Myth No. 5: That the ISI is playing a double game and if Pakistan did more the war could be won.

If Talibanisation is growing in Pakistan because of the covert support of ISI in the tribal areas, then surely the growing Taliban control over Afghanistan (70 % of the territory) must be with NATO’s complicity? Surely a more rational understanding would be to see that the strategy being employed is creating hatred against the US and its collaborators. Aerial bombardment and its devastating collateral damage is the biggest gift the US has given to the Taliban. According to official reports, out of the 60 drone attacks conducted between 14 January 2006-April 8 2009, only 10 were on target, killing 14 alleged Al Qaeda. In the process almost 800 Pakistani civilians have been killed, while many lost their homes and limbs.

Despite its military surge effort, the US will eventually pack up and leave like the Soviets, but the “do more” mantra could end up destroying the Pakistan army - especially the ISI which is being targeted specifically for the mess created by the Bush Administration in Afghanistan.

Myth No. 6: That Pakistan could be Talibanised with their version of Islam.

Both Musharraf and Zardari have contributed to this myth in order to get US backing and dollars. Firstly there is no such precedent in the 15-hundred years of Islamic history of a theocracy like that of the Taliban, outside of the recent Taliban period of rule in Afghanistan. However, as mentioned earlier, the Taliban’s ascendancy in Afghanistan was not a result of their religious ideology but their ability to establish order and security in a war-devastated and anarchic Afghanistan.

In Swat, the present mess has arisen because of poor governance issues. Also, it was the manner in which the government handled the situation - simply sending in the army rather than providing better governance - that created space for the Taliban. Just as in Balochistan (under Musharraf) when the army was sent in rather than the Baloch being given their economic and provincial rights, similarly the army in Swat aggravated the situation and the present mess was created.

What Pakistan has to worry about is the chaos and anarchy that are going to stem from the radicalisation of our people because of the failure of successive governments to govern effectively and justly. Karen Armstrong, in her book The Battle for God, gives details of fundamentalist movements that turned militant when they were repressed. Ideas should be fought with counter ideas and dialogue, not guns. Allama Iqbal was able to deal with fundamentalism through his knowledge and intellect. The slaughter of the fundamentalists of Lal Masjid did more to fan extremism and fanaticism than any other single event.

Pakistan is staring down an abyss today and needs to come up with a sovereign nationalist policy to deal with the situation. If we keep on following dictation from Washington, we are doomed. There are many groups operating in the country under the label of “Taliban”. Apart from the small core of religious extremists, the bulk of the fighting men are Pushtun nationalists. Then there are the fighters from the old Jihadi groups. Moreover, the Taliban are also successfully exploiting the class tensions by appealing to the have-nots. But the most damaging for Pakistan are those groups who are being funded primarily from two external sources: first, by those who want to see Pakistan become a “failed state”; and, second, by those who wish to see the US bogged down in the Afghan quagmire.

What needs to be done: A two-pronged strategy is required - focusing on a revised relationship with the US and a cohesive national policy based on domestic compulsions and ground realities.

President Obama, unlike President Bush, is intelligent and has integrity. A select delegation of local experts on the tribal area and Afghanistan should make him understand that the current strategy is a disaster for both Pakistan and the US; that Pakistan can no longer commit suicide by carrying on this endless war against its own people; that we will hold dialogue and win over the Pushtuns of the tribal area and make them deal with the real terrorists while the Pakistan army is gradually pulled out.

At the same time, Pakistan has to move itself to ending drone attacks if the US is not prepared to do so. Closure of the drone base within Pakistan is a necessary beginning as is the need to create space between ourselves and the US, which will alter the ground environment in favour of the Pakistani state. It will immediately get rid of the fanaticism that creates suicide bombers as no longer will they be seen to be on the path to martyrdom by bombing US collaborators. Within this environment a consensual national policy to combat extremism and militancy needs to be evolved centring on dialogue, negotiation and assertion of the writ of the state. Where force is required the state must rely on the paramilitary forces, not the army. Concomitantly, Pakistan needs serious reforms. First and foremost we have to give our people access to justice at the grassroots level - that is, revive the village jury/Panchayat system. Only then will we rid ourselves of the oppressive “thana-kutchery” culture which compels the poor to seek adjudication by the feudals, tribal leaders, tumandars and now by the Taliban also - thereby perpetuating oppression of the dispossessed, especially women.

Second, unless we end the system of parallel education in the country where the rich access private schools and a different examination system while the poor at best only have access to a deprived public school system with its outmoded syllabus and no access to employment. That is why the marginalised future generations are condemned to go to madrassahs which provide them with food for survival and exploit their pent up social anger. We need to bring all our educational institutions into the mainstream with one form of education syllabus and examination system for all - with madrassahs also coming under the same system even while they retain their religious education specialisation.

Third, the level of governance needs to be raised through making appointments on merit in contrast to the worst type of cronyism that is currently on show. Alongside this, a cutting of expenditures is required with the leadership and the elite leading by example through adoption of an austere lifestyle. Also, instead of seeking aid and loans to finance the luxurious lifestyle of the elite, the leadership should pay taxes, declare its assets and bring into the country all money kept in foreign banks abroad. All “benami” transactions, assets and bank accounts should be declared illegal. I believe we will suddenly discover that we are actually quite a self-sufficient country.

Fourth, the state has to widen its direct taxation net and cut down on indirect taxation where the poor subsidise the rich. If corruption and ineptitude are removed, it will be possible for the state to collect income tax more effectively.

A crucial requirement for moving towards stability would be the disarming of all militant groups - which will a real challenge for the leadership but here again, the political elite can lead by example and dismantle their show of guards and private forces.

Finally, fundamentalism should be fought intellectually with sensitivity shown to the religious and heterogeneous roots of culture amongst the Pakistani masses. Solutions have to be evolved from within the nation through tolerance and understanding. Here, we must learn from the Shah of Iran’s attempts to enforce a pseudo-Western identity onto his people and its extreme backlash from Iranian society.

The threat of extremism is directly related to the performance of the state and its ability to deliver justice and welfare to its people.
 
.
Well at least he has put forward some solutions I haven't seen much of that from other politicans.

And some of them were quite good but can these measures really be effective in todays climate?
 
.
Well at least he has put forward some solutions I haven't seen much of that from other politicans.

And some of them were quite good but can these measures really be effective in todays climate?
I think he should reconsider his position on this not being Pakistan's war. It's Pakistan's war as long as the Taliban choose to fight in Pakistan. If they want to fight America in Afghanistan then by all means do so and we will remain neutral.
 
.
Sorry, this may seem like trolling but I think this is an extremely interesting piece. Not a big fan of Imran Khan. And Irfan Husain gives more reason not to be.

(This came in January 17 edition of the Dawn newspaper.)



Imran Khan vs Charles Darwin



By Irfan Husain


THIS year will see a large number of celebrations at campuses and scientific institutions around the world to mark the 200th year of the birth of Charles Darwin, and the 150th year of the publication of his seminal work.

Widely regarded as one of the three most influential thinkers of the 19th century, together with Freud and Marx, Darwin has had a stronger impact on our thinking than the other two giants of the era. Since its publication in 1859, his explanation of how life evolved on the planet has been subjected to rigorous criticism and analysis. Generations of scientists have tested it in the field and in the laboratory. And to date, it remains the only scientific explanation of how life on Earth has developed over the millennia.

Many religious people have viewed the Darwinian theory of evolution as an attack on their faith. Others have reconciled belief in a supernatural being controlling events in the universe with a scientific theory that pulls together a vast plethora of evidence. Whatever one’s position on the truth of Darwin’s revolutionary exposition, it would take a foolhardy person to dismiss it as a ‘half-baked theory’ as Imran Khan has done recently.

Titled Why the West craves materialism and why the East sticks to religion, the essay is dated Nov 8, 2008, and was sent to me via email by a reader. In this article, the politician and ex-cricketer describes his personal journey from the westernised, secular outlook of his youth to his present faith-based worldview.

In a sense, Imran Khan’s view of Darwin’s life work captures the essence of our backwardness. By rejecting a vast body of scientific research and analysis as ‘half-baked’, he exposes his own ignorance. He is, of course, entitled to his own opinion on any subject under the sun. But as he is a role model for many young Pakistanis, he has a duty to choose his words with greater care. He may refuse to accept the consensus behind Darwinian theory in the international scientific community, but to dismiss it out of hand risks influencing impressionable young minds into following him.

As it is, there is not a single world-class university or research institute in the Muslim world. The reason for this is not hard to find. By refusing to accept and internalise the rational method of empirical research and analysis, we discourage and suppress scientific and objective scholarship.

In Imran Khan’s mind, as in many others, reason is a western monopoly. So anyone using rational analysis as a tool is dismissed as ‘western’, a pejorative term deployed to undermine any argument. Unfortunately, this widespread trend has had profound significance over the centuries. By ceding scientific research and progress to the West, Muslims find themselves in their current predicament. By contrast, countries like China, Japan and Korea have made tremendous progress by accepting reason as the basis of their education and public discourse. So when Imran Khan says ‘the East sticks to religion’ in the title of his essay, he is effectively ignoring well over half the East.

I have long admired Imran Khan for his cricketing prowess, as well as for the fine work he has done in creating Pakistan’s first cancer hospital. So as a fan, it has saddened me to see him in the constant company of right-wingers like ex-ISI chief Hamid Gul and Qazi Hussain Ahmed, the leader of the Jamaat-i-Islami. On TV talk shows, where he is a frequent guest, he has been voicing the most extreme views. Let me hasten to say that I would defend his right to his opinions, but as a hero to millions of young Pakistanis, I would ask that these views be based on logic and facts.

Imran Khan has complained in his article that Pakistan’s secular elites do not study Islam, and hence they are seduced by ‘western’ thinking. I’m afraid this is based on the arrogant assumption that simply because people dress in a certain way, they are ignorant of their own culture, history and religion. According to him, Pakistan is polarised between this group who “react strongly to anyone trying to impose Islam on society”, and religious extremists. Personally speaking, I don’t want any belief or dogma imposed on society. As a secularist, I think everybody should be free to believe in any faith. And in the distinguished company of Mohammad Ali Jinnah, I feel that religion should have nothing to do with the business of the state.

So why is it that today, only Muslim nations seem to deny the validity of the scientific method? It is true that many evangelical Christians reject Darwinian theory as well, and push creationism as the explanation for the development of life on earth. Recently, this extreme position has been replaced by something called Intelligent Design. But among educated people, it would be difficult to find many who close their eyes to the insights contained in Darwin’s groundbreaking research, even though many of these ideas were developed by Wallace, a contemporary of Darwin’s.

In his important book Muslims and Science published nearly 20 years ago, Pervez Hoodbhoy made the point that the entire output of scientific papers written in the Muslim world every year did not equal those produced in Israel alone. This remains true two decades later. And the reason for this imbalance lies in the position reflected in Imran Khan’s views about Darwin.

If we do not encourage the young to think and reason for themselves, how can we expect them to discover anything new? The essence of scientific enquiry lies in curiosity about how the world works, how matter was formed, and how life came into being. Perhaps curiosity about the universe is what sets mankind apart from the animal kingdom.

But if, as Darwin was in the Galapagos Isles, we are struck with wonder when we see something for which we have no explanation, then we have taken a step towards discovering more about our universe, and ultimately, about ourselves.

irfan.husain@gmail.com
 
.
I think he should reconsider his position on this not being Pakistan's war. It's Pakistan's war as long as the Taliban choose to fight in Pakistan. If they want to fight America in Afghanistan then by all means do so and we will remain neutral.

Agreed especially given these brazen attacks and criminal activity.

I can see his point especially where Pakistan should not have gotten involved in the first place but this new cancer is striking Pakistans society and spreading.

Pakistan has business with those seeking to Talabanise the country in its entirety.

I also find it both disturbing and revealing that the MQM is the only group out there seeking to do soemthing about it.
 
.
Well at least he has put forward some solutions I haven't seen much of that from other politicans.

And some of them were quite good but can these measures really be effective in todays climate?

I share your opinions. I think time has passed for these to be implemented. Its too late and again leads to the differentiation between good taliban - bad taliban which has been a fruiteless excercise.

It can be debated whether Musharraf did the right thing by being a part of WOT, but thats history now and can not be changed. Also was it altogather his decesion specially after declaration from the US that either you are with us or against us. It can also be debated whether Pakistan would have fared any better by not participating in WOT, as the Afghan and Taliban refugees would have still landed up in Pakistan and Pakistan would have been next US hunting location.


I dont see Taliban backing down now even if Drone attacks are stopped and a sudden plugging out of support from US in Afghanistan seems implausable.

I have learned on this forum hyphenation of Pakistan with any nation is discouraged but I guess US does not see it like that ( The AF Pakistan Policy) symobizes just that. They see Pakistan as an extension of Afghanistan and percieve that there is hardly any difference between the Pakistani tribal areas and Afghanistan area under control of Taliban.

I would like to see a debate / discussion on consequences of a pullout of pakistan from the WOT.

I see this as an article written with benefit of hindsight and lacking in a vision for the future.
 
.
I have only one question to ask of Mr. Niazi:

His party's motto is: Justice, Humanity & Self Esteem. Yet he is always one step ahead trying to defend the Mullah movement, hang on... Mr. Imran Khan, we were expecting an Oxford Grad like yourself to understand the fundamentals of "Humanity" and "Justice" are the freedom of expression, freedom of speech and freedom to live without fear of prosecution (based on religious, political or creed).

Do you think the TTP or TNSM will Subscribe to Justice, Humanity & Self Esteem? Answer: NO! The Taliban, who he is always trying to defend every time he is on TV are a curse and I would have thought he would have been educated enough to understand the ground reality.

Exactly what kind of leadership image is this man giving to his party members and followers? Hello I am a Lota, vote for me..
 
.
I think he should reconsider his position on this not being Pakistan's war. It's Pakistan's war as long as the Taliban choose to fight in Pakistan. If they want to fight America in Afghanistan then by all means do so and we will remain neutral.

You're missing IK's point here.

If the Pakistani security forces had not sided with the US in attacking its own citizens, there would have been no "rise of the Taliban". Or in IK's own words, lest I put words in his mouth :

"Iran is ideologically opposed to both Al Qaeda and the Taliban yet why are its security forces not attacked by terrorists? The answer is because their President does not pretend to be a bulwark against Islamic extremism in return for US dollars and support."

Basically, he's saying that there was no Talibanization in Pakistan prior to the attacks on the tribal areas.

The solution is another matter.
 
.
I think Musharraf was in a hard position though, and he had to do what he did. Pakistan was sucked into the war through force.
 
.
Agreed especially given these brazen attacks and criminal activity.

I can see his point especially where Pakistan should not have gotten involved in the first place but this new cancer is striking Pakistans society and spreading.

Pakistan has business with those seeking to Talabanise the country in its entirety.

I also find it both disturbing and revealing that the MQM is the only group out there seeking to do soemthing about it.

JK

The very assertion that Pakistan could have avoided facing today's situation by avoiding getting involved is skewed. Groups like Taliban and others do not recognise the political boundaries and yet need a definde region to base themselves in. Had Pakistan not taken the bold step to engage them (howsoever minimally) at the earliest, it would only have delayed not removed the threat faced by Pakistan today. There has been example of Iran which was quoted which is not under attack. To understand that one has to know that these Talibanis arose from the Afghan war shelters INSIDE FATA/NWFP areas and as such there is a similarity in school of thoughts and a general sympathy for the same groups from local populance to a certain extent.

Loss of Afghanistan would have anyways forced Talibs to find a new base and where else except where they have relatively more sympathy from local population and to a certain extent from the government (initially GoP was sympathetic to them anyways). The long existence of such groups allowed them to build a strong base in Pakistani territories.Iran was never and can not be a natural haven for them for such reasons. And not because they dont take US dollars!! The local population in Iran as also Iranian government has no sympathy for them that is the fact.

MQM is the only group willing to fight to protect Sindh and they have fared better in comparision to others. A certain poster in different forum had contended that this was a false claim. But its not so. Infiltration of Pakistani cities is taking place and until and unless steps are taken, the future is bleak.
 
.
I think Musharraf was in a hard position though, and he had to do what he did. Pakistan was sucked into the war through force.

beg to differ

he took the best possible decision in Pakistan's interests ....... it took great courage on his part to recognise a threat which was still some distance away
 
.
beg to differ

he took the best possible decision in Pakistan's interests ....... it took great courage on his part to recognise a threat which was still some distance away

You can argue it was dormant, but the point is they were not attacking Pakistan prior to this.

It would have been better to have recognized the threat, and then subtly terminated it, rather than blundering into military action that was always going to elicit a retaliatory response.

There's more ways to deal with this than just military action.
 
.
You can argue it was dormant, but the point is they were not attacking Pakistan prior to this.

It would have been better to have recognized the threat, and then subtly terminated it, rather than blundering into military action that was always going to elicit a retaliatory response.

There's more ways to deal with this than just military action.

while you are right about exploring other venues to deal with it - yet the situation would be same.

Swat is an example of alternate routes of dealing with this menace which now has spread to Buner and adjoining provinces near to Islamabad and the threat to capital is looming larger. There shall be no negotiations and no quarters given this time round.

An interesting news llink. I dont know how gravely does GoP take this development as:

Pakistan on verge of collapse as Taliban surge towards Islamabad | Mail Online
 
.
while you are right about exploring other venues to deal with it - yet the situation would be same.

Swat is an example of alternate routes of dealing with this menace which now has spread to Buner and adjoining provinces near to Islamabad and the threat to capital is looming larger. There shall be no negotiations and no quarters given this time round.

An interesting news llink. I dont know how gravely does GoP take this development as:

Pakistan on verge of collapse as Taliban surge towards Islamabad | Mail Online

That's what you think, more like.

There's no danger of anything moving and taking over Islamabad.

It's all dramatization. It is best that you wait and see.
 
.
That's what you think, more like.

There's no danger of anything moving and taking over Islamabad.

It's all dramatization. It is best that you wait and see.

I sure hope so that its all a lie. We have Pakistani journalists giving interview claiming contrary to what you are saying over Indian channels here. And frankly its not inspiring. Either they want to increase their ratings or GoP/PA are in a denial mode.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom