Dear AgNoStIc MuSliM
Thanks very much for your thoughtful and logical response. I truly appreciate you investing the time and attention to articulate your views, I find them very informative, a great learning opportunity.
Thank you.
However I respectfully differ with the flow-down inferences from the revered concept of the State of Pakistan:
1. Whereas Pakistan State and its Constitution are absolutely uncontroversial (above board); the implementing framework is not.
a. Just because a corrupt traffic policeman receiving a Rs 200 bribe from me is wearing a Uniform sanctioned by the state, I cannot salute him with the reverence as I salute my Flag!.
b. Just because our Commander-in-Chief (President) is formally instituted under the States constitutional framework, that does not entitle him to a revered status even though he has served time for embezzlement and corruption.
c. Just because the Armed Forces are sanctioned under the States framework, it does not confer upon them the right to launch operations on their own soil (stated objectives are always very noble, even Pol Pot regime in Cambodia had noble objectives!).
a. The corrupt policeman is violating Pakistan's laws and constitution - he has no authority given him/her by the constitution to extort bribes. So unless the government of Pakistan/NWFP has no right to requisition the military in support of maintaining law and order, there is no comparison to be made here.
b. Zardari does not have to be given 'revered' status - this is a strawman since I never made this argument - but if he is constitutionally appointed (and the fate of the NRO may change that), then he also has the right to use his powers (or Gillani does, not sure who can deploy the army) to pursue policies he thinks will work. Pakistanis can disagree with those policies, which you are, but I would also like to see constructive alternatives. Otherwise let him do his job.
c. I believe the GoP ordered the ops. so you would have to show that the GoP acted unconstitutionally in asking for Military support to maintain law and order.
2. State Constitution is the bed rock on which rest of the framework is anchored. Its been 36 years since we had the 1973 Constitution; 20 years under direct martial law, and the rest under Quasi martial law. Repeated amendments have mutilated the letter and spirit of Constitution.
I agree it has been mutilated - Zia and Bhutto's extremist amendments - such as the Blasphemy Law, declaration of Qadianis as non-Muslims, Hudood Laws - some of the most despicable mutilations.
But it is nonetheless the only constitution we have, and that most Pakistanis generally agree on. I despise the above-mentioned amendments in the constitution, as I am sure you do some others, but we are required to support it until such time as other amendments are made or the people of Pakistan can come up with another constitution.
3. It is a fact of life that since 2001 the Government of Pakistan has essentially forfeited its sovereignty to the USA. The Constitution of the State of Pakistan does not sanction:
a. Sale of its citizens to CIA/FBI
b. Or to facilitate drone strikes on its soil.
c. Hand over a serving Ambassador of another country to CIA for being interned in Guantanamo bay.
d. Abduction / Disappearance of hundreds of Pakistanis without a due judicial process.
e. Authorize the use of our airspace and resources to a foreign country to launch operations on our soil or that of neighbors.
And any actions not in consonance with the constitution should be opposed, but the above actions do not automatically indicate that the Military Operation in FATA is unconstitutional.
4. The Constitution does not confer upon the Services the instutions:
a. Appointing serving Army Officers to run State institutions like KESC, PIA, CDA, Factories and even Cricket teams!.
b. Rapacious land grabs and commercial activities on the pattern of Lt. Gen. Zarrar Zameen, or others of his elk.
In a nutshell the State implementing machinery (Government) has lost its constitutional and moral authority.
part a. I assume refers to Musharraf, and he was opposed and is long gone.
And the rest I cannot comment upon since I have not seen the evidence, or that the current government supported them. Nor do they have any bearing on the legitimacy of the Military Operation in FATA.
FATA has been managed under the draconian FCR (1901) by the corrupted nexus of Political Agents and selected Muajib Khwar Maliks. Taliban are essentially a reactionary force that swapped the ends on the rapacious system then in place. It is not possible to enforce ill conceived ideas on the tribal populace, unless you have some respectability and moral authority.
No one is enforcing 'ill conceived ideas upon the Tribal populace' - terrorists are being eliminated. Hopefully the ideas of the terrorists are not the ideas of the majority of the Tribal populace.
TTP menace did not rise overnight, it was carefully nurtured over years to CREATE a front in Pakistan where Musharraf regime can be seen as waging a valiant struggle against Al-Quaida.
I would like to see evidence of that 'nurturing'. I don't believe it came about overnight either though. It came about as a result of the US invasion of Afghanistan, and strengthened because Pakistan ignored it for a variety of reasons, until it started to threaten the State.
Taliban doctrine gained acceptability due to the misuse of the Armed forces in FATA since early 2002. It began with the ritual BALLI of tribal lives by Musharraf Government whenever a western dignitary passed by Pakistan. Jack Straw while visiting a Medrassah in Peshawar on a goodwill visit was told how expensive his goodwill
Damadola airstrike - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
On 13 January 2006 the Central Intelligence Agency fired missiles into the Pakistani village of Damadola (Urdu: ڈمہ ڈولا
in the Bajaur (Urdu: باجوڑ ) tribal area, about seven kilometres (4.5 miles) from the Afghan border, killing at least 18 people. Originally the Bajaur tribal area government claimed that at least four foreign members of al-Qaeda were among the dead. US and Pakistani officials later admitted that no al-Qaeda leaders perished in the strike and that only local villagers were killed.[1] The attack purportedly targeted Ayman al-Zawahiri, second-in-command of al-Qaeda after Osama bin Laden, who was thought to be in the village.
Hundreds of such incidents were repeated in Khyber, Mohmand, Orakzai, Bajaur, Waziristan till the fuel / air mixture had reached the right proportions. The ill conceived Lal Masjid operation ignited the mixture first in Swat (girl students burnt alive); and then a full scale conflagration. Taliban just emerged as the rallying point by default.
You are assuming Pakistan was aware the Damadola strike was going to occur, and I believe people like Nek Mohammed, Abdullah Mehsud etc. had been operating and challenging the state long before that strike.
And we have discussed the Lal masjid Operation in detail on other threads - the state has a right to resolve a situation as it sees fit, and the State considered that lives of the students reportedly being held hostage by Mullah Aziz as being in danger if the standoff continued for much longer, and therefore made the decision to storm the terrorist sanctuary.
There are no credible reports validating the 'burning of hundreds of students' and what not.
You have absolute freedom to enjoy your black label, rave parties late into morning, and occasional ecstasy highs and ++, as long as you dont attack the sensibilities of the society. The mixed marathon was one of Musharrafs many hedonistic ideas (kinda enlightened moderation); essentially boycotted by the people of Lahore. Even Ch. Pervaiz Elahis family did not participate.
If people want to boycott it that is their choice - it is not however their right to infringe upon the freedom of others to go for a run around the neighborhood and participate in athletic activities (provided the women were not dressed like Serena Williams).
There is a sure shot way to disband the Taliban militias, by giving them due political space in accordance with the Constitution of Pakistan.
We tried that in Swat, it didn't work.
Collective punishments and mass exodus is not sanctioned by any Constitutional provision.
I thought that is what the FCR did in fact sanction.
I agree however with doing away with it and bringing FATA into the political mainstream, but that will not work until the Taliban threat is neutralized
Dear Sir you know it very well that such simplistic outlook has got us where we find ourselves today. Even a Soap factory is managed with better dexterity than this. If this was a solution, you and I would have been enjoying a holiday in pacified Swat today (or even in 5 years).
We have tried the other options, including bowing to almost all Taliban demands in Swat, did not work - so unless you have other options, dexterous or not, this remains the only way for now.
