Source: SWAT Peace Deal: Separating facts from fiction | Asian Tribune
SWAT Peace Deal: Separating facts from fiction
By: Farzana Shah
Peace cannot be achieved through violence; it can only be attained through understanding. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson
We look forward to the time when the Power of Love will replace the Love of Power. Then will our world know the blessings of peace. ~William Ewart Gladstone
On 16 Feb. 2009, NWFP government and militants signed a deal according to which government will implement Islamic Sharia in Malakand division under Nizam-e-Adal Regulations. Immediate effect of this deal is sudden ceasefire in Swats troubled areas and life returned to normal in the Valley earlier suffered badly due to fierce fighting between militants and Pakistan army.
Buying peace is need of the hour and a legitimate right of all Pakistanis in the region and as a nation Pakistanis expect that global community will also appreciate the efforts for peace but ironically there are elements having opposition confusing the masses world over about this peace and Sharia Law.
2- Peace deal; Facts out of fiction :
Of course any deal demands from concerned signatories to put their actions under the signed agreement to honour it. Fate of current truce hangs on the level of commitment by both parties to honour the deal. Understanding the good and bad aspects of the deal a brief look at main points of agreement is necessary.
1. Sharia law would be implemented in Swat and Malakand.
2. Security forces will gradually withdraw from the region.
3. The government and the Taliban would exchange prisoners.
4. Militants would recognize the writ of the government and cooperate with security forces.
5. Taliban would halt attacks on barber and music shops.
6. Ban on display of weapons by militants in public.
7. Taliban would lay down heavy weapons (rockets, mortars).
8. Taliban would close down training camps.
9. Taliban would denounce suicide attacks.
10. A ban would be placed on raising private militias.
11. Taliban will cooperate with the government to vaccinate children against diseases like polio.
12. Fazlullah's madrassa, the Imam Dheri would be turned into an Islamic university.
13. Only licensed FM radio stations would be allowed to operate in the region.
14. Taliban would allow women to "perform their duties at the workplace without any fear."
3: Gains and Losses:
A cursory look at the above points concludes at some optimistic view that the deal demands a lot more from militants than government in return
It seems the people of Swat and Government of NWFP are victorious rather than militants as claimed by many self-claimed South Asian experts sitting thousands of miles away from Swat serving Western and US media.
However a detailed comparison of the demands that each signatory will have to comply with will help in understanding the long term and short term gains or losses.
Governments demands from militants:
Militants agreed to most of the demands of government like
To bring two-year long violence to an end.
Shutting down training camps.
Handing over heavy weapons.
Lifting ban on education.
Abandoning illegal FM radio stations.
Releasing captured military and civilian government officials.
Halting suicide bombing and training for such attacks
Turning madrassa into university
These are few short term gains for government in Islamabad but this deal has some real far-reaching implications discussed in the article afterwards.
Militants demands from Government:
Government agreed to;
Implementing Nizam-e-Adal Regulations.
Releasing captured militants gradually.
Withdrawal of Pakistan Army after ensuring that peace is achieved in all troubled pockets of Swat.
As far as implementation of Nizam-e-Adal is concerned this is nothing new. This system was promised by previous governments during 90s much earlier than 9/11 and WoT and current government in Islamabad was also under obligation to fulfill this longstanding demand of people of Swat. The thing annoying most of regional and international stakeholders is withdrawal of military from the area.
Why it is necessary to pullout army and why some elements dont want this to happen will be examine later on; first a quick look at how international and local players reacted over this peace deal. By military point of view again it is Pakistan Army who has gained. Armed forces gained a strong tactical position to expose those who were getting help from foreign agencies and were committing anti-social activates as said by DG ISPR after the deal. The victory for forces was not in sight before the accord.
Militant will lay down firearms and abandon all their illegal check posts but still according to deal, Pakistan Army will remain in the area so it is not a take over by militants as it is being propagated by international media. The prominent gain for Pakistan is an end to a fight between Army and Militants in which civilians were suffering at the hands to both.
4- Reactions over peace deal:
US: Mixed signals were sent by US official regarding the Swat deal.
In his statement Gordon Duguid, acting spokesman of Obama administration, said We are in touch with the government in Pakistan and discussing the issue. Well wait and see what their fuller explanation is for us."
First clear criticism came from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, "the activity by the extremists in Pakistan poses a direct threat to the government of Pakistan as well as to the security of the United States, Afghanistan and a number of other nations," Washington is studying the agreement and trying to understand the Pakistani governments "intention and the actual agreed-upon language."
The US seems not liked the deal much and it is beyond any comprehension why US always thinks that only military usage can bring peace when a more reliable and workable solution is available to counter of terrorism i.e. eliminating root-cause.
By agreeing to implement Nizam-e-Adal Regulations government has done exactly the same because this demand was biggest cause of militants surge in Swat. Pakistan has made it clear that Adal is nothing more than system of justice for people.
NATO: NATO is most worrying stakeholder with regard to latest development in Pakistan. According to NATO commanders in Afghanistan accepting any deal with militant means surrender by government of Pakistan. A Nato spokesman, James Appathurai, told reporters in Brussels that "we should all be concerned by a situation in which extremists would have a safe haven" He said, "I do not want to "doubt the good faith of the Pakistani government, but its clear that the region is suffering very badly from extremists and we would not want it to get worse".
Responding to this reaction foreign office spokesman Abdul Basit said statements by NATO and Britain about the peace deal in Swat are 'mostly speculative', making it clear that implementation of the 'Nizam-e-Adal regulations' was sequentially linked to the restoration of peace in the area. Speculation in the matter therefore would not be helpful".
India: Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee on 22nd Feb. 2009 accused Pakistan of still being in denial mode over cross-border terrorism and called the peace deal as matter of concern for India. Mukherjee opined "No compromise should be made with terrorist organizations like Taliban".
At surface it seems that Swat is no business of India but underneath the surface there is a great deal of Indian interests there in Swat and FATA. It is also pointed out by DG ISPR that there is foreign intervention by hostile agencies in Swat but government was failed to highlight this involvement of foreign intelligence agencies. Many RAW operatives were captured or killed in region during operation Rah-e-Haq. FO in previous and current government utterly failed to highlight this sinister game mostly due to strong US intervention in Islamabads decision regarding WoT. It is time for both military and civilian government to act according to Pakistans own needs and plans instead of serving the US.
5- Hypocrisy, Psy-Ops & Misunderstandings against Swat Deal:
Most vocal opposition to his deal did not come from any top official of US or NATO but from some self-styled experts on Pakistans issues and WoT. Who are too inept to take historical struggle of Swatis for the Sharia law and Qazi courts as it was there till 1969. This is same media and these are same "experts" that had been terming the Afghan Taliban and TTP as same organization working with two different names in two countries. Western media which launched these Psy-ops is also spitting venom over Swat peace deal but failed to utter a word against the similar deal which is in the offing for Afghanistan by US.
Al Jazeera TV Website on 16th Feb reported,"The US and Afghanistan have signed a declaration containing measures aimed at reducing civilian deaths in the war against the Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters. The move was announced by Richard Holbrooke, the US envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, at a news conference in the capital Kabul on Sunday." report continues "The US and Afghanistan have signed a declaration which will initiate specific measures aimed at reducing civilian casualties in Afghanistan."
Again there is an irony the way US perceives things. It is confusing for many to understand why US is pursuing a policy of double standards in the region where one thing is legitimate for Afghanistan while the same is prohibited for Pakistan. At one place US is ready to workout ways to reduce the civilian causalities and on the other hand US is pushing Pakistan to carry on military operations in NWFP and FATA despite the fact that mainly locals are the ones suffering due to these operations much more than Al-Qaeda and Taliban.
US duplicity doesnt end here. Secretary of defense Robert Gate welcomed similar deal in Afghanistan,< "If there is a reconciliation, if insurgents are willing to put down their arms, if the reconciliation is essentially on the terms being offered by the government, then I think we would be very open to that. We have said all along that ultimately some sort of political reconciliation has to be part of the long-term solution in Afghanistan."
An example of media Psy-Ops can be seen in following peace of Press Trust of Indias report where Michael Kugelman, an expert at the Woodrow Wilson Center South Asia, agreed, calling the deal "a dramatic setback" in the American and Pakistani battle against radical Islam in South Asia.
He fears that the cease-fire will legitimize the implementation of Islamic law by the Taliban, who have been de-facto imposing their interpretation of sharia in the region for over a year. It will be really interesting to know Mr. Kugelmans view on above mentioned US-Afghan deal to cut civilian causalities. Why he is not commenting on Robert Gates comments about similar deal in Afghanistan with Afghan Taliban? Simply, because he is not told to raise these sort of questions in front of US administration. Then there are some misunderstandings among some Pakistani commentators who by the way are sitting miles away from NWFP and especially from Swat.
One can understand the motives of non-Pakistani commentators and Western media but Pakistani journalists and commentators must understand that by presenting a horrified picture of the deal just because of the word Islamic Sharia is not only confusing local people in the region but also making case of Pakistan more and more difficult in International community where already many active players are out there to destabilize Pakistan in order to get there own objectives served.
6- Foreign Interventions: A Different Angle
The main strength of militants is large amount of criminals being used for pumping money and abducting government officials. These criminals are real threats to any peace deal as they are working on the payroll of foreign agencies as revealed by DG ISPR in press conference after the peace deal.
Swats location is also very critical for Pakistan. It borders Bajaur Agency at one side and with Chitral region from other. It provides route to the Northern areas of Pakistan which connects it to China. There are known plans to cut Chinese access to Pakistan through ground by dismembering Pakistan by cutting NWFP province.
There are also reports that Israeli are also involved in covert trainings of these militants in Badakhshan province of Afghanistan as reported in Arab News on 24th Feb 2009, and sending these troops to Pakistans Northern areas like FATA and Swat for creating unrest.
Unlike Swat, situation in Bajaur (FATA) is much more under control of security forces after massive operations and TTP (Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan) was forced to announce a ceasefire in the area. The comments by local commander of TTP in Bajaur on recent ceasefire are very meaningful. As reported by Daily Times, "Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) on Monday announced a unilateral ceasefire and an end to resistance against security forces in Bajaur Agency. Speaking on their illegal FM radio, Bajaur TTP Chief Faqir Muhammad said Pakistan was their country and its defence was their obligation.
He said the Taliban did not want war against the government and the army, but some elements were fuelling differences between them, adding that the Taliban did not attack government installations and schools."
Isnt there a shocking change in tone of TTP local commander? But this is not the revelation part of the entire development the real surprise came from Swat where Taliban extend ceasefire. The move came shortly after a Taliban group in the nearby Bajaur region declared a unilateral ceasefire.
Now this development is fascinating because Badakhshan lies on Afghan side against Bajaur on Pakistani side and it is evident that supply route of these Mossad-backed militants has been seized. So tactically there is no need to fight at front battle field (Swat) if supply line from rare battle field (Bajaur) has been cut off.
There are media reports that many militants left the area as soon as peace deal was signed between NWFP government and TNSM. This is another indication that there were more than two stakeholders in battle fields.
According to Pakistan Observer, the speed with which NATO/US came out with penchant criticism confirms the widely held belief that the United States and some other Western countries were exploiting Afghan situation to destabilize Pakistan and their agenda is other than peace and stability of the region.
7. Impact of Deal on Pakistan Security
Impact of deal can be seen already there in Swat Valley. Life in Swat is coming back to normal rapidly with markets reopened and witnessing large crowd whereas the most pleasant and worth noticing change is the re-opening of many private schools in the areas whereas government ones will also follow the same.
Armed-militant gangs have vanished from roads, displaced population is returning back to homes. For a common Pakistani this peace deal makes a complete sense but ironically for some "strange" but obvious reasons Western world and US got irritated. How much world powers are annoyed by this daring deal, by a rather weak government in Islamabad? It can be judged by looking at initial reactions of major regional and world players who have stakes in the region.
This is another very misunderstood aspect of this deal that Pakistans security has been compromised. According to DG ISPR "political cost of the operation was too high." This one line is enough to conclude why this deal was made and why it is important to buy peace for Pakistan at this time. Military operation was not paying any dividends at all but also utterly counter productive due to following facts
1- Massive collateral damage in form of civilian lives and displacement of thousands of people was creating a deep rift between security forces and people.
2- Situation was fast turning into another 1971 due to operation as militants were using grief and anger of masses to have new recruits in their ranks just like Mukti Bahni did in then East Pakistan.
3- Non functional civilian and paramilitary forces in Swat and lack of public backing to operations were biggest problems to have constant control over areas which were cleared by Army. This was one of major reasons for halting operation and it was described by DG ISPR, "The army had already reduced operations in Swat because it lacked public backing, and was hampered by the breakdown of the local administration and ineffectiveness of the police in the face of the insurgency".
4- There was no political backing to operation by local political parties like ANP which has it s government in NWFP.
Pakistan will have to stand on its feet. Swat deal is good beginning in this direction as it will pave way for coming out of 8-year-old unnecessary pressure of Do More. Pakistan military and civilians had bled much more than those who actually carried out 9/11. If there was no terrorist in Pakistan before 9/11 or till that date then certainly there is none expect those who were sent in to destroy peace in mainland Pakistan. Since last 8 years Pakistan did what no other country will do ever on its own soil. Some of the decisions turned into real disaster as these were taken under pressure or dictated by Washington like accepting Damadola strike by CIA in 2006 and drop scene of Lal Masjid siege in 2007.
What happened after these is now part of brutal history of Pakistan. Pakistan cannot afford another blunder by pursuing military operations where as those who are asking for these operations themselves signed such deals (UK in Ireland) or are busy in signing these deals elsewhere (recent agreement between US and Afghanistan to minimize civilian causalities). So far stance of FO in Islamabad is just in accordance with Pakistans national interests in context of Swat deal. All parties must support government in this deal and must contribute towards its success. Only peace can erode the demon of terrorism.
Pakistan has all the rights to protect its citizen and territory by taking any route suited to its geopolitical situation, be it military, political or economical. Only and only people of Pakistan have the right to determine how to handle any internal problem. Swat deal is just a manifestation of this rule. Now if "civilized" world do respect democracy and peace this deal has both of these civilized norms of modern world so this peace deal needs to be respected and honored as it is by the representative of people of Pakistan.
It is time for the world to heed to what former US president Clinton said about peace:
The real differences around the world today are not between Jews and Arabs; Protestants and Catholics; Muslims, Croats, and Serbs The real differences are between those who embrace peace and those who would destroy it; between those who look to the future and those who cling to the past; between those who open their arms and those who are determined to clench their fists. ~William J. Clinton, 1997.
Farzana Shah is a Pakistani journalist, defense analyst based at Peshawar.
- Asian Tribune -
SWAT Peace Deal: Separating facts from fiction
By: Farzana Shah
Peace cannot be achieved through violence; it can only be attained through understanding. ~Ralph Waldo Emerson
We look forward to the time when the Power of Love will replace the Love of Power. Then will our world know the blessings of peace. ~William Ewart Gladstone
On 16 Feb. 2009, NWFP government and militants signed a deal according to which government will implement Islamic Sharia in Malakand division under Nizam-e-Adal Regulations. Immediate effect of this deal is sudden ceasefire in Swats troubled areas and life returned to normal in the Valley earlier suffered badly due to fierce fighting between militants and Pakistan army.
Buying peace is need of the hour and a legitimate right of all Pakistanis in the region and as a nation Pakistanis expect that global community will also appreciate the efforts for peace but ironically there are elements having opposition confusing the masses world over about this peace and Sharia Law.
2- Peace deal; Facts out of fiction :
Of course any deal demands from concerned signatories to put their actions under the signed agreement to honour it. Fate of current truce hangs on the level of commitment by both parties to honour the deal. Understanding the good and bad aspects of the deal a brief look at main points of agreement is necessary.
1. Sharia law would be implemented in Swat and Malakand.
2. Security forces will gradually withdraw from the region.
3. The government and the Taliban would exchange prisoners.
4. Militants would recognize the writ of the government and cooperate with security forces.
5. Taliban would halt attacks on barber and music shops.
6. Ban on display of weapons by militants in public.
7. Taliban would lay down heavy weapons (rockets, mortars).
8. Taliban would close down training camps.
9. Taliban would denounce suicide attacks.
10. A ban would be placed on raising private militias.
11. Taliban will cooperate with the government to vaccinate children against diseases like polio.
12. Fazlullah's madrassa, the Imam Dheri would be turned into an Islamic university.
13. Only licensed FM radio stations would be allowed to operate in the region.
14. Taliban would allow women to "perform their duties at the workplace without any fear."
3: Gains and Losses:
A cursory look at the above points concludes at some optimistic view that the deal demands a lot more from militants than government in return
It seems the people of Swat and Government of NWFP are victorious rather than militants as claimed by many self-claimed South Asian experts sitting thousands of miles away from Swat serving Western and US media.
However a detailed comparison of the demands that each signatory will have to comply with will help in understanding the long term and short term gains or losses.
Governments demands from militants:
Militants agreed to most of the demands of government like
To bring two-year long violence to an end.
Shutting down training camps.
Handing over heavy weapons.
Lifting ban on education.
Abandoning illegal FM radio stations.
Releasing captured military and civilian government officials.
Halting suicide bombing and training for such attacks
Turning madrassa into university
These are few short term gains for government in Islamabad but this deal has some real far-reaching implications discussed in the article afterwards.
Militants demands from Government:
Government agreed to;
Implementing Nizam-e-Adal Regulations.
Releasing captured militants gradually.
Withdrawal of Pakistan Army after ensuring that peace is achieved in all troubled pockets of Swat.
As far as implementation of Nizam-e-Adal is concerned this is nothing new. This system was promised by previous governments during 90s much earlier than 9/11 and WoT and current government in Islamabad was also under obligation to fulfill this longstanding demand of people of Swat. The thing annoying most of regional and international stakeholders is withdrawal of military from the area.
Why it is necessary to pullout army and why some elements dont want this to happen will be examine later on; first a quick look at how international and local players reacted over this peace deal. By military point of view again it is Pakistan Army who has gained. Armed forces gained a strong tactical position to expose those who were getting help from foreign agencies and were committing anti-social activates as said by DG ISPR after the deal. The victory for forces was not in sight before the accord.
Militant will lay down firearms and abandon all their illegal check posts but still according to deal, Pakistan Army will remain in the area so it is not a take over by militants as it is being propagated by international media. The prominent gain for Pakistan is an end to a fight between Army and Militants in which civilians were suffering at the hands to both.
4- Reactions over peace deal:
US: Mixed signals were sent by US official regarding the Swat deal.
In his statement Gordon Duguid, acting spokesman of Obama administration, said We are in touch with the government in Pakistan and discussing the issue. Well wait and see what their fuller explanation is for us."
First clear criticism came from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, "the activity by the extremists in Pakistan poses a direct threat to the government of Pakistan as well as to the security of the United States, Afghanistan and a number of other nations," Washington is studying the agreement and trying to understand the Pakistani governments "intention and the actual agreed-upon language."
The US seems not liked the deal much and it is beyond any comprehension why US always thinks that only military usage can bring peace when a more reliable and workable solution is available to counter of terrorism i.e. eliminating root-cause.
By agreeing to implement Nizam-e-Adal Regulations government has done exactly the same because this demand was biggest cause of militants surge in Swat. Pakistan has made it clear that Adal is nothing more than system of justice for people.
NATO: NATO is most worrying stakeholder with regard to latest development in Pakistan. According to NATO commanders in Afghanistan accepting any deal with militant means surrender by government of Pakistan. A Nato spokesman, James Appathurai, told reporters in Brussels that "we should all be concerned by a situation in which extremists would have a safe haven" He said, "I do not want to "doubt the good faith of the Pakistani government, but its clear that the region is suffering very badly from extremists and we would not want it to get worse".
Responding to this reaction foreign office spokesman Abdul Basit said statements by NATO and Britain about the peace deal in Swat are 'mostly speculative', making it clear that implementation of the 'Nizam-e-Adal regulations' was sequentially linked to the restoration of peace in the area. Speculation in the matter therefore would not be helpful".
India: Indian External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee on 22nd Feb. 2009 accused Pakistan of still being in denial mode over cross-border terrorism and called the peace deal as matter of concern for India. Mukherjee opined "No compromise should be made with terrorist organizations like Taliban".
At surface it seems that Swat is no business of India but underneath the surface there is a great deal of Indian interests there in Swat and FATA. It is also pointed out by DG ISPR that there is foreign intervention by hostile agencies in Swat but government was failed to highlight this involvement of foreign intelligence agencies. Many RAW operatives were captured or killed in region during operation Rah-e-Haq. FO in previous and current government utterly failed to highlight this sinister game mostly due to strong US intervention in Islamabads decision regarding WoT. It is time for both military and civilian government to act according to Pakistans own needs and plans instead of serving the US.
5- Hypocrisy, Psy-Ops & Misunderstandings against Swat Deal:
Most vocal opposition to his deal did not come from any top official of US or NATO but from some self-styled experts on Pakistans issues and WoT. Who are too inept to take historical struggle of Swatis for the Sharia law and Qazi courts as it was there till 1969. This is same media and these are same "experts" that had been terming the Afghan Taliban and TTP as same organization working with two different names in two countries. Western media which launched these Psy-ops is also spitting venom over Swat peace deal but failed to utter a word against the similar deal which is in the offing for Afghanistan by US.
Al Jazeera TV Website on 16th Feb reported,"The US and Afghanistan have signed a declaration containing measures aimed at reducing civilian deaths in the war against the Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters. The move was announced by Richard Holbrooke, the US envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, and Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, at a news conference in the capital Kabul on Sunday." report continues "The US and Afghanistan have signed a declaration which will initiate specific measures aimed at reducing civilian casualties in Afghanistan."
Again there is an irony the way US perceives things. It is confusing for many to understand why US is pursuing a policy of double standards in the region where one thing is legitimate for Afghanistan while the same is prohibited for Pakistan. At one place US is ready to workout ways to reduce the civilian causalities and on the other hand US is pushing Pakistan to carry on military operations in NWFP and FATA despite the fact that mainly locals are the ones suffering due to these operations much more than Al-Qaeda and Taliban.
US duplicity doesnt end here. Secretary of defense Robert Gate welcomed similar deal in Afghanistan,< "If there is a reconciliation, if insurgents are willing to put down their arms, if the reconciliation is essentially on the terms being offered by the government, then I think we would be very open to that. We have said all along that ultimately some sort of political reconciliation has to be part of the long-term solution in Afghanistan."
An example of media Psy-Ops can be seen in following peace of Press Trust of Indias report where Michael Kugelman, an expert at the Woodrow Wilson Center South Asia, agreed, calling the deal "a dramatic setback" in the American and Pakistani battle against radical Islam in South Asia.
He fears that the cease-fire will legitimize the implementation of Islamic law by the Taliban, who have been de-facto imposing their interpretation of sharia in the region for over a year. It will be really interesting to know Mr. Kugelmans view on above mentioned US-Afghan deal to cut civilian causalities. Why he is not commenting on Robert Gates comments about similar deal in Afghanistan with Afghan Taliban? Simply, because he is not told to raise these sort of questions in front of US administration. Then there are some misunderstandings among some Pakistani commentators who by the way are sitting miles away from NWFP and especially from Swat.
One can understand the motives of non-Pakistani commentators and Western media but Pakistani journalists and commentators must understand that by presenting a horrified picture of the deal just because of the word Islamic Sharia is not only confusing local people in the region but also making case of Pakistan more and more difficult in International community where already many active players are out there to destabilize Pakistan in order to get there own objectives served.
6- Foreign Interventions: A Different Angle
The main strength of militants is large amount of criminals being used for pumping money and abducting government officials. These criminals are real threats to any peace deal as they are working on the payroll of foreign agencies as revealed by DG ISPR in press conference after the peace deal.
Swats location is also very critical for Pakistan. It borders Bajaur Agency at one side and with Chitral region from other. It provides route to the Northern areas of Pakistan which connects it to China. There are known plans to cut Chinese access to Pakistan through ground by dismembering Pakistan by cutting NWFP province.
There are also reports that Israeli are also involved in covert trainings of these militants in Badakhshan province of Afghanistan as reported in Arab News on 24th Feb 2009, and sending these troops to Pakistans Northern areas like FATA and Swat for creating unrest.
Unlike Swat, situation in Bajaur (FATA) is much more under control of security forces after massive operations and TTP (Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan) was forced to announce a ceasefire in the area. The comments by local commander of TTP in Bajaur on recent ceasefire are very meaningful. As reported by Daily Times, "Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) on Monday announced a unilateral ceasefire and an end to resistance against security forces in Bajaur Agency. Speaking on their illegal FM radio, Bajaur TTP Chief Faqir Muhammad said Pakistan was their country and its defence was their obligation.
He said the Taliban did not want war against the government and the army, but some elements were fuelling differences between them, adding that the Taliban did not attack government installations and schools."
Isnt there a shocking change in tone of TTP local commander? But this is not the revelation part of the entire development the real surprise came from Swat where Taliban extend ceasefire. The move came shortly after a Taliban group in the nearby Bajaur region declared a unilateral ceasefire.
Now this development is fascinating because Badakhshan lies on Afghan side against Bajaur on Pakistani side and it is evident that supply route of these Mossad-backed militants has been seized. So tactically there is no need to fight at front battle field (Swat) if supply line from rare battle field (Bajaur) has been cut off.
There are media reports that many militants left the area as soon as peace deal was signed between NWFP government and TNSM. This is another indication that there were more than two stakeholders in battle fields.
According to Pakistan Observer, the speed with which NATO/US came out with penchant criticism confirms the widely held belief that the United States and some other Western countries were exploiting Afghan situation to destabilize Pakistan and their agenda is other than peace and stability of the region.
7. Impact of Deal on Pakistan Security
Impact of deal can be seen already there in Swat Valley. Life in Swat is coming back to normal rapidly with markets reopened and witnessing large crowd whereas the most pleasant and worth noticing change is the re-opening of many private schools in the areas whereas government ones will also follow the same.
Armed-militant gangs have vanished from roads, displaced population is returning back to homes. For a common Pakistani this peace deal makes a complete sense but ironically for some "strange" but obvious reasons Western world and US got irritated. How much world powers are annoyed by this daring deal, by a rather weak government in Islamabad? It can be judged by looking at initial reactions of major regional and world players who have stakes in the region.
This is another very misunderstood aspect of this deal that Pakistans security has been compromised. According to DG ISPR "political cost of the operation was too high." This one line is enough to conclude why this deal was made and why it is important to buy peace for Pakistan at this time. Military operation was not paying any dividends at all but also utterly counter productive due to following facts
1- Massive collateral damage in form of civilian lives and displacement of thousands of people was creating a deep rift between security forces and people.
2- Situation was fast turning into another 1971 due to operation as militants were using grief and anger of masses to have new recruits in their ranks just like Mukti Bahni did in then East Pakistan.
3- Non functional civilian and paramilitary forces in Swat and lack of public backing to operations were biggest problems to have constant control over areas which were cleared by Army. This was one of major reasons for halting operation and it was described by DG ISPR, "The army had already reduced operations in Swat because it lacked public backing, and was hampered by the breakdown of the local administration and ineffectiveness of the police in the face of the insurgency".
4- There was no political backing to operation by local political parties like ANP which has it s government in NWFP.
Pakistan will have to stand on its feet. Swat deal is good beginning in this direction as it will pave way for coming out of 8-year-old unnecessary pressure of Do More. Pakistan military and civilians had bled much more than those who actually carried out 9/11. If there was no terrorist in Pakistan before 9/11 or till that date then certainly there is none expect those who were sent in to destroy peace in mainland Pakistan. Since last 8 years Pakistan did what no other country will do ever on its own soil. Some of the decisions turned into real disaster as these were taken under pressure or dictated by Washington like accepting Damadola strike by CIA in 2006 and drop scene of Lal Masjid siege in 2007.
What happened after these is now part of brutal history of Pakistan. Pakistan cannot afford another blunder by pursuing military operations where as those who are asking for these operations themselves signed such deals (UK in Ireland) or are busy in signing these deals elsewhere (recent agreement between US and Afghanistan to minimize civilian causalities). So far stance of FO in Islamabad is just in accordance with Pakistans national interests in context of Swat deal. All parties must support government in this deal and must contribute towards its success. Only peace can erode the demon of terrorism.
Pakistan has all the rights to protect its citizen and territory by taking any route suited to its geopolitical situation, be it military, political or economical. Only and only people of Pakistan have the right to determine how to handle any internal problem. Swat deal is just a manifestation of this rule. Now if "civilized" world do respect democracy and peace this deal has both of these civilized norms of modern world so this peace deal needs to be respected and honored as it is by the representative of people of Pakistan.
It is time for the world to heed to what former US president Clinton said about peace:
The real differences around the world today are not between Jews and Arabs; Protestants and Catholics; Muslims, Croats, and Serbs The real differences are between those who embrace peace and those who would destroy it; between those who look to the future and those who cling to the past; between those who open their arms and those who are determined to clench their fists. ~William J. Clinton, 1997.
Farzana Shah is a Pakistani journalist, defense analyst based at Peshawar.
- Asian Tribune -
