fatman17
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2007
- Messages
- 32,563
- Reaction score
- 98
- Country
- Location
The binding force
Syed Jawaid Iqbal
Thursday, December 18, 2014
The bloodbath that took place at a school in Peshawar on December 16 is indicative of the lack of governance on the part of Pakistan’s civilian rulers. There were reports that the Peshawar administration had been warned of a major imminent terrorist incident but it seems to have been taken lightly by both the federal and provincial governments and no measures were in place to counter such an eventuality. Even when the tragedy occurred and the civilian government was running helter-skelter, it was the troops and commandos of the Pakistan Army who came to the fore and removed the dead and injured from the blast scene.
The cliché goes that you can change everything but you can’t change your neighbours. That is also true that as far as Pakistan is concerned. It has to contend not with one neighbour on its western border, Afghanistan, but almost the whole world. The international dynamics of global power-mongering require that the interests of all four big power brokers in the world today – the US, China, Russia and the EU – must converge in this part of the world for a way forward in terms of global peace. This tremendously increases Pakistan’s strategic importance and further magnifies the challenges faced by the county.
However, where there is challenge, there is opportunity as well. If handled judiciously, the very dangers that are currently knocking at Pakistan’s doors could be converted to its advantage and the nation could emerge as an important fulcrum in the global power game. It is a pity then that the country’s ‘democratically-elected’ rulers have allowed themselves to be embroiled in a continuous string of ‘non-issues’ – and are not paying much attention to all that is happening in the neighbourhood. This is borne by the fact that the country still does not think that the IS is an existential threat to Pakistan. The government needs to be extremely vigilant and take urgent pre-emptive measures to stop the militant group’s ingress in the country.
Pakistan still does not have a proper foreign minister or even a minister of state for foreign affairs. The prime minister has kept this portfolio himself but has no time to formulate foreign policy because he is so busy travelling. No wonder then that a mixture of confusion is evident within government circles regarding key foreign policy matters. In the end, the civilian government goes its own way and the army its own. In this backdrop, at least one good step the government has taken is that it has appointed Dr Maleeha Lodhi, as its permanent representative in the UN.
The various ways in which Pakistan is being ‘misgoverned’ is simply inexcusable. Our past record also shows that whenever the country’s economy has picked up, it is during military dispensations, which shows that civilian rulers have never had the vision or depth to truly appreciate the country’s key problems and deal with them accordingly. It is in these circumstances that the military has stepped forward and played its role.
When the US Secretary of State John Kerry invited Pakistan Army Chief General Raheel Sharif over to the State Department on Thanksgiving, it surely was not to chat about the hospitality he had received on the trip. The meeting is said to have been hastily arranged. It took place in a very cordial and friendly atmosphere and served to again support the view that the United States gives greater importance to the Pakistani military than the civilian rulers in matters of running the country.
This is also borne by the fact that Pakistan has only made real progress during the periods when it was ruled by the military. Ayub Khan may have had many faults but everyone agrees that Pakistan took some important key initiatives on the development front during his rule. Yahya can at least be credited with giving Pakistan its first and only fair elections. He was followed by Gen Ziaul Haq.
A game of musical chairs followed after the death of Gen Ziaul Haq and again set the country back. In fact the period when both Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif ruled has been described as a ‘lost decade.’ Then came Pervez Musharraf in 1999 and he again set about putting the country back on rails. His good work was again undone by the ‘democratic’ government of the PPP after the 2008 elections. When Nawaz Sharif won the elections in 2013 and took over prime ministership for the third time, the nation rejoiced on his arrival. Sadly, more than a year and a half later, Pakistan is still in the woods.
Having spent some 13 years in Afghanistan and concluding that there was not much for the US and Nato forces to do in the region anymore, the allied forces decided to call it a day. A reduced Isaf force will now stay in Afghanistan for another year to enable the new Afghan president to gain control. The US will not repeat the mistake it committed back in the 1980s after the Soviets quit the region and the Afghans were left to fend for themselves.
This time, however, the Americans are also depending a great deal on Pakistan to maintain peace on its western and northern borders. For its part, Pakistan has again started saying that its foreign policy would revert to seeking ‘strategic depth’ in the region by ensuring that no further military adventures are undertaken and that other regional nations, particularly India, do not take undue advantage of the vacuum caused by the Nato exit.
Here Pakistan will be called upon to play a key role and all this would depend on how the army handles affairs under Gen Raheel Sharif. The US knows that he is the right man for the job. He has grown up in a family with a proud military tradition. He knows the capabilities of the army as well as its limits in terms of military and civilian governance matters. He and his commanders have successfully led Operation Zarb-e-Azb in North Waziristan but it is good they have stayed out of political matters.
The army also closely monitors the ‘tyre and tube’ relationship between the incumbent Nawaz Sharif government and the so-called PPP opposition but leaves them to their own machinations since one is dependent on the other. If the ‘tyre’ of the Sharif government bursts, the ‘tube’ of the PPP opposition is bound to follow so they both protect each other. Where this leads the country is a question that continues to beg for answers. Meanwhile, the army has its external and internal roles cut out and continues to function as a binding force of national unity which commands equal respect both inside and outside the country.
The writer is the chairman of Moderates, a private sector think tank strengthening tolerance, interfaith harmony and democracy.
Email: chairman@moderates.com.pk
Syed Jawaid Iqbal
Thursday, December 18, 2014
The bloodbath that took place at a school in Peshawar on December 16 is indicative of the lack of governance on the part of Pakistan’s civilian rulers. There were reports that the Peshawar administration had been warned of a major imminent terrorist incident but it seems to have been taken lightly by both the federal and provincial governments and no measures were in place to counter such an eventuality. Even when the tragedy occurred and the civilian government was running helter-skelter, it was the troops and commandos of the Pakistan Army who came to the fore and removed the dead and injured from the blast scene.
The cliché goes that you can change everything but you can’t change your neighbours. That is also true that as far as Pakistan is concerned. It has to contend not with one neighbour on its western border, Afghanistan, but almost the whole world. The international dynamics of global power-mongering require that the interests of all four big power brokers in the world today – the US, China, Russia and the EU – must converge in this part of the world for a way forward in terms of global peace. This tremendously increases Pakistan’s strategic importance and further magnifies the challenges faced by the county.
However, where there is challenge, there is opportunity as well. If handled judiciously, the very dangers that are currently knocking at Pakistan’s doors could be converted to its advantage and the nation could emerge as an important fulcrum in the global power game. It is a pity then that the country’s ‘democratically-elected’ rulers have allowed themselves to be embroiled in a continuous string of ‘non-issues’ – and are not paying much attention to all that is happening in the neighbourhood. This is borne by the fact that the country still does not think that the IS is an existential threat to Pakistan. The government needs to be extremely vigilant and take urgent pre-emptive measures to stop the militant group’s ingress in the country.
Pakistan still does not have a proper foreign minister or even a minister of state for foreign affairs. The prime minister has kept this portfolio himself but has no time to formulate foreign policy because he is so busy travelling. No wonder then that a mixture of confusion is evident within government circles regarding key foreign policy matters. In the end, the civilian government goes its own way and the army its own. In this backdrop, at least one good step the government has taken is that it has appointed Dr Maleeha Lodhi, as its permanent representative in the UN.
The various ways in which Pakistan is being ‘misgoverned’ is simply inexcusable. Our past record also shows that whenever the country’s economy has picked up, it is during military dispensations, which shows that civilian rulers have never had the vision or depth to truly appreciate the country’s key problems and deal with them accordingly. It is in these circumstances that the military has stepped forward and played its role.
When the US Secretary of State John Kerry invited Pakistan Army Chief General Raheel Sharif over to the State Department on Thanksgiving, it surely was not to chat about the hospitality he had received on the trip. The meeting is said to have been hastily arranged. It took place in a very cordial and friendly atmosphere and served to again support the view that the United States gives greater importance to the Pakistani military than the civilian rulers in matters of running the country.
This is also borne by the fact that Pakistan has only made real progress during the periods when it was ruled by the military. Ayub Khan may have had many faults but everyone agrees that Pakistan took some important key initiatives on the development front during his rule. Yahya can at least be credited with giving Pakistan its first and only fair elections. He was followed by Gen Ziaul Haq.
A game of musical chairs followed after the death of Gen Ziaul Haq and again set the country back. In fact the period when both Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif ruled has been described as a ‘lost decade.’ Then came Pervez Musharraf in 1999 and he again set about putting the country back on rails. His good work was again undone by the ‘democratic’ government of the PPP after the 2008 elections. When Nawaz Sharif won the elections in 2013 and took over prime ministership for the third time, the nation rejoiced on his arrival. Sadly, more than a year and a half later, Pakistan is still in the woods.
Having spent some 13 years in Afghanistan and concluding that there was not much for the US and Nato forces to do in the region anymore, the allied forces decided to call it a day. A reduced Isaf force will now stay in Afghanistan for another year to enable the new Afghan president to gain control. The US will not repeat the mistake it committed back in the 1980s after the Soviets quit the region and the Afghans were left to fend for themselves.
This time, however, the Americans are also depending a great deal on Pakistan to maintain peace on its western and northern borders. For its part, Pakistan has again started saying that its foreign policy would revert to seeking ‘strategic depth’ in the region by ensuring that no further military adventures are undertaken and that other regional nations, particularly India, do not take undue advantage of the vacuum caused by the Nato exit.
Here Pakistan will be called upon to play a key role and all this would depend on how the army handles affairs under Gen Raheel Sharif. The US knows that he is the right man for the job. He has grown up in a family with a proud military tradition. He knows the capabilities of the army as well as its limits in terms of military and civilian governance matters. He and his commanders have successfully led Operation Zarb-e-Azb in North Waziristan but it is good they have stayed out of political matters.
The army also closely monitors the ‘tyre and tube’ relationship between the incumbent Nawaz Sharif government and the so-called PPP opposition but leaves them to their own machinations since one is dependent on the other. If the ‘tyre’ of the Sharif government bursts, the ‘tube’ of the PPP opposition is bound to follow so they both protect each other. Where this leads the country is a question that continues to beg for answers. Meanwhile, the army has its external and internal roles cut out and continues to function as a binding force of national unity which commands equal respect both inside and outside the country.
The writer is the chairman of Moderates, a private sector think tank strengthening tolerance, interfaith harmony and democracy.
Email: chairman@moderates.com.pk
