EDITORIAL : THE DAWN, PAKISTAN

Nato supplies deal

AFTER seven months of obstinacy by both sides, and a year and a half of tensions between the US and Pakistan, the reopening of Nato supply routes holds in it the promise of a turning point in the relationship. Whether through a recognition of our increasing international isolation, a desire to be involved in the future of Afghanistan, or simply a realisation of the limited power Pakistan really had in these negotiations, the Pakistani civilian and military leaderships have finally demonstrated a willingness to compromise despite hurt sensitivities and political pressure at home. In return, the US needs to be extremely conscious of Pakistani sovereignty going forward, including when it comes to the unilateral use of drone attacks. If both sides grasp the opportunity this moment presents, it could help turn a dysfunctional relationship into one that can actually help solve the region’s security problems.

In fact, the most significant advantage Pakistan could derive from this moment is to start reversing the reputation it has developed of being an obstacle to peace in the region. The outcome of the talks has shown Pakistan did not gain much else from miscalculating the leverage it really had and then sticking stubbornly to that calculation. We have managed to obtain an apology — though some argue it wasn’t formal or direct enough — but not much else is different seven months later. There will be no transit fees, Pakistan had to say mistakes were made by both sides — a significant step back from the earlier position that the Americans attacked Pakistani soldiers deliberately — and the coalition support funds that will now come through represent overdue reimbursements for money already spent and will not solve the ongoing issues that come up every year with processing CSF payments. In the process, we have risked our reputation with the other Isaf countries as well. The lesson from all this should be that a concern for Pakistani sovereignty has to be balanced with the need to play a constructive, cooperative role in the region.

Aside from sorting out lingering issues with America, particularly counterterrorism cooperation, the task at home now is to rein in any violent right-wing reactions. The right was encouraged when public anger was needed as evidence of Pakistan’s political constraints, and by the same token it can probably be controlled now that a deal has been struck. But the risk with fostering intolerant forces is that they cannot always be managed. The Taliban, too, have said they will retaliate. It is now the security forces’ responsibility to make sure that truckers, and the communities that they pass through, remain safe.

KP leader’s murder

THE killing of the ANP’s district president, Khan Gul Bittani, in Tank on Tuesday is another grim indicator of the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan returning to its tactic of targeted killings of political and community leaders in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the tribal areas. Late June, the leader of an anti-Taliban laskhar and three of his associates were killed in the Bazid Khel area of Peshawar. Several other similar incidents have occurred in recent weeks. The tactic may be new — or rather a revived one — but the problem is old: the state’s inability to decisively tackle the Taliban threat as it morphs and ebbs and flows. Part of the problem is still the unacceptable level of problems in coordination between the intelligence agencies, security forces and local law-enforcement agencies. The killing of a tribal leader, local politician or leader of an anti-Taliban group on a road or in a bazaar is usually over in the blink of an eye — so what is needed is the intelligence and the resources to find the killers in their hideouts where they plan such attacks.

There is a wider problem though: the absence of a comprehensive strategy to deal with militancy and insurgents. The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government tried to take a longer view on dealing with militancy recently but the paper produced and discussed by the provincial government will require serious implementation — and implementation is where the best laid plans come unstuck. Even the best of intentions sometimes lead to unintended negative consequences. For example, the superior judiciary’s pursuit of missing persons is admirable and deserves the fullest support. But the intelligence and security agencies have been left with a dilemma in the murky world of militancy: continue with business-as-usual tactics and risk the court’s ire or avoid detaining suspected militants until the evidence is overwhelming, and in the process, risk letting the militants carry out more attacks. The solution ought to be that the federal and provincial governments work together to overhaul anti-terrorism laws but the paralysis at both those levels makes such an outcome very unlikely. So on Pakistan muddles through, except that the problems are growing.

Meeting on minorities

SOUTH Asia has had few opportunities to celebrate its diversity. Instead, what we have heard are voices of concern about the treatment of minorities in the region. At Tuesday’s Regional Conference on the Rights of Religious Minorities in South Asia, held in Islamabad, speakers deplored the treatment meted out to marginalised religious communities in South Asia. A speaker from India said the way Hindus treated Muslims in his country was linked to the Pakistani penchant for going after the minority Hindu community. He was happy to note that people belonging to all religions believed in Mahatma Gandhi. But unfortunately, little appears to have been said about how putting faith in the non-violent Mahatma is useful for the targeted. A Pakistani Hindu was of the view that Pakistan was as much his country as anybody else’s. Yet the reality could be gauged from his account of cases of unending persecution of Pakistan’s Hindus. In much the same vein, a Pakistani Christian talked of his community’s contribution to the country’s progress — but eventually it is the sad comparison the present offers with the past that puts the national journey in doubt. The Mahatmas, the rights activists and the natural instinct for tolerance notwithstanding, the picture is dismal overall.

One consensus coming out of the meeting was that all religions abhor violence. The special reference to Islam was unavoidable given how its name has been used for a violent cleansing exercise from Tirah to Timbuktu. That point inevitably leads to reflections about the protective and trendsetting roles of the state which, today, is quite inseparable from religion. “No non-Muslim ambassador or federal secretary … Hindus barred from the atomic energy commission…” — the state has, in fact, failed its minorities, and failed to set an example of tolerance for all its people.