By Munir Akram
Pakistan’s diplomatic
initiatives with Afghanistan and India have both collapsed.
Afghanistan’s President
Ghani and Pakistan’s prime minister and army chief were sincere in desiring
normalisation. The implicit bargain was that Pakistan would deliver the Afghan
Taliban to the negotiating table while Afghanistan would act against
Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) leaders and militants hiding in Afghan
territory. Success would have implied: enhanced security within Pakistan from
TTP-engineered terrorism and attacks by the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), and
an end to Indian pressure on Pakistan on the western front; the re-emergence of
the Afghan Taliban as a political force in Kabul; and the complete withdrawal
of foreign forces from Afghanistan.
It was evident from the
outset that India and hostile elements in Afghanistan would work overtime to
subvert this peace initiative. They appear to have succeeded.
The
debacle on the west is intimately related to the disturbing developments in the
east.
The Islamabad-Kabul
understanding was based on over-optimistic expectations on both sides. Ghani’s
ability to act against the TTP and the BLA was constrained by his lack of
control of the Afghan security establishment, especially the National
Directorate of Security (NDS) — Afghanistan’s intelligence agency — led by a
Karzai holdover. Kabul proved unable (or unwilling) to kill, capture or expel
Mullah Fazlullah and other TTP elements holed up in Afghanistan.
Similarly, Pakistan
promised too much in offering to bring the Afghan Taliban to the negotiating
table. To do so, Islamabad was obliged to revive or reveal its contacts with
them. If the Kabul-Taliban talks had succeeded, few would have objected to the
presence of Afghan Taliban leaders in Pakistan. Unfortunately, the revelation
of Mullah Omar’s demise by the NDS upended the talks. (Pakistan’s failure was
in either not knowing of Mullah Omar’s death or not preventing the NDS from
gaining knowledge of this while senior Taliban commanders remained unaware.)
As no doubt anticipated by
the NDS and its Indian patrons, a leadership struggle ensued between the
‘fight’ and the ‘fight and talk’ factions within the Taliban. To salvage the
talks, Pakistan’s agencies attempted to hastily gather the Taliban leaders to
select Omar’s deputy as the new Amirul Momineen, further exposing the
relationship. But the Taliban’s fighting faction, freed of Mullah Omar’s ghost
edicts supporting talks, and fearful of losing ground to the self-styled
‘Islamic State’ (IS), escalated its attacks within Afghanistan, particularly
against targets in Kabul.
Under pressure to avoid
blame for the security failures in Kabul, and aware that Islamabad was no
longer able to deliver the Taliban to the negotiating table, President Ghani
took the easy route of placing all the blame on Pakistan. His Aug 10 statement
was indistinguishable from Karzai’s familiar diatribes against Pakistan. Chief
Executive Abdullah and other factions joined him in whipping up the
anti-Pakistan animus. The ‘gathering’ of Taliban leaders to choose Mullah
Mansour as Omar’s successor was used as a basis to extrapolate that Pakistan
maintained Taliban sanctuaries and bomb-making factories, and connived in the
Taliban attacks. Ghani declared that he did not want Pakistan to bring the
Taliban to the table but to “prosecute” them.
Kabul was the scene of
orchestrated demonstrations against Pakistan, the burning of Pakistan’s
national flag, calls for boycott of trade with and even ‘jihad’ against
Pakistan. A demand was made that an Afghan delegation be immediately received
by Pakistan’s prime minister and army chief.
Instead of protesting
Kabul’s unsubstantiated charges and demanding an apology for the desecration of
Pakistan’s national flag, Pakistan’s leadership meekly received the angry
Afghan delegation to clear the “misunderstanding” ( to quote Sartaj Aziz).
Pakistan will be able to
evoke respect for its national interests only if it respects its own dignity
and honour. Pakistan should demand an apology from Kabul for the desecration of
its national flag and a retraction of the wild accusations voiced by Ghani and
other Afghan leaders. If they desire a trade boycott, Pakistan should fulfil
their wish and halt all trans-shipment and transit until they reverse their
hostility.
At the strategic level too,
there is need for a careful policy review to deal with an Afghanistan that is
likely to be embroiled in chaos and conflict for some time. Pakistan should:
first, secure its border against TTP and BLA infiltration from Afghan
territory; second, devise strategies to eliminate their safe havens in
Afghanistan; third, promote coherence among the Afghan Taliban; and, fourth,
work with China, Russia, the US, Iran and Saudi Arabia to resume the
Kabul-Taliban talks and insulate Afghanistan from infiltration by the IS.
The debacle on the west is
intimately related to the disturbing developments in the east. Apart from working
to scuttle a Pakistan-Afghan rapprochement, India has rejected Pakistan’s
endeavours to resume the ‘composite dialogue’ and exerted direct pressure on
Pakistan to keep it on the diplomatic and military defensive — thus the Line of
Control (LoC) violations, threatening statements and the hostile media and
diplomatic campaigns.
Instead of a muscular
response, Pakistan has virtually endorsed the Indian premises for normalisation
in the Ufa statement by restricting the Pakistan-India talks to terrorism, evoking
public denunciation within the country and disappointment from Kashmiri
leaders.
The Gurdaspur incident, on
the eve of the scheduled terrorism talks, is no accident. Indian agencies are
past masters at stage-managing such events to suit their purpose. The Indian
media has been unleashed to pin blame for this incident also on Pakistan. Yet,
Pakistan’s national security adviser plans to walk blithely into this Indian
entrapment in New Delhi next week.
The right response would be
to: call off this ill-conceived exchange; respond effectively to the Indian
media onslaught by projecting India’s support for the TTP and BLA and its
historic role as a state sponsor of terrorism; protest formally to the UNMOGIP
and the Security Council about India’s LoC violations; and raise India’s human
rights violations in occupied Kashmir at the Human Rights Council and other
international forums.
Instead of submitting to
Modi’s agenda, Pakistan should remind the world that: Kashmir remains a nuclear
flashpoint and must be addressed, bilaterally or multilaterally; that India’s
arms build-up will oblige Pakistan to respond appropriately; and that the
danger of a disastrous conflict can be avoided only through a comprehensive
dialogue encompassing Kashmir and reciprocal arms control between Pakistan and
India.
No comments:
Post a Comment