Why Pakistan needs to turn back on militancy? By Jan Assakzai

(Frontier Post July 03)

The recent missing of Pakistan’s para-military personnel on a remote outpost in Mamond Agency is proof of how the militant landscape in the border region continues to give Pakistan a taste of its own medicine. The militants have already developed a siege of the people of FATA and brought fear and intimidation to the residents of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa while it causes tremendous damage to the country’s image around the world. It should be clear to both Pakistan and the United States by now that the fight against the complex mix of militant landscape in the border region has failed so far to accomplish its goals: dismantling of safe havens for al Qaeda and its allies. Pakistan has so far not succeeded in ending the Taliban havens in parts of FATA particularly in the North Waziristan, putting the TTP out of business. To Pakistan’s dismay, the TTP has succeeded in putting the spotlight on the militants in the south Punjab directing world attention by default to the country’s inconsistent and incoherent policies towards not only the militants but also its own citizen’s welfare and security. From outside, the situation in FATA may appear unsustainable for the TTP, but in fact the TTP and its supporters are content to wait it out particularly in the wake of Pakistan’s reluctance to wipe out militant havens in the North Waziristan. Indeed some cynics believe the current status quo is the best situation, the TTP have enjoyed it a long time. What is even more unsettling from the point of view of peace-loving people of FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is the fact that Pakistan’s top politicians like Nawaz Sharif and his brother Shahbaz Sharif, are aware of the implications of their damaging policies, even as they refuse to change them. But many observers now believe that unless Pakistan changes its policies vis-a-vis militancy in general, sooner or later the world will see those policies for what they are: duality of purpose towards militancy in the country. The recent incident of missing soldiers, and the reactions that followed in the media are confirming their fears and sooner, rather than later, Pakistan’s policies will be no longer acceptable to the world community, and a change in policy is crucial. The fight against militancy has been going on for nearly a year and strategically speaking, so far, Pakistan and its people have been the biggest losers. The reaction from the newspapers’ editorials and columns , and of the people to the attack on the Mamond outpost, shows not only the growing intolerance of Pakistan’s policies, but an urgent need for Pakistan to rethink its long-term goals. Is it to exist as a democracy, and in peace with its neighbours? If Islamabad’s goal is to be a permanent haven for the militants, then its future in the region is clear: More and more disgruntled youth from Pakistan and around the world will continue to join the lines of the militants against what they believe the pro-US policies of Pakistan and will continue to threaten the stability of the country, other neighbouring regimes and the international community at large. It is important to note that a significant number of the militants in border areas are young foreigners from almost every country in the region and beyond. Today they may come as individuals, tomorrow they will storm the border with jihadist movements ready to take over other parts of world. Then, it will not only be Pakistan facing them, then other countries will also have to face the consequences. The fact that “Islamic Emirate of Waziristan” will not only undermine the legitimacy of the claims of Islamabad’s whole-hearted fight against the militants, but will also lead the Muslim populations in China and India and Central Asia to draw inspiration from the border region. Counties like central Asian states and Russia, realising that FATA is the epicentre, has already felt the heat of militancy and started positioning to secure their interest in their interactions with the US which also include securing borders from the spillover of militancy in FATA (where there are known central Asian terrorists in hiding). Most importantly, China fears Uighur militants are operating in Pakistan-- as well as in Afghanistan and Central Asia-- and from there could potentially plot and launch attacks against China. While China and Pakistan are old allies, they do have their disagreements, including China’s worries over Pakistan not being able to control militant training and funding networks in its territory that could directly or indirectly assist Uighur militants with the intention of conducting attacks in China. If Pakistan wants to keep receiving support from China, especially financial, then it needs to demonstrate progress on matters of concern to China. So, is Pakistan ready to think seriously about long-term solutions, or does it intend to simply continue to pursue its “friendly” and “unfriendly” militant policy? Pakistan’s political and military leadership - with the help of the United States and the international community - must redefine their country’s long-term vision and goals with regard to militancy not only in the border region but also in the country at large. If Pakistan’s goal is to live in a democracy and in peace, then its path should be clear: Switch to zero tolerance policy on militancy, dismantle the havens, encourage anti-militant Lashkars and democratic forces, and let the people of FATA and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa build their own democracy. janassakzai200@gmail.com