The announcement of holding the All Parties Conference (APC) was followed by a spate of speculation as to its motives and possible outcome. There was a general consensus that nothing substantial should be expected as, primarily, the congregation was meant to be an exercise in semantics and no critical policy shift was planned.
And how could it be any different? For a country to be able to formulate policies in conformity with its security and strategic considerations, the most essential pre-requisite would be a self-respecting and incorruptible leadership that would be unbending in the face of any pressure found incongruent with its national priorities. But, for a country to formulate policies that are always in conflict with its inherent security considerations, it needs a National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO). That’s how Pakistan has been rendered perpetually subservient to foreign (read US) diktat.
For such a leadership, it is essential that, every now and then, it conducts self-serving exercises – statements and conferences included. When under pressure, it immediately resorts to getting a group of people under one roof to play the card of national unity in the face of any purported aggression. Thereafter, things return to ‘normalcy’.
The problem that the incumbent government is now confronted with is a cardinal shift in the thinking and operational approach of the security establishment. This change had been taking shape for long, but the brazen US operation at Abbottabad not only expedited its formulation, but also accentuated its surge. That is the reason why the US has been specifically attacking the Pakistan military and the ISI and has even blamed them for being ‘complicit’ with the extremists and the ISI its ‘veritable arm’ (the Haqqani network) for launching attacks in Afghanistan. Coming from a supposed ‘ally’, it is not only unacceptable behaviour, but contains inimical portents for the security of the country. Under pressure from the military establishment to change course, the government needed an injection of courage. That’s why the APC and such other shows that may be planned in the future.
The other question that plagues the mind relates to the fate of any resolution that may be passed by the APC: will this also go by the way of the two resolutions passed earlier? And if even a resolution adopted unanimously by the parliament was not implemented, what is the guarantee that this would meet any different fate?
But, is that what the military establishment would like at this critical stage? In the face of the nature and scope of the US threat, that does not appear to be the case. It must be gauged in the backdrop of the impending US retreat from Afghanistan which requires a scapegoat to pin the blame on. The military and the ISI appear to be the most obvious targets. By doing so, the US would not only find an excuse for its immediate setback, but would further promote its threatening posturing with regard to Pakistani nukes.
For one thing, the gathering did signify national unity in meeting the growing challenge the US has so crudely outlined. On a different front, it was a reiteration of national support for the armed forces and the actions that they would take to secure Pakistan’s frontiers. But, more significantly, it called for the initiation of dialogue for bringing peace: “Pakistan must initiate dialogue with a view to negotiating peace with our own people in the tribal areas and a proper mechanism for this be put in place”. At another point, the resolution said: “The APC recognised that there has to be a new direction and policy with a focus on peace and reconciliation. ‘Give peace a chance’ must be the guiding principle henceforth”.
For years, Pakistan has been at war with itself and its own people, this being the result of an ill-conceived policy to push it into the US-led offensive in the neighbouring Afghanistan. While it may have brought some ‘legitimacy’ to the rule of the former dictator, it was the beginning of a harrowing period for Pakistan that has led to compromising its sovereignty considerations, its security paradigm and internal peace. It pitted Pakistanis against Pakistanis and, even more importantly, it pushed Pakistan’s armed forces to initiate a war that has no end in sight. In the process, Pakistan lost over 40,000 of its sons and daughters, its economy incurred a loss of US$ 7 billion and peace prospects across its expanse have been vitiated. It rendered its hitherto secure Western border volatile and brought untold misery and pain to its people.
The resolve to “initiate dialogue with a view to negotiating peace with our own people…” sounds heartening, but what are the guarantees that this would actually be done? The parliamentary committee that will be constituted to oversee the implementation of the APC Resolution and report back on a monthly basis has a tough task to handle particularly in the backdrop of two earlier resolutions having gone the way they did. The fact that the responsibility for having the previous resolutions implemented has also been assigned to this committee makes little sense as their non-implementation reflects a lack of resolve which has persistently dogged the working of the incumbent administration and, with the NRO whip there, there appears little likelihood of a change coming through.
Therein ends another well-orchestrated exercise rich in polemical reverberations and expression of intentions to do as outlined. At a different level, the Declaration is a testament to what Imran Khan has been advocating all along: give peace a chance. But, will he rest with just a Resolution having been passed?
The writer is a political analyst and a member of the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf. He can be reached at raoofhasan@hotmail.com