The Institute of Strategic Studies Islamabad (ISSI) on Thursday organised a public talk under its Islamabad Debate Series 2012 titled “Given its domestic vulnerabilities, Pakistan has no option but to support and participate in the US-led war on terror in Afghanistan”. The eminent speakers in the debate included former foreign minister Inam-ul-Haque who spoke in the favour of proposition while former ambassador to the United States Dr Maleeha Lodhi pledged to speak against the motion.
The ISSI director general welcomed the distinguished speakers and said such a debate was a need for new and far-reaching standpoints on issues of foreign and strategic policies. The debate began with Inam-ul-Haque’s dialogue in the favour of proposition. He put across some reservations regarding assumptions of the topic and the phraseology employed. He said foreign policy formation required a delicate balancing through available options through dispassionate discussion and analysis. “I am not comfortable with the particular language of the proposition”, he showed his reservation.
He further said to a great extent the United States had given up on the phrase ‘war on terror’ in favour of less emotive language – “overseas counterinsurgency operations”. He said indispensable clause for rational debate was to get rid of preconceived notions, and to get rid of a belief of conspiracy theories.
He said it was necessary to analyse that how the world looks at Pakistan because Pakistan was currently the third most dangerous country in the world, the third worst country regarding women’s rights and the worst country as far as protection to journalist community was concerned. It is at 12 in the index of dysfunctional states which includes uneven development, human flight, a faltering economy, huge fiscal deficits, high poverty level, negative levels of trade, human rights violations, poor governance, no rule of law and external intervention, he added.
He argued that internally Pakistan was in a mess. Against this backdrop, it is important to examine Pakistan’s affairs and relations with the United States. Today the US is a dominating state which, according to many, has also an arrogant global hegemony. It has the largest economy and thousands of military bases around the globe and has quite dominant voices in powerful international organisations, the former minister said. He said the US had always been an imperialist power. She has also demonstrated a strange inclination to freedom of ideals through mass killings of peoples, destruction of infrastructure through bombing, resorting to outright falsehoods and war crimes before moving on to save other countries.
Dr Lodhi said Pakistan could address its domestic vulnerabilities through foreign and internal policies. She said Pakistan had suggested the US to find peaceful solutions and not to punish its citizens by sending them to Afghanistan. If you have to intervene, it should be short-lived and surgical operation, it had suggested.
She said Islamabad had advised Washington to distinguish between Taliban and Al-qaida which had attacked the US. Furthermore, she said the debate should take place within this wider geopolitical evaluation, and that the relationship with the United States should not be isolated from the wider situation.
Lodhi said drone attacks were unacceptable to the government and the people of Pakistan. “Can Pakistan influence the nascent fragile peace process is a question we cannot answer at the moment but we must engage in peace process firmly and consistently. Islamabad must accelerate the peace process. At the end of kinetic operation in Afghanistan, an end to the war is in the interest of Pakistan,” she added.
She said the war as a response to terrorism had far-reaching consequences and made enemies which did not exist and needlessly killed many in Pakistan.
Dr Maleeha said: “We must read the existing environment analytically before formulating policies accordingly. Saying foreign policy has no options is not a foreign policy.” She said our intention to find a negotiated settlement of Afghanistan was now converging with the US and we must work on it. Our prime motive is to have stability in the region and Pakistan should play its role and extend help to Afghanistan in this regard, she averred.
The debate, she affirmed, should not be cast in either black or white, or be seen primarily through a binary prism. The danger of framing the question in this way, she said, was that one might end up making false choices. However, Pakistan is now in the post 9/11 decade and now even that phrase has been retired from official western lexicon. Western policies are gradually turning away from war and large-scale military interventions. This shift is reflective of the experiences of the past decade, she added. In the question-answer session, Maleeha Lodhi said one would find very few supporters of the US long-term interventions. Even there was no support of drone attacks in America, she argued. She said prolonged US stay in Afghanistan would promote extremism and instability in Pakistan and we should oppose it in every case.
If you want otherwise, she exhorted, convince the people here, a task which the Islamabad government could not accomplish. She said Pakistan successfully adopted made its nuclear policy in the face of numerous sanctions in the past and it can do it now as well, she added. She said opposed to create false expectations for the other country which might think we are double-gaming. Back a policy if there is a solid consensus at home, she said.
Answering a question, Maleeha said they did not play double game, and if anyone said so, let it be.
While answering a question, Inam-ul-Haq said they could hold negotiations on peace with President Karzai.
Shafqat Kakakhel, former UNEP deputy head, said Islamabad also had non-representative governments (Zia and Musharraf), and decided Afghan policies in 1979 and 2002 against the interests of Pakistan.
‘US intervention must be opposed’
