Negotiating with the terrorists? Why and for what?
The frequency and the sheer brutality of the terrorist attacks seem to have increased since the induction of the negotiations-friendly governments at the centre and the KPK. Of particular concern is their apparent failure to stem the militant attacks and their lack of eagerness for formulating a comprehensive anti-terror policy and an operational mechanism any time soon.
The proposed meeting of the heads of the parliamentary groups in the national assembly scheduled for July 12 “to discuss and evolve a national strategy to curb militancy and address the overall law and order and security situation in the country” is like putting the problem on a routine trail, results from which may consume weeks, months, even years to materialise. Such a meeting, if at all, should have been held on a war-footing immediately after the incumbent government had assumed the mantle of power more than a month ago. Such multi-party conferences have been convened in the past which were never followed with any concrete steps. There is really nothing new that is likely to emerge from this gathering which the government is not already aware of in terms of the nature of the problem and the broad contours of any policy that needs to be pieced together to combat terror. The question is one of garnering political resolve to go forward without any fear. The carnage has gone on for almost a decade while we remain incessantly stuck in the basics. Pity!
The concept of negotiating with the terrorists is rooted in a fatal fallacy. In essence, it is agreeing to talk with a band of inhuman murderers who have no faith in democracy, constitution or a credible system of justice. They want all that to change irrevocably and the tool that they are employing to do so is terror. By ceding to the idea of sitting on the same table with this heinous band, the government is legitimising both their perception of the system of government and the murderous weapons they are using to topple that. Thereafter, agreeing to the rest of their evil demands will only be a matter of time.
As part of our rationale to start negotiating with them, we give the example of the Americans. We forget that the US is doing so for chartering a convenient and peaceful exit course from Afghanistan that suits their strategic interests. On the other hand, we are not leaving here. We are not negotiating an exit course. Instead of formulating an effective anti-terror strategy to confront and annihilate these militants, we are surrendering our writ before their murderous onslaught, thus encouraging them in their inhuman pursuits.
We fail to understand that negotiations conducted from a position of weakness would not yield durable results. By showing a lack of resolve, we would be strengthening these mercenary bands to dismantle our national edifice and replace it with their madrassa-driven obscurantist infatuation. The concept of negotiations would be meaningful only when we have weakened these venom-puking armed bandits substantially and have made them realise the futility of their cause. Otherwise, what would the negotiations be all about? How and when are we going to annul the constitution and frame a new one paving the way for the khalifa to take over? How to close down all educational institutions? How to banish women from the mainstream of life and confine them to the four walls of the house never to see the light of the day? Make going to a religious seminary mandatory for all and sundry? Introduce barbaric punishments administered in the most brutal manner to those who challenge their inhuman edicts? Ostracise people belonging to all other religions and impose the sharia of a select few? What are we going to talk about?
The terrorists will gain most from the divisions within our ranks – and these are aplenty! First a legislator in the national assembly demanded an honourable release of the murderer Qadri – the one who assassinated Salman Taseer. As far as my information goes, he has so far not been given a show-cause notice to explain his stance, nor has his party membership been suspended. There was not even a protest from any other member of the assembly. Add to that the statement of another legislator in the KPK assembly who tried to rationalise the suicide attack in Peshawar that had killed more than thirty people. Again, he seems to have escaped censure from his party and from his colleagues in the assembly. These are just two examples of people who have come forth with their views. There may be a host of such zealots sitting in the legislatures waiting for their turn to pounce on the measly remnants for the evolution of a civilised society that may still remain for the hapless people of this country.
The militancy that visits us practically every living day of our life has also cultivated the syndrome of violence in the country. There is a dire need to take urgent practical steps to curb that and stop us from degenerating into tiny fiefdoms controlled by criminal mafias. One needs to re-visit the Supreme Court (SC) adjudication on the situation in Karachi and the presence of militant wings in political parties which need to be disbanded. In more than one year since the SC judgement, no step has been taken in that direction. The extortionist mafias continue with their killing rampage.
Karachi is not the only victim of this violence syndrome. It has become a norm in the country where people are becoming increasingly inclined to following their own writ in matters of personal feuds and in issues where they feel aggrieved by the government, its functionaries or its institutions. This is so because of inaccessibility of justice and lack of accountability of those who are responsible for grave transgressions. A remedial process needs to be initiated. The process must begin from the top – from the leadership that has manipulated and ravaged the resources of the country for their personal advancement and the promotion of their petty interests. They need to be made an example of. They should be forced to pay back to the state what they have taken from it through use of dishonest means. Practically all political leaders have been guilty of this crime at one time or the other. This is where the process of national recovery can and should begin.
The writer is a political analyst. He can be reached at [email protected]
