Nonsensical and all-too-apparent a ploy
Never before in our history has such a hoax – calling for the formulation of a ‘national consensus’ to defend against a bloodthirsty enemy – been played so cynically as the one being currently played on the altar of the people’s lives and the country’s existence. This hoax is of truly Armageddonion proportions, and at least to tens of thousands of those whose body and flesh were blown to bits by this primordial Taliban/Jihadi enemy, it must have felt revolting.
The gallant chief of a brave army, in an epiphany of democratic upsurge, calls for the equally fearless civilian government to forge a ‘national consensus’ to fight the enemy. The Lion-spirited chief of the government quickly passes the buck to the valorous politicians for convening an APC for forging, what else, but a ‘national consensus’.
The fundamental question: National consensus for what? Is it for preventing our citizens – men, women and children of Pakistan – from being killed, blown to pieces, maimed, their properties, businesses and livelihood from being destroyed? Is it for protecting the writ, the rule of law, the Constitution from being trashed? Is it for having to fight in order to defend our territory, sovereignty and indeed the very existence of our country?
If so, do we really need a national consensus? Or suppose if it is not forthcoming, then would it mean that the army will not fight and will not defend our people and our country because there’s no consensus?
Seeking national consensus on public issues implies debate, discussion and choice. Is the question of protecting the lives and properties of citizens against a relentless enemy a matter of debate and discussion? Is the issue of fighting to defend the existence of the country and the nation, a question of yes or no choice? Can anyone in our country who is patriotic, who believes in Pakistan, who values life and who wishes to live freely and safely, be opposed to such noble goals. Do we need a national referendum or a parliamentary vote to tell us so?
The national consensus to fight an enemy for defending our country and our people was established the day the Pakistan armed forces and the federal and provincial governments were formed, the day the army, air force, navy chiefs and officers in all three armed forces took oath, the day the head of our state and chief executive took their oaths of office.
Isn’t it strange that no such consensus was called for when the army on its own plunged into the 1948, 1965, 1971 wars and the Balochistan (several times over since 1948), Kargil, the FATA operations? Why now?
So let’s brush aside this nonsensical and all-too-apparent ploy of first obtaining a national consensus to combat and defend against this Taliban/Jihadi enemy and go to the core behind this evasiveness by the army and its civilian accomplices. The bottom line: the establishment is perhaps refusing to fight this enemy on account of some erroneous conclusions.
Surely the military brass must have conducted much internal analysis to develop various options and courses of action on how to deal with this enemy, which it now concedes an existential threat to the country.
Firstly, the military might have concluded that in this deadly assault on the nation, time is on their side, that the Talban/Jihadi enemy will eventually peter out, will run out of suicide bombers, bombing material, arms and money.
This however flies in the face of facts. The enemy appears well stocked with adequate weaponry and motivated manpower. We must not overlook that its propaganda machinery, both online and door-to-door networking, is formidable in attracting support and resources to its cause and it shows no signs of cooling down.
Secondly, the military might think that a full-scale war against this enemy would spill over into the cities and mainland, triggering a nationwide civil war that would engulf the whole country.
This may be true to some extent, but in my opinion, the army is underestimating the resilience and patriotism of most of our people whether in urban or rural areas, and overestimating the popular appeal and operational strength of the militants.
Thirdly, it’s possible that the military baulks at undertaking a full-blown offensive due substantial presence of the Taliban Islamist sympathisers amongst its own ranks. Even if it were true, this is an internal matter for it to resolve. Why should the nation be left undefended because of the army’s failure to produce a unified, efficient fighting force in nearly seven decades despite devouring the best of national resources?
Fourthly, the military might be inclined towards waiting for the Americans to depart from Afghanistan before decisive action against the Taliban. The Afghan Taliban then would be able to impose their writ in the weakened Afghanistan and establish a foothold there. To the army, the separated and thus weakened Pakistani Taliban and Jihadis would be easier to tackle and defeat. The problem with this strategy: it is based on assumptions that might not materialise.
Fifthly, there seems to be subliminal feeling in the establishment that it would be more prudent to preserve the army’s and country’s limited resources for a war against the country’s bigger enemy than to dissipate them in fighting a smaller enemy that might be containable. Again the underlying presumption that the country would be able to survive and remain intact until then is dubious at best. In my humble analysis, military’s strategy in opting, despite all its power and resources, against wholeheartedly fighting this enemy has been a huge mistake – militarily, economically and politically.
Militarily speaking, Taliban is an effective fighting force, but only in the field of hit and run warfare. In regular warfare it is very weak, bereft of required tools of modern conventional warfare, such as trained troops, air power, etc.
For instance, the Pakistan army in battle formation was easily able to overrun and defeat the Taliban in Swat and in the South Waziristan. A few hundred US Special Forces troops along with some motley tribesmen of the Northern Alliance were able to rout the Taliban from power in Afghanistan in under a month.
About 80 per cent of attacks by Taliban involve the cowardly, inhuman use of brainwashed underage suicide bombers, civilian shields and hidden IED’s, and if you take away these tactics, along with their safe sanctuaries in the FATA, they will have nothing significant left to sustain their campaign.
Our army made a huge mistake in choosing to play the enemy’s game: in tit for tat, piecemeal operations rather than launching a full-scale conventional war, the weak point of this enemy. Sri Lanka would still be fighting a blood sapping guerrilla war with the Tamil terrorists if it hadn’t gone for an all-out offensive.
The Pakistan government estimates that it has suffered an economic loss of about $ 60 billion in 10 years at the hands of this self-bred enemy. For a fraction of this, a decisive conventional offensive could have been undertaken to crush this enemy.
Apart from the tens of thousands of our citizens and soldiers killed, economically and politically the country has taken a beating in this war. It has plummeted to the bottom of failed or failing states, like Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan etc, in the UN socio-human development index, a far cry when it was viewed as a future star in Asia.
Ever since the onslaught of terror attacks by the Taliban began the national economy has been inexorably collapsing, kept barley alive by an infusion of foreign remittances, the US aid and the IMF loans. It cannot even begin to revive as long as the Taliban are allowed to flourish.
The country’s international image lies in tatters, looked down upon as a dangerous, anti-modern, paranoid, psychotic place with whom few countries would venture to do business. During the last decade the world has watched in horror as this enemy has inflicted one horrendous attack after another.
Even if the establishment contends that it has stopped the Taliban advance, it’s no victory. A stalemate in this battlefield would be akin to defeat, because the country’s downward slide would continue unabated. Nothing short of a total elimination and subjugation of this enemy would be seen as victory, toward picking up the pieces – toward sanity, rebuilding and growth.
As long as the people are unable to breathe freely, as long as the enemy stalks the land unvanquished, the country cannot hope to rise up. Our future is sealed until the nation can deliver the hammer-blow to the Taliban. The vise that grips our country with blood-soaked fingers must first be broken and shattered before we can even dream of a destiny with a bright future.
The writer is a US-based corporate attorney, author, independent analyst and writer.
Great , clear analysis by the author. As he correctly says that this Taliban/Jihadi enemy has inflicted tremendous damage to the country in all spheres of life, economically and politically included. This whole business of calling for a national consensus is a diversion and a trick by the powers that be to delay and avoid facing the enemy. Either we fight them or we will continue to loose, its as simple as that. Country has no other choice. The only talk with this enemy is to give then an ultimatum to surrender their weapons. If we talk we will have to agree with their demands.
I fully agree walling for with the learned author, Mr Kamal, in his excellent article this calling for a consensus is a hoax, a delaying tactic, and that the establishment must confront this bloody enemy from within. However, in my opinion, we must the prepare the nation and the civilians before we take this necessary step. And I think we can be prepared to face any retaliation by Talibans, its not too difficult a task. As they say, where there is a will there is a way. Pakistan can easily defeat them with its huge, well armed armed forces. Once this enemy is crushed then we can start to really rebuild our country. If not it will remain paralyzed as the writer rightly states and we can make no progress at all. Very well said by the author. Thanks PT.
Tausif Kamal is right on the dot. Excellent piece.Defending the country doesn't need a nationwide consensus. Suppose no consensus emerges, then would it mean that we don't defend our country from this self-confessed enemy? How ridiculous would that be, just think about. it.
.
Of course it is a hoax …
But that's the most convenient way to play against the "angry borther's" elder …
.
@Dr Imran; Yes before we give the enemy an ultimatum to lay down their weapons and then talk,, the armed forces and the people must be fully prepared to strike them with full force if they refuse to do so. If we are not ready and prepared to attack, then the Taliban will no take our ultimatum seriously, so everything should be ready before we communicate with them. Wonderful style of writing by the author. Great job…
Thank you Mr. Kamal for exposing this big fraud. For sure the Taliban are no match for the Pakistani Army. Either the Army has taken our politicians for a ride or the PM is a party to this scheme as it suits him also.
'The country’s international image lies in tatters, looked down upon as a dangerous, anti-modern, paranoid, psychotic place with whom few countries would venture to do business.'
That is not just because of the Taliban. That is because it has so many sympathisers in the country. And that is why concensus is needed because the sympathisers do not want military action. People in more normal societies find it impossible to understand why and how there should be people who sympathise with elements that are tearing their own country apart. And they are not just a small minority; the overwhelming majority in the National Assembly today want to talk to these killers. That is Pakistan's dilemma and that is why it is seen everywhere as a society that is, as Mr Kamal rightly says, anti-modern and psychotic.
Wonderful! That is exactly what we need to do.
The tricky part is how to separate those needed for Jihad in Kashmir from the ones who have become our enemy.
Forget about Jihad in Kashmir. We have tried it before and failed miserably. Let us put our house in order first before we chase a pie in the sky.
"A stalemate in this battlefield would be akin to defeat, because the country’s downward slide would continue unabated ." Exactly right, very well put by Kamal Saheb…either we fight or surrender and I don't think the people will choose the latter.
Agree, bad analysis by our establishment, for which we have paid and are still paying a very heavy price. the latest Index of Failed States of the world by Foreign Policy, Pakistan is ranked No. 15 alongside Somalia, Congo, Sudan etc thanks to terrorism and Jihadism and religious extremism really shame on us and our rulers, civil and military…pay heed to this worthy opinion.
Agree. Is it asking too much for just one victory by our army, so far they have been defeated in all the wars
@Mirza Aslam Beg. Sirji Can an army of 700,000 defeat a force of 17000? If it can then show it.Good , sharp, logical write up.
Our country has suffered a lot during the last 10 years or so, ever since the Taliban and Jihadis started their attacks or war against us, killing about 50,000 Pakistani civilians and soldiers, and destroying the property and economy of the country. These are facts which no one can deny. Why has the establishment failed to defend us, is the question they must answer it and be accountable. Its their failed policies and failure of duty. I don't know when and if the country will recover from them. Our cowardly, religiously duped, short sighted people have also to be blamed.Enjoyed reading this,
@Ayesha, thanks for pointing out that our country has been reduced to the bottom of failed states because of murders, bombings, mayhem, kidnappings , robberies with the state cannot stop or confront. A whole generation is lost. Where are the defenders of the country. Consensus for what? as the writer rightly asks. Shame on us.
Very, very true Sir. but the people are helpless, and defenseless, as Ghalib said,
Ghalib e khasta ke beghair, kaun se kaan bund hein'
Rooye zaar,zaar kyoun, keejeay hai, hai kyoun…
i don,t agree. We have chosen to become one.
in seeking consensus one appoints a group of indviduals who individually cannot make a decision and see to that collectively no body makes one! We elected a Govt. and gave it a mandate with muscle to protect and perserve the security of the people who elected it. What is need for a consensus? Security is paramount to the develoment of a country. It is time to walk the talk. Let us be Pakistan centric rather than India or Afghanistan centric. Let us stop this circus of consensus composed of poor minds.
Comments are closed.