The talks finally start
A camel, they say, is a horse designed by a committee. But imagine the exponential increase in quirkiness that would be the result of committee-meets-committee. Yes, there would be no other way to do it, but the sheer abstraction of the situation is pretty groggy. Consider: there is little by way of government in the government committee and there is little Taliban in the Taliban committee. Sure, the latter’s members seem to enjoy their martial cousins’ trust, but they are not fighting men themselves. Other than Maulana Abdul Aziz of the Lal Masjid fame, whose profile in valour is pretty inspiring stuff. And even he announced he would be leaving the committee.
It might be argued these are just parleys whose members were chosen specifically because they were away from the centres of power on both sides. It would be their job to report back developments and wait for further instructions. The state of Pakistan as we know it might not stand a good chance if these individuals, indeed, were ones who were empowered to make decisions. Other than one of the two journalists on the government committee, all the members on either side are about as liberal as a couple of centuries ago.
Consider: there is little by way of government in the government committee and there is little Taliban in the Taliban committee.
Oliver Wendell Holmes famously said, “Between two groups of people who want to make inconsistent kinds of worlds, I see no remedy but force.” That pretty much summed it up. There is no reason to delve really deep into the forces at play when you conduct the test above. The Taliban and the citizens of Pakistan seek inconsistent kinds of worlds. We can guess the outcome of talks. Maulana Abdul Aziz had already declared the enforcement of the Sharia as a condition. Insider reports say that Major Amir, the former intelligence official in the government committee, rebuked the Maulana for going to the press with such a statement.
Even if, by miraculous powers of persuasion, the government veers the situation away from being a zero-sum game, would that entail handing over certain parts of the country to the militants? Where does the constitution stand on that one? And how would it represent the country, as a whole? Especially if the territory in question is to be used as a springboard for terrorist activities into other countries?
In the meantime, we can also expect a lot of confusion on the committee members’ end, especially regarding what has and has not been decided, with one committee member saying one thing, and another saying quite another.