Security fortified or compromised?
Security concerns remain at the forefront of Pakistan’s policy agenda. Whether it is the internal or external security issues, the state authority is continuously grappling with the task at various levels. In a bid to remove all types of security risks in the capital, the Islamabad High Court recently sanctioned the clearing of slum settlements.
A look at the CDA operation against the slum dwellers reveals that the eviction plan is driven by the need for security measures to be ensured in the federal capital. These slums are seen as a source of potential risk for the peace and security owing to the fact that most of these people are not the local citizens but unregistered and unidentified immigrants who have outstayed their welcome and have turned into a menace by refusing to leave their semi permanent abodes built on someone else’s land. Hence not only could they serve as a likely place of refuge for miscreants and criminals but can also be a potential breeding ground for the population with the same attributes. In such a scenario, they don’t leave any other option to the authorities but that they be razed and removed forcefully so that peace and security could be maintained.
The operation might be justified on the legal grounds but the way the plan is being carried out raises serious questions: Will it actually help achieve the targeted goal or will it just be another cosmetic measure aiming at restoring the pristine look of the capital? What significant points were overlooked by the authorities? How is the state going to deal with the possibility of the displaced poor population becoming a pawn in the hands of terrorists? Lastly, could this operation back fire and further aggravate the security situation?
Lack of proper planning can inadvertently impact the security environment. The policy implementation should always be preceded by a process of securitisation i.e., to create awareness about the existence, nature and intensity of a particular threat. Since no such measures were taken, the general public was left wondering as to why the poor residents living in deplorable condition were being uprooted. The action meant for the protection of larger population only served to antagonise them against the authorities. Unfortunately this nontraditional “social” dimension of security is usually overlooked by the authorities in Pakistan who fail to recognize the potential of its negative ramifications. Such non kinetic security challenges could be dealt with if the government makes efforts to sensitize the masses through a step by step process of identification of risks, its reinforcement and securitization through the speech act.
A large number of Pakistani citizens belonging to Christian minority class also reside in these slums. The state has a responsibility to provide them with alternative shelter. But no resettlement plan has been announced. This problem could be addressed if the government and the private sector come together for the quick and early relocation of the displaced citizens. The state is already finding it hard to deal with the ethnic and sectarian problems and cannot afford to further alienate the minorities.
Media’s responsible role is also very important in such cases. It should not just be “covering” the story but should also convey the right message through to the people. Showing one side of the picture without laying out the facts could be rather damaging for the general health of the society. The people saw on their television sets how big bulldozers went about demolishing dozens of one-room mud and thatched houses in sector I-11. Tear gas was used and the unarmed protestors were chased after by the baton wielding police. They were beaten, dragged and arrested, while the women were left crying and wailing. Such had been the media projection, which only led to invoking sympathies in favor of squatter settlers.
No doubt these immigrants and illegal settlers have been an economic and demographic burden and an eye sore for an otherwise immaculate landscape of the capital, but after having them displaced they are now even more dependent on others for shelter, food and water, hence a bigger burden for the government to deal with.
Also previously the suspected potential risk elements were present at one place, now they are more dispersed and much harder to manage and locate.
There is also a huge possibility that the extremist organisations might try to cash in on the opportunity and win support of this vulnerable populace by offering them means and incentives for their sustenance. Desperation may lead these people to grab on to any option they may came across that guarantees their survival, hence creating bigger security risks for the state.
The state authority needs to realise that the heavy cost will not only be paid by the slum dwellers but by the state too. Comprehensive security will be guaranteed only if the demolition plan is paired with a legal framework and post operation rehabilitation.
At the moment it looks like a poorly thought out eviction plan aimed at displacing the population. One ends up wondering if this attempt at ensuring the internal security would create much bigger security risks. May be it is not too hard to tell after all.
