Mullah Mansour’s Killing

Foreign policy failure

The killing of Mullah Mansour in a US drone strike on May 21 inside Pakistan shows once again how faulty and directionless is its policy towards Afghanistan. It indicates that no ‘paradigm shift’ has occurred in Pakistan’s security and foreign policies. It also gives us a glimpse of the fragility of the situation and the powder keg that we are constantly sitting on.

The first thing that is bad about this policy is that no one knows what it is. The second bad thing is that no one knows who is in charge of it. The third thing is that it is not compatible with contemporary world both in terms of time and space. The fourth thing is that nobody is allowed to criticise it. And the fifth very bad thing is that it is single-track with no alternative or fallback options available.

It is not that the policy is new or that its negative aspects were not known. No. The policy is continuing for more than three decades. And even if we don’t count the dead Afghans, its cost Pakistan more than 50,000 lives besides playing havoc with the states and societies of both the countries. It’s only that Mullah Mansour’s killing on our soil has highlighted its darker side once more.

Pakistan’s policy is based on assumptions and goals like; Afghanistan can give us ‘strategic depth’; there must be a ‘friendly’ government in Kabul to protect Pakistani interests; these interests can only be secured or protected through Taliban; US and its western allies cannot cling on to Afghanistan forever, so a little forbearance –some more sacrifices – and we’ll be through.

But it has become imperative now to reassess these assumptions on which one of the country’s most damaging policies is based.

Can Afghanistan really provide us that illusive strategic depth which appears to be a concept embedded in the previous century? Can a country’s interests be protected only by installing friendly governments in neighbouring countries? Will the US and its allies really run out of patience and abandon that country? Isn’t it more realistic to think that we may run out of patience and resources much too early than the whole of the world combined? Will Taliban really serve Pakistani interests once they are given a share in power in Kabul? What was our experience with them when they were in power there not long ago? And if we couldn’t nudge their leadership to the negotiations table, how realistic it is to expect them to do our bidding once they succeed in having a berth in government?

Banking on Taliban is a very shaky premise not only because they may not necessarily listen to us but also because they have no popular support inside Afghanistan anymore. Fact is that the popularity of Taliban has never been tested or proven. Rather, whenever Afghans were given a chance they came out and voted for the competing forces. They came to power with the use of brute force, remained there through strong-arm tactics and are relevant today due to their capacity to inflict violence. This has made them a lot despised by the people of Afghanistan at large.

Seen siding with them cannot help Pakistan in any way in future as no government or ruling elite can pursue policies for long if these are not approved by the people. Besides this hurdle Pakistan cannot afford to support them due to their political ideology as its law enforcing agencies and armed forces are at war with the people who share the same ideology with them and which is posing existential threat to the country.

Along with this, Pakistan is faced with an embarrassing situation on the international front. It’s now mostly identified with the people who are responsible for killing innocent Afghan civilians and attacking international coalition forces. It stands internationally isolated whether that’s accepted and discussed inside the country or not. Selling failed policies to one’s own people through propaganda and other coercive means is one thing, getting practical benefits out of it for the country is quite another.

It now needs no further proof that our current foreign policy, particularly towards Afghanistan, is a failure. The country has gained nothing out of it. It has inflicted unbearable financial losses on the country. It has introduced drugs and weapons cultures and torn the social fabric. It has popularised violence in society. It has made Pakistan an international pariah.

This country cannot afford any more international outlaws to be found and killed here. Its people do not deserve the embarrassment and contempt they face outside the country because of the wrong policies of its state.

Presence of Mullah Mansour, the Haqqani Network and their likes on its soil makes Pakistan morally weak to demand action against Fazlullah and other terrorists who carried out countless attacks on innocent civilians, including the APS atrocity.

Pakistan does not need to have ‘influence’ on them and to provide them sanctuaries under this pretext. It doesn’t mean to wage a war against them either. But it’s about time they must be told to go to their country and do whatever they like. The excuse that they can become inimical if Pakistan took unfavourable action against them can’t be valid forever. It has to be taken care of even if that fear is real. Also, it is the most opportune time to do that as on the other side of the border are forces that can cooperate effectively if distrust in relations is removed. Tomorrow, it may be more difficult.

It is obvious that our present policy goals are not clear to the people, nor do they know what the country’s foreign policy really is. If it is to be continued then our policy makers and elected representatives must take the masses into confidence. They must explain what the country’s policy is and why it is pursuing it.

The first step in this regard will be appoint a full-time foreign minister and assign him/her the task to formulate a cohesive policy within the parliament. The second can be to operationalise the foreign office in the real meaning of the word and not just use it as rubber stamp. The third can be that military leadership should take a step back and allow the civilian side to at least give some input if not handed over complete responsibility of foreign policy formulation. But all in all, foreign policy must be brought to parliament. It isn’t something to be run through Twitter, and that too, by unauthorised persons.

The continuation of these policies in its current shape can result in greater harm and much more embarrassing situations for the country in future. They have now become like a hot potato which neither can be thrown away nor swallowed. It’s better to throw it to parliament to take care of it. Crises present opportunities sometime. Let’s turn this unpleasant moment into an opportunity to introduce changes to our foreign and domestic policies that are long overdue.