Militants in Mohmand

The fierce clash between militants and security forces in the Mohmand Agency, in which 40 militants and at least six troops were killed, offers evidence that the Taliban and other elements continue to pose an immense threat to the nation and the writ of state. The exchange took place after several hundred militants, including foreign nationals, reportedly attempted to storm a fort occupied by the Frontier Corps. An exchange of fire lasting hours then ensued and militant positions were subsequently bombed. This ranks as the fiercest offensive by militants in the area since an operation began there several months ago. Fighters from Waziristan are said to have taken part in the effort, which had obviously been well-planned and meticulously executed. Other operations, similar to this one, have been seen in the past.

There is a question that arises: why have the armed forces of Pakistan been unable to overcome a relatively small band of fighters even after months of heavy fighting? Why have the top leaders of these outfits not been arrested? Is it really possible that intelligence agencies have no idea as to their location or their movements? If the Taliban have truly gained such strength as a guerrilla fighting force that it is impossible to knock them out despite the use of all our military might, the state of affairs now prevailing is truly frightening. But then just as grim is the other possibility: that there is still no real will to defeat them despite all that has happened in recent years in terms of bombings, suicide attacks and assassinations.

A full assessment of the situation needs to be urgently made. Our leaders, military and civilian, need to sit down together and contemplate the true position. There have lately been a number of insinuations emanating from regions of fighting that allege an all-out effort is still not being made. These may be nothing more than fiction, but there should be a review of what is happening, how the operation is going and how far it is succeeding in defeating militants. Quite evidently, the militant elements that remain entrenched in the tribal areas are still able to organize themselves into large bands and take on security forces at fortified positions. It is also clear that a large number of non-Pakistani nationals remain a part of the Taliban armies. It is quite obvious that for the sake of the security of our country, the militants need to be vanquished. What needs to be determined is how best this can be achieved.


The renewed clashes in the Hangu district of NWFP, where 40 people have been killed within three days, brings back memories of the terrible fighting in the area, along sectarian lines, that has already claimed hundreds of lives in recent months. Tribes, broken up into Sunnis and Shias, have once more been battling each other. Tensions seem to have risen with the advent of the Muslim month of mourning – Muharrum – an occasion that has repeatedly triggered violence over the past decade. This is of course immensely sad, given the sanctity of the month for Muslims of all sects.

So far, tribal elders attempting to mediate between the fighting tribes have failed to restore peace in Hangu. Even if they do achieve a breakthrough, one fears that it will be short-lived. This, after all, is what has happened each time in the past. Periods of peace have been followed by resumed phases of intense fighting. The sectarian violence in areas such as Parachinar in the Kurram Agency has resulted in what amounts to a brutal ethnic cleansing. It is said large pockets of Shias have been entirely wiped out or else have fled, fearful of death. It is unfortunate that this should still happen in a day and age that is described as 'civilised'.

We have seen too many episodes of repeated sectarian violence. The government needs to step in and act. It is senseless to simply ignore what is happening or hope that it will just go away. Even if another period of peace is enforced, the risk is that at some point in the future the underlying tensions will erupt once more. What we need is a policy to address the root causes of sectarian hatred. Through curriculums, through the immensely powerful media and by enforcing the laws that exist to safeguard against the dissemination of hate, a concerted effort to turn back the clock must be initiated. It is true that sectarian strife was a reality in Hangu even decades ago, but the degree of violence has increased markedly since then. It must be stopped before it tears apart the fabric of a society that has forgotten the need to tolerate each other and to live together in peace, regardless of belief, race or other similar factors.


The news that after a presentation by the Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation (SIUT) to a parliamentary committee, representatives who had proposed amendments in the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Ordinance of 2007 have withdrawn the suggestions they had made for change, is immensely welcome. It also shows how much can be achieved through dedicated effort. SIUT had campaigned tirelessly for the law to be introduced. It has over the past few months struggled just as hard to prevent amendments in it that would open up the way for those not related by blood to donate kidneys and other organs.

The law is intended to guard against the exploitation of poor people by those able to purchase kidneys from them. The stories heard, of these hapless 'donors' being ripped off by middle men, of the situations that forced them to part with a kidney and of the situation of their lives after the surgeries inflicted on them, are truly tragic. In some villages in Punjab, more that half the adult population is said to have given away a kidney for amounts that vary from about Rs150,000 to 400,000. Indeed, in recent years, Pakistan had become known as a sales point for kidneys internationally, with those seeking the organ flying in from the Gulf and elsewhere to purchase them. Mafias, who include doctors, in all large cities profited from the unethical trade. The pioneering 2007 law placed conditionalities on organ donations, laying down rules intended to ensure they were offered voluntarily, and only by blood relatives. It made it possible to act against those engaged in purchasing organs, and placed tough ethical requirements for surgeries. It is sad that members of parliament, knowingly or unknowingly, apparently attempted to undo this. The suspicion always is that there are vested interests at work behind such moves. But the outcome has, in the final run, been positive. The awareness effort launched by SIUT immediately after the proposed amendments become known has worked, and a change that would have undone much of the good of the 2007 law has been averted.

__________________
Regards,
P.R.