Airbase attack
August 17th, 2012
The attack on the air force base in Kamra has raised disturbing — and disturbingly familiar — questions. That only one security personnel was killed as opposed to nine dead militants is only a small consolation: the first and foremost question is, how were militants able to yet again infiltrate a high-security armed services’ base and engage security forces inside for many hours? Given that some kind of military operation in North Waziristan against at least the Pakistan-centric militants is in the offing, the possibility of pre-emptive strikes by the militants is high. Had the warning of a blowback only been made at the policy level without it filtering down to the security forces likely to be in the cross-hairs of the militants? Already, the very specific threat against PAF bases in Punjab by the TTP in revenge for the killing of a militant leader earlier this month had been picked up by the intelligence apparatus. Surely, then, at this stage of the fight against militancy, the security apparatus should be able to repulse attacks on at least critical sites with more efficiency, particularly with both the circumstantial and direct forewarning appearing to have been available.
As with previous attacks, the possibility of insider help to the militants in the assault on Kamra is also very high. From sympathisers of radical Islamist thought to direct supporters of militant groups, the army appears to have a militancy problem, the severity of which is hidden from the public because investigations and court martials are often carried out in secret. The wider concern going forward ought to have the army’s screening procedures: how robust and effective is the surveillance and vetting of the armed forces’ personnel to prevent an incident before it happens? Clearly, as recent history suggests, not robust or effective enough — but what will it take for a more serious and sustained effort? Finally, the question that has bedevilled the fight against militancy: when will the state, both the army and the political government, drive home the message to the Pakistani public that the war is real, it is against a radicalised fringe of Pakistan and that unless the war is fought with total commitment and purpose, the state and society itself will spiral towards irreversible disaster? Gen Kayani’s Independence Day message contained the first strands of that message but it has to be sustained and spread to the farthest corners of the country. The ones shouting ‘this isn’t our war’ — many on the political right — need to be countered, firmly and unequivocally. Delay that battle any longer and the already manifold complications will grow yet more complicated.
OIC’s Syria decision
August 17th, 2012
Besides adding to the Baathist regime’s regional and international isolation, the suspension of Syria’s membership by the Organisation of Islamic Conference on Wednesday is unlikely to have much effect on the situation in the Levant if the aim is peace. The 57-member bloc coupled the suspension with a call for the development of a peaceful mechanism that would build “a new Syrian state based on pluralism” and a “democratic and civilian system” — ideals that are in keeping with the spirit of the Arab Spring. However, ignoring the plea by Pakistan, Algeria and Kazakhstan that the insurgents be also blamed for the bloodshed, the 57-member body’s final statement said the “principal responsibility” for the fighting lay with the government of President Bashar Al-Assad. The statement coincided with a UN report which said there were “reasonable grounds” to believe that both government forces and the rebels had committed war crimes and “gross violations” of human rights, including “unlawful killing, torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, sexual violence, pillaging and destruction of property”.
Unless there is an agreement on a ceasefire, the Syrian conflict, which has led to 20,000 dead, could expand. Lebanon is already in a state of tension and fear, with reports that four Arab countries have asked their nationals to leave the country following a string of abductions of some Sunnis by a Shia group. The OIC and the Arab League, which suspended Syria’s membership last year, ought to have a uniform policy on dissent in Muslim countries. Their attitudes towards Bahrain, for instance, are in sharp contrast with their Syria policies. While in the former case the Gulf Cooperation Council sent troops to crush the uprising and save the monarchy, in the case of Libya and Syria they have pursued an active regime-change strategy. What happens if tomorrow there is a democratic stir in Arab monarchies, some of which have not given their people even a semblance of constitutional rule? The Syrian situation deserves to be addressed with all sincerity, but as Pakistan’s foreign minister said at the recent Tehran moot, moves that could lead to foreign intervention need to be avoided.
Less aggressive now?
August 17th, 2012
Droplets of light rising from candles are gradually taking effect at Wagah. They are a metaphor for a future that must be explored and discovered, a vindication for the activists who are so often blamed for taking Pak-India peace as little more than a holiday trip. The light as a people’s collective offers a mild, soothing contrast to the thunderous war theatrics the border between Pakistan and India is famous for. The two have learnt to coexist. In fact, the battle routine the soldiers so proudly display each evening at the lowering of the Pakistani and Indian flags amid nationalist chants by the crowd gathered there is undergoing modifications. A dialogue has been opened to rid the drill of some of its more offensive gestures. Soldiers are talking, enabled by the new mood the peace activists have helped shape.
Gathering on either side of Wagah each year for a joint celebration of the Independence Day, peace activists have themselves come some distance. They were berated and threatened with isolation when they first decided to hold the border candle vigil some years ago. Today, the trends have changed sufficiently enough for the media to give a positive spin to the talks that have in recent past been held to make the border drill less aggressive, and to not miss the ceremonial exchange of sweets between the soldiers of the two countries. It appears, and appears so vividly on the television screen, that the old prediction about peace having a market in the subcontinent has also been vindicated. Tensions sell, too, and it is not that the issues have been resolved and a friendship bond established forever. There will always be some matters pending — even if the alternative route to resolution is lit up for more and more people to see and traverse.