Strategies to prevent violence
By Moonis Ahmar

WITH its realities of violent conflict along several fault lines, Pakistan stands to benefit greatly from pursuing preventive action strategies.

Over the past five years, thousands of people have been killed and injured in acts of terrorism and violent conflict, particularly in the volatile parts of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Fata, Balochistan and Karachi. Sections of Punjab and Gilgit-Baltistan have also witnessed large-scale violence, particularly in terms of sectarian conflict.

Preventive action is a multi-dimensional approach used to avert the outbreak of conflict by applying the techniques of early warning and early response. Preventive action aims to anticipate conflicts and prevent their escalation by pursing a multi-stakeholder approach involving civil society groups, state actors, and regional and international organisations.

The Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflicts, a think tank based in the Hague, has done pioneering work in conflict-ridden parts of the world by helping local stakeholders build a conflict-prevention mechanism. Political will, determination, resources and adequate knowledge about the nature of conflict are essential for a viable preventive action plan.

In Pakistan, it is easy to discern a dearth of basic understanding, expertise and vision to prevent conflicts that cause colossal destruction. Intolerance, extremism, militancy, radicalisation and terrorism have permeated the very fabric of Pakistani society. Yet even more unfortunately, there is indifference and apathy at the state and societal levels in dealing with the chaos and violence.

For quite a long time, now, civil society groups and other stakeholders have been warning that there would be an outbreak of large-scale violence and terrorism related to sectarian, communal and ethnic issues. But the response from major stakeholders has been no more than lukewarm. Early warnings about pre-poll violence were also given but they failed to elicit any serious response from state authorities.

The lack of a preventive action plan to use against groups that openly challenge the writ of the state and force people to conform to their way of life proves the incompetence of those responsible for protecting people’s lives. For instance, for different reasons, the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan and hard-line Baloch nationalist groups had made it clear that they would try to sabotage the holding of general elections.

The former warned that it would target “secular” political parties because of their alleged pro-American stance, and the latter wanted to compel voters to boycott the elections because of what they see as military operations in their province.

When early warning was given, why did the police, Rangers and the intelligence agencies fail to provide an early response? Why were adequate measures not taken against these groups?

The absence in Pakistan of a culture of tolerance, innovation and a forward-looking approach in terms of critical issues provides space to those who pursue an extremist,
radical and violent agenda. Preventive action can work when there is political will and determination at the state and societal levels to understand the dynamics of conflict and take steps for their prevention. This may be an uphill task but in view of the predictable human casualties that would occur in case a conflict broke out, it is prudent to take preventative steps before it is too late. Without doubt, prevention is better than cure.

Strategies for preventive action in Pakistan could be planned at four levels. First, at the institutional level, conflict-prevention centres need to be established in Pakistan’s conflict zones. These centres, equipped with technical expertise and having knowledge about conflict zones, would play an important role in providing information
and data about the possible outbreak of conflict.

The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe has one such centre in Vienna and conflict prevention centres are located in the United States, Japan, Jordan, Ethiopia, Senegal and elsewhere. The proposed preventive action centres in Pakistan could focus on early warning and early response so that local conflicts can be prevented to keep them from becoming a major threat to national security later.

Second, preventive action can be taken at the educational level by empowering the young people of Pakistan with knowledge about conflict and how it can be prevented.
There exists enormous scope to introduce courses on conflict prevention, management and resolution in the schools, colleges and universities of Pakistan so that the required interest is created about the issues that cause periodic outbreaks of violent conflict.

Third, at the societal level civil society organisations and political parties could work together to create awareness about the need for an effective preventive action mechanism. Had there been political will and commitment on the part of these groups to understand the causes, nature and dynamics of conflicts at the sectarian, ethnic, communal, economic and political levels, Pakistan would have been better off.

Finally, at the state level, the capacity of the police, Rangers and intelligence agencies needs to be enhanced so that they can sense a potential conflict and work for its timely prevention. If state institutions responsible for maintaining law and order and providing basic security were professional in the discharge of their duties, there would be a marked reduction in violence. The need is to create early warning and early response mechanisms related to the outbreak of violence in Pakistan.

The writer is a professor of International Relations at the University of Karachi and a member of the Preventive Action Group, Regional Centre for Strategic Studies, Colombo.

amoonis@hotmail.com