Listen to what Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali K han has said about how the crisis of Karachi could be resolved. He said that it required political will, a sense of direction, clarity of thought and transparency. Good. We can say that the recipe for meeting the challenge of Karachi’s calamity is all there.

But where are these ingredients in the actual performance of our rulers in dealing with the ghastly situation that has simmered in Karachi not for a year or two but for decades? Meanwhile, it has become incredibly toxic. And the horror of it has dominated the media this week, primarily with reference to the hearing of Supreme Court’s suo motu case on law and order in the city.

These proceedings have highlighted the inability of the authorities to curb target killings and other violent crime rampant in Karachi because the Supreme Court had already issued its verdict in October 2011. This week, the larger bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry noted that its directives given in the earlier verdict were not implemented and the situation was getting worse.

Come to think of it, it is the same story when it comes to the perhaps a larger threat to the survival of the country, that of terrorism and religious militancy. Again, the rulers would need political will, a sense of direction, clarity of thought and transparency – to repeat the entire prescription offered by Chaudhry Nisar – to combat the dark forces that have gained strength with time.

In that sense, one can only presume that our ruling establishment either lacks the sense and the ability to mobilise its forces against the terrorists and the militants or it is in two minds about what to do. Look carefully and you may detect that this establishment is congenitally prone to playing both sides. That is how Pakistan’s long affair with the Taliban has been conducted. Or would our relations with the United States serve as a better example?

Be that as it may, the situation on both these fronts has worsened to an extent that some action on the part of the present government seems imminent, even if it is of a temporising nature. There are reports that some contacts have been established with the Taliban, or with some of their factions, to initiate a process of negotiation. Similarly, a special meeting of the federal cabinet on Karachi is to be held and, according to Chaudhry Nisar, the blue-print for a ‘targeted operation’ is ready.

Does this mean that this government has the political will and the clarity of thought to be able to devise and then implement comprehensive strategies to deal with the two crises? Unfortunately, the evidence that is available is not so reassuring. We are not certain about what it has resolved to do in a specific manner.

What is very evident, though, is that Nawaz Sharif – immediately after taking oath of office – has been in serious consultations with all sections of opinion to get a good grasp of the issues that have landed on his table. This is a sign of mature leadership. In this context, however, problems that relate, for instance, to the energy crisis and the revival of the economy have to be seen in a different light than the more complex and ideologically divisive issues about national security, terrorism and the overall brutalisation of the Pakistani society.

Establishing peace in Karachi, seemingly an impossible mission, is only one challenge that this government has to meet. In fact, the task is to reinvent Pakistan before its decline and fall becomes irreversible – if it has already not become so. The Taliban, with all the jihadi accomplices and sectarian warriors that their vicious mindset has spawned, epitomise this catastrophe. So, what to do about them?

We do not yet have a definite answer. Nawaz Sharif has called for a dialogue with the militants to end the violence. He recognises that it is a threat to the survival of the country. If this offer is rejected, the government, he said, is ready to attack the militants “with full force”. Almost three months after he became the chief executive of this country, the waiting game continues. We are so adept at playing this game and it has continued for years.

When he initiated his process of consultations, he admitted to be searching for a consensus on how to counter insurgency and frame a national security policy. All the parties and stakeholders should be on the same page, it was repeatedly stated. This word ‘consensus’ was also used by Chaudhry Nisar in his press conference on Karachi. This is the theme song.

Many questions arise when a government goes out shopping for consensus on issues that have polarised the entire society and created antagonistic divisions. Will the government do nothing decisive until this elusive consensus is achieved? Three months is a long time to put a well-thought out strategy into action because the issue must have been present to the PML-N leadership even before the election results were declared. Don’t they say that a week is a long time in politics?

Irrespective of what the experts and studies conducted by think tanks advice, the final decision rests with the leader. This is a leadership moment in the history of Pakistan and Nawaz Sharif must consider himself very fortunate to be at the helm at this critical time. The buck stops on his desk. This is his opportunity to rise to the occasion. He must do what he thinks is right, without resorting to expediency and opportunism and immoral compromises that have led us to our present state of affairs.

What is certain is that he will never have a consensus on whatever option he exercises. It is not possible when obscurantist and extremist elements, supported by a large segment of opinion, are in a state of war with democratic and liberal forces that aspire for a society that is at peace with itself and is tolerant of religious, sectarian, ethnic and political differences. It is for this government to choose the side it must defend.

One example from history that I like to cite, considering the present conflict of our society, is of Abraham Lincoln. He could not have consensus on ending slavery in his country 150 years ago. He had to push for a shift that he believed in, even if it meant a civil war. The situation is not so dire for our present rulers but the implications are obvious. Can we have a just and a humane society – in Karachi as well as in the other tribal areas?

The writer is a staff member.
Email: ghazi_salahuddin@hotmail.com

http://e.thenews.com.pk/9-1-2013/page7.asp