|
The 9/11 commission report describes U.S security as "more than
a war". Out of the 27 recommendations made in this chapter only
one seems to be advocating military options: targeting "terrorists
and their organizations." Pakistan has been identified as one
of the main sanctuaries for terrorists along with Thailand, Nigeria
and Central and Eastern European cities with slack border controls.
It does not follow that these countries are on immediate military
hit list but they have been red-flagged for any future strategy, which
would include persistent pressures to seek cooperation from the governments
for disruption and apprehension of terrorist networks.
This should dispel two misperceptions that our Establishment has fostered.
One, that as soon as matters settle down in Afghanistan, U.S. focus
(and pressure) is going to shift from Pakistan, consequently reviving
Pakistan's freedom to determine its foreign policy once again. Two
that when the focus on Pakistan diverts, the goodwill for assistance
is going to evaporate, as it did after the Afghan war in the nineties.
Neither is likely to happen in the foreseeable future because flushing
out the terrorist elements out of our system is not likely to succeed
in a matter of months or years; perhaps we are looking at decades
here. Secondly, more critical, the spirit of defiance against American
hegemony has already escaped the narrow confines of organised resistance
groups; it has permeated a wide spectrum of counter-liberal sub-cultures
that extend from the destitute youth up to the privileged elite intellectuals
educated in the heart of western liberal educational institutions.
A brief stroll through local institutions like LUMS will provide a
stark testimony to this phenomenon. The spirit of defiance is an amorphous
force that can change its organisational form with uncanny swiftness.
So it is not a matter of intercepting a few rogue cells of Al-Qaeda.
The emergence of a terrorist cell, Jundullah, which nearly succeeded
in killing the Corps Commander in Karachi last month is just one manifestation
of the morphing ability of the new breed of Islamic militants. The
master mind of the operation, Atta-ur Rahman according to the police,
began his career as a member of the violent youth wing of MQM in the
eighties. Since the American establishment is just beginning to wake
up to this nexus between anti-western terrorism and a reactionary
culture emerging in the Muslim world, as in Pakistan, it would be
adopting a long term strategy to understand the theological, ideological
and cultural dimensions behind this reality to disarm the threats
at intellectual and economic levels. Thus Pakistan is not likely to
go off the radar in the U.S. for a very long time to come.
Under the situation, peering into the crystal ball what do we see.
Pakistan is perched precariously on the knife edge of what is being
euphemistically termed as 'enlightened moderation'. What it really
translates into is 'essentially minimum amount of compliance with
U.S. policies towards forces hostile to the U.S.' to avert arousing
suspicions of complicity with reactionary elements. With a dubious
history in this area, Pakistan cannot be too careful. But sitting
on the fence has its perils. As Margaret Thatcher put it, "Standing
in the middle of the road is very dangerous; you get knocked down
by the traffic from both sides."
While General Musharraf is bracing to face the full wrath of the Islamic
extremists from one side - as after being smoked out of their burrows
in Waziristan, they are bringing the conflict to him in the cities
of Pakistan - on the other, the western press is yet to be convinced
of his reformation. In a stinging editorial on July 9, the New York
Times wrote, "Pakistan's military dictator, Gen. Pervez Musharraf,
has done such a good job of repackaging himself as a vital American
ally against radical Islamic terrorism that it is easy to forget how
alarming Washington rightly found so many of General Musharraf's policies
not very long ago. He crushed Pakistani democracy, was, at the least,
recklessly indifferent to safeguards against the proliferation of
nuclear weapons and supported the Taliban and the terrorist groups
active in Indian-ruled areas of Kashmir." The editorial goes
on to add, "This year, General Musharraf promised to end the
infiltration of insurgents from Pakistani territory into the Indian-ruled
part of Kashmir. He seems to be keeping his word, but he has not taken
on the groups that train and arm these militants."
It is clear now that George Bush's unidirectional policy based on
three pillars of hegemony, preemption and unilateralism has gone too
far in supporting General Musharraf's regime. He cannot afford to
trim his stance on Pakistan during the next three critical months
before elections but after wards, even if he wins, the honeymoon will
be over and a much more cautious approach will replace the carte blanche
approval that our General has enjoyed till hitherto. If the Democrats
take charge, the shift in American policy is going to be even more
discomforting for us. However, short of a 180-degree turnabout, there
is going be far more 'stick' before the 'carrot'.
The killing of two Pakistani hostages in the shadow of debilitating
ambivalence on the decision about sending troops to Iraq is just a
little preview of rough times to come. Catch 22 is not the best way
to describe Pakistan's situation because that assumes a coincidental
vulnerability to external forces beyond one's control. This is a case
of self-entrapment.
By instituting intractable theological doctrines in the essence of
our statehood and national identity, we began a process of cultural
coloration that has intensified over time. Pakistan was a very liberal
society at the time of partition. I can show you printed pictures
of Mr. Jinnah giving away prizes to girl athletes wearing shorts.
Lahore was known as the 'Paris of the East' for its array of cabaret
houses down the Mall. The literary movement of 'tarraqi pasand adab'
(progressive literature) countenanced subjects that would bring the
Governor House down today. Each decade following partition eroded
the liberal spirit of Muslims in the subcontinent. General Zia ul
Haq sealed the coffin of liberal thought. The Zia-generation is a
mutated species of intellectually confused individuals who have nothing
but hypocrisy to reconcile their inherited creed with contemporary
realities.
As the world integrated culturally towards a global village during
the later half of the last century, Pakistan was being secluded with
barbed wires of cultural isolation. Swept away in the tide, even a
nominal liberal like Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto decided sadistically to announce
a ban on alcohol on national television, while smoking a rum-dipped
cigar before singing his swan song. The society stands polarized today
between the disenchanted, who are ready to buy the mullah's promise
of justice if he were allowed to impose Islam and the impotent liberals,
who do not have the nerves to challenge chauvinistic theological pretence.
So how is the world supposed to perceive us? As a society of illiterate
and destitute masses seeking some redemption in their lives before
the Day of Judgment; an elitist oligarchy that will happily sip scotch
at a diplomat's residence while explaining the virtues of moderation
in Islam; a mushrooming breed of Spartan but ruthless fortune hunters
who will sacrifice the last shred of conscience and integrity at the
shrine of power that can be en-cashed in dollars overnight.
The cultural barbed wire that we erected around ourselves for national
security is now isolating us from the world. More than that, it is
runs within our ranks too and tears flesh every time someone tries
to move out. Or move in, as Mr. Shaukat Aziz learned with a bitter
shock on Friday 30th. July, at Fateh Jang.
Iqbal Mustafa
1250 words
31 July 2004
|
