:: Inder Malhotra

India must let Pak sort out its mess

Inder Malhotra

April.29: Whatever any Indian might say about the current situation in Pakistan, there is bound to be suspicion on the other side of Wagah. But surely the avalanche of alarming statements from the United States — Pakistan’s closest ally and principal aid-giver since the ’50s, now in desperate need of Pakistan’s cooperation in the war in Afghanistan — cannot be dismissed off hand. Even more important and ominous are pained writings in Pakistani newspapers by respected columnists and commentators. Sadly, the sum total of the messages from both within and without is that Pakistan’s future is bleak. The danger of a Taliban takeover is clear and present.

It was US secretary of state Hillary Clinton who first sounded the alarm that the Pakistan government and military were "abdicating" to the Taliban. US defence secretary Robert Gates added that this would "affect Pakistan’s relations with the US". Almost immediately thereafter the Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, declared that with the Taliban "only a 40-minute drive away from Islamabad", Pakistan was "on the tipping point". On Capitol Hill, senators tripped over one another to demand that in future US aid to Pakistan must be linked to its performance in fighting the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

This understandably had some effect in Pakistan and for the first time Pakistan’s Chief of the Army Staff, General Ashfaq Kayani, announced that the Army would not "tolerate the Taliban dictating to the Pakistani government and society". Obviously aware of widespread scepticism about the Army’s "willingness and capacity" to take on the Taliban, Gen. Kayani asserted that the Army would, as usual, "make any sacrifice to preserve the territorial integrity of Pakistan". However, the problem is that the Taliban and other extremists are not threatening the country’s territorial integrity. They are challenging the writ of the state so that they can bend the civil society to their will.

The first visible effect of Gen. Kayani’s tough talk was the announcement that the Taliban that had seized the town of Buner some days ago were "withdrawing" and going back to Swat, their stronghold, conceded to them under an "agreement" that empowered them to enforce Sharia. Unfortunately, it later turned out that the withdrawal was more a facade than reality. To be sure, the nearly two score heavily armed Taliban men who had come to Buner and taken over, without the slightest resistance, did go back to Swat. But they left behind enough activists to enforce the dictates Gen. Kayani had objected to. According to the New York Times, the Taliban took over Buner and adjoining areas with a mixture of "guile and force", which is exactly what they are are trying successfully elsewhere too.

In Pakistan’s News newspaper, on Sunday, April 26, analyst Dr Farrukh Saleem wrote, "Five thousand sq kms of Swat are now under Taliban control — de jure". He then went into meticulous detail of the areas under de facto or contested Taliban control, and concluded: "Eleven per cent of Pakistan’s landmass is either under complete ‘Taliban control’, ‘contested control’ or is ‘Taliban influenced’". He then asked, "Where is the Pakistan Army?" His answer to his own question was, "In effect, some 80 to 90 per cent of our military assets are deployed to counter the threat from India. The Pakistan Army looks at the Indian Army and sees its inventory of 6,384 tanks as a threat". No amount of American persuasion that the "existential threat" to Pakistan is not posed by India but by the extremist enemy within doesn’t seem to cut any ice in the General Headquarters (GHQ) at Rawalpindi.

It is also remarkable that the Pakistani Army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), that have displayed great proficiency in organising terrorist outfits such as Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (an ally of Pakistan’s Tehrik-e-Taliban) and Jaish-e-Mohammed to "bleed India through a thousand cuts", now find that they have no expertise in counter-insurgency. On the other hand, the Pakistani Taliban, that a couple of years ago were no more than a bunch of suicide bombers, are now able to take on the regular Army even in set-piece battles. One explanation is that Pashtun ex-servicemen have swollen their ranks.

However, late on Sunday the Pakistan Army did launch an operation — not in Swat proper but along its border with Afghanistan. For the present, the action is "limited". Pakistani Army spokesman Maj. Gen. Athar Abbas, when asked by the BBC whether the military shouldn’t have acted earlier, replied, "I agree with you. But the ‘operational pause’ has been due to expectations of reconciliation". That is precisely where the rub lies. Pakistani editors and columnists, too numerous to be named here, have been shouting hoarse that the "surrender to the Taliban" in Swat is at the root of the rising tide of Talibanisation, but to no avail. There are far too many apologists of the so-called "agreement" which they claim would give "peace a chance". The irony is that the Taliban, in their arrogance, have reneged on their commitment to lay down arms. Who would disarm them and how remains to be seen.

Ardeshir Cowasjee, a highly respected columnist with Dawn, and Maleeha Lodi, a former envoy to the US and Britain, are among those who have lamented the "retreat of Jinnah’s Pakistan". Mr Cowasjee says that with the National Assembly’s endorsement of the Swat deal, "a perverted form of religion has been legally sanctified to terrorise the state, to threaten the nation…"

Sadly, a very large section of Pakistan’s civil society has been either terrorised or indoctrinated. "Thinking" Pakistanis are gravely concerned over what Pervez Hoodbhoy, another respected writer, calls "Saudi-isation of Pakistan". In Karachi alone, Saudi Arabia finances 4,000 madrasas which are nicknamed "jihadi factories". The US has done nothing to dissuade its closest ally in the Gulf region. Nor has the government of Pakistan.

Any Indian trying to draw satisfaction from the going-on in Pakistan would be foolish. No neighbour can be worse than the one that is either chaotic or Talibanised. But equally, any Indian advice, leave alone the offer to help, would have opposite of the desired result. What Lord Buddha said of individuals is true also of nations: "Each must find its own salvation".