APC: civil façade of foreign policy — Farhat Taj

Both Nawaz Sharif and Mahmood Achakzai deserve credit for making their views heard to the APC participants dominated by pro-establishment political parties. Their voices, although not part of the ‘unanimous’ resolution, were echoed by the media

Since the recent attack on the US embassy in Kabul by the Haqqani network Taliban, Pakistan came under immense US pressure, including veiled threats of attack, for its links with the Haqqani Taliban with bases in Pakistan. Pakistan’s military, which runs the country’s foreign policy on Afghanistan, rejected all the statements from the US but still needed the country’s civil political leadership to stand by it to offset US pressure. Hence an All-Parties Conference (APC) was held by the PPP-led government to create a façade of civil ownership of the military-run policy in Afghanistan.

The text of the 13-point ‘unanimously’ approved resolution of all parties’ heads seems hardly anything more than a script from the ISPR. The text is mostly rhetorical without referring to the terror sanctuaries in Pakistan pointed out not only by the US but many people within Pakistan. The text, as expected, rejects US allegations about the ISI’s links with the Haqqani network.

A striking statement in the text is this: “Pakistan must initiate dialogue with a view to negotiating peace with our own people in the tribal areas [FATA] and a proper mechanism for this be put in place.” This is also the oft-repeated position of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) leader Imran Khan, who always projects the Taliban as synonymous with the Pakhtuns. What is the justification of giving such a prominent mention in the resolution to the position of the unrepresentative PTI while totally ignoring the scepticism of the twice elected prime minster of Pakistan and leader of an elected PML-N, Mr Nawaz Sharif? Mr Sharif asked the military leaders present in the conference that there must be a ‘reason’ why the whole world is holding Pakistan responsible for terrorism, a direct reference to the generals’ links with terrorist organisations.

Moreover, it is immensely surprising that the PTI’s position was recorded in the resolution but there is nothing in the text that reflects the view of Mahmood Khan Achakzai, leader of the Pakhtun nationalist party, Pakhtunkhwa Milli Awami Party (PkMAP), who reportedly told the ISI chief at the APC that “there will be peace in Afghanistan within a month, provided the ISI stopped exporting terrorism into that country”. PkMAP, unlike PTI, has a representation in the Senate of Pakistan and has a longstanding firmly held position whereby it asserts that the ISI is responsible for terrorism in Afghanistan and FATA. It is remarkable to note that the ‘unanimously’ passed resolution does not accommodate the point of view of this party that has lost several political workers, who were anti-Taliban, in targeted killings in FATA. The party leaders hold the ISI responsible for their killings.

Both Nawaz Sharif and Mahmood Achakzai deserve credit for making their views heard to the APC participants dominated by pro-establishment political parties. Their voices, although not part of the ‘unanimous’ resolution, were echoed by the media, putting a question mark on the ‘unanimous’ status of the resolution.

A strange position not concurring with the longstanding position on Pakistan’s Afghan policy of the other Pakhtun nationalist party, the Awami National Party (ANP), was adopted by its leader, Asfandyar Wali, in the APC. It is pertinent to mention that the ANP issued an official statement on September 23, 2011 in the context of the growing tension between Pakistan and the US. The statement, while expressing concerns over US threats to Pakistan, “calls for an all out effort by the government (of Pakistan) to root out such (terrorist) groups, their supply lines and infrastructure (on Pakistani soil)”. The statement declares such effort as “an inescapable and urgent need of evolving a clear strategy for dealing with terror outfits (in Pakistan)”. The statement was totally ignored by the Pakistan media in line with its track record of suppressing the Pakhtun nationalist standpoint.

A few days later, ANP’s provincial leader, Afrasiab Khattak, expressed a similar view as in the official statement in a TV interview, also referred to in Dr Taqi’s column, ‘US-Pakistan relations: a rocky road ahead’ (Daily Times, September 29, 2011). By taking almost a U-turn a few days later the ANP-led Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly passed a unanimous resolution condemning US threats without any reference to the terror sanctuaries, including the Haqqani network, in Pakistan. A couple of days later, Asfandyar Wali Khan participated in the APC without making his party’s longstanding position on the Afghan policy heard and quietly toeing the establishment’s line.

This leaves one to wonder what the real position of the ANP is on the current US-Pakistan tension on the Haqqani Taliban. The ANP, which has sacrificed the blood of hundreds of its workers for the party’s anti-Taliban stance, must show the courage to publicly explain which of the two texts — the APC resolution or the party official statement — really represent the real party position.

In the current political scenario in Pakistan, it looks like the ANP position is oscillating between blackmailing the military establishment of Pakistan with the party’s nationalist position on Afghanistan and collaboration with the establishment provided it accommodated the party in the ruling alliance of Pakistan as a junior partner. Even under the leadership of Begum Nasim Wali Khan — many believe the party organisation suffered under her leadership — the ANP never compromised in publicly asserting its longstanding position on the Afghan policy of Pakistan, the position that asserts that the establishment’s strategic depth policy is responsible for the violence and instability in Afghanistan. The ANP today seem to be suffering from such a compromised leadership that the party has never seen in the past.

Notwithstanding Achakzai’s straightforward comment to the ISI chief, both he and Asfandyar Wali have to explain how they can accept the point in the resolution mentioned earlier in this column. Do the two leaders not know that the militants in FATA are the Punjabi Taliban and international terrorists linked with al Qaeda, who have committed atrocities on the tribal people, including the tribal political workers of the ANP and PkMAP? Do they not know that the ISI, not the tribal people, brought these terrorists to FATA? Do they not know that local communities in FATA view the local Pakhtun Taliban, a fringe element of the tribal society, as murderers and anti-social elements who need to face justice?

The two nationalist leaders should have boycotted the APC for inclusion of such a misguiding statement in the resolution. One must appreciate the Baloch nationalist leaders for boycotting the APC in response to the state crimes against the Baloch people. Alas the Pakhtun leadership is too compromised to take such a courageous stance on their people.

The writer is the author of Taliban and Anti-Taliban
Courtesy: daily Times

Another US-Saudi Intervention in Pakistan; Threatens the Civilian Setup, Coerces Military Establishment

Pakistan is an unfortunate country as it has not only been prone to various calamities and disasters, but also throughout its history, it has remained battlefield for the international players. It is also a country that always remained under pressure from Saudi Arabia in the name of Muslim Ummah and China in the name of the evergreen friendship with heavy cost to Pakistan in the terms of industry, economy and trade of certain goods. However, it happens to be the biggest victim of US-Saudi nexus, which seems active once again and no wonder to dislodge political dispensation as in the past.

By Aijaz Ahmed

Former Afghanistan president, Burhanuddin Rabbani

Islamabad: US-Pakistan relations have further strained in the aftermath of the assassination of ex-Afghanistan president Burhanuddin Rabbani as the United States has accused Pakistan of it’s involvement in the terrorist attacks inside Afghanistan and Pakistani intelligence agency, ISI’s links with Haqqani network in Pakistan.

US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta & US military chief Admiral Mike Mullen

As reported in the press, US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has threatened to take “operational steps” against Pakistan while the US military chief Admiral Mike Mullen has accused the ISI of it’s involvement in the attack on the US Embassy in Kabul.

The developments have paved the way for another US intervention in Pakistan’s affairs as diplomatic sources have confided to this correspondent that the US administration has threatened to dislodge the civilian setup in Pakistan. According to the sources, the US administration wants Khakis at the helm of the affairs again and wants to get rid of the political government, which is not only scared of the disciplined khakis but also the undisciplined politicians having strong voice in the parliament and media. The US administration also wants to get rid of the vibrant parliament that for the first time in the history of this country took up such critical and serious issues like the war on terror and the killing of Osama bin Laden in a secret operation by a US Navy SEALS team.

Reason behind new US moves are of the multiple nature: the US administration wants an action against Haqqani group in Afghanistan while Pakistan considers this group indispensable for peace in Afghanistan as well as in the bordering tribal belt of Pakistan. A young Haqqani was preaching peace in Mohmand Agency till few months back with the blessings of the powers that be. The role that Haqqani group can play also suggests that it is the group that can foil the designs of anti Pakistan forces, and it is the group that has significant presence and influence in Pushtoon speaking Afghanistan specially the part adjacent to the Tribal belt right from South Waziristan to Bajaur Agency and Pakistan sees the influence of the group as a tool for positive dialogue with Taliban. Perhaps this is the biggest mistake that Pakistan is making and both Army and civilians seems on one page on the issue. The Unites States considers it as a fault of the civilian administration but at the same time, it blames ISI for the quagmire.

The sources in the diplomatic circles are confident that the United States has adopted two pronged strategy: on one hand it is giving threats of waging war against Pakistan on its reported links with the Haqqani group and other Taliban groups. It has also sent a critical message through Afghanistan president Hamid Karazai, which was delivered to Prime minister Gilani today when he paid a brief visit to Kabul to condole the death of Ustad Rabbani who was killed in a suicidal attack. The message was not soft, rather it contained some hidden threat, sources maintained and that is why Prime Minister rushed to Karachi direct from Kabul to discuss with the president the possible future scenario, they confided. It is considered as the pressure and fresh moves against the elected government and the parliament.

On the other hand the US is adopting a policy to maintain a bit soft corner for the Army, as it can be a valuable partner in future scenario. The army because of its training, discipline, and links with certain groups in and outside Pakistan is considered indispensable, and perhaps it is true and has been proved as a fact many times in the past.

However, the most important part of the strategy seems the point number one, i.e., putting more pressure on the civilian government and getting rid of the democracy, the parliament and the ruling politicians, and here comes the role of US stooges, unfortunately hailing from the Muslim world. And this time according to the sources, Saudi Arabia is playing the role of a stooge once gain to serve the United States and its interests and against Pakistan. Bahrain is still believed to be a part of the game.

It will be worth mentioning here that it was the same “bad” civilian government that provided human resource to Bahrain to control a pro democracy movement by Shiite Muslims near Saudi border, which turned into a deadly violence because of a firing incident. Pakistan also mediated between Saudi Arabia and Iran just few months ago by the Zardari government. The savior of the Muslim Ummah is endangering the same Zardari government, along with the parliament, sources said.

Ex-military dictator Musharraf in the news again

Pervez Musharraf is again in the game too. The Saudis have interviewed him few weeks back and assured him of a better role in Pakistan in near future. The former military dictator is being assured full protection on his already announced return to Pakistan by 23^rd March next year. The only hurdle for his return would have been Mian Nawaz Sharif and Saudis are assuring him that Nawaz will not create problems for him. Nawaz will give a positive response or not, only time holds the answer, but sources are quite sure that the plan is underway to get rid of the present regime and the parliament. It can not be predicted whether the move will be successful or not, but the recent visits of Army Chief to Karachi, having meetings with Industrialists and making a Rangers deployment plan, the recent concerns on Karachi situation and a deadline for the government to solve the Karachi problem shall also be analyzed in the view of the above mentioned developments, but nobody in the parliament at this stage will have the courage ask a question from the COAS that under which law he intervened in civilian government’s ambit and held meetings on law and order issue which is purely a civilian matter. The law of the land and the Constitution clearly prohibits him for holding such meetings.