Losing integrity: Is Pakistan dividing again?
With the Taliban moving into Swat and trying to take control of the Pashtun area, Pakistan risks being torn apart by its own contradictions, says Shaun Gregory (The writer is a professor at the Pakistan Security Research Unit, University of Bradford)
There is a school of thought which has long argued that the creation of Pakistan in 1947 was a geographical, ethnic, cultural, economic, and political artifice, sewn and held together only by the weak thread of a questionable religious homogeneity, and that consequently the project of Pakistan would eventually be torn apart by its own contradictions. The break up of East and West Pakistan in 1971, the failure of successive leaders in Islamabad to build a nation through a just federal dispensation, and the unwillingness to settle the contours of its borders with its neighbours, has meant that the continuation of Pakistan has remained an open question.
On the face of it, the success of the murderous Mullah Fazlullah and his militant army of 3,000 men in taking control of Swat and Malakand areas of Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province (NWFP), would not appear to be of great significance in the unfolding of the destiny of Pakistan. However, history may well record that the abject surrender of Swat in a phoney ‘peace deal’ marked an important stepping stone on the path to Pakistan’s destruction.
While the weak and hapless Zardari/Gilani government continues to waste precious political capital on PPP infighting and avoidable confrontation with Nawaz Sharif, to the west of the Indus river dynamics are unfolding which have placed Pakistan’s integrity once more in question. Since 2001, the Pakistan Army and ISI have been playing a dangerous game in providing sanctuary to the Afghan Taliban in the Pashtun areas of Northern Balochistan and in the FATA, in the expectation that Mullah Omar would orchestrate a comeback in Afghanistan, displace the Karzai regime or any of its western-backed successors, force NATO from the region, and reverse India’s growing influence in Afghanistan. In early 2009, this strategy appears to be working. The Afghan Taliban are influential across all but the most northerly areas of Afghanistan and a peace deal of some sort with Mullah Omar is predicted this year or next.
Pakistan has, however, entered a Faustian pact with Mullah Omar and the Quetta Shura, and the darker implications of that bargain have only now begun to dawn on Pakistan’s ruling elite. As the Afghan Taliban have regained power and momentum from sanctuaries in Pakistan, they have also created and driven the context for the emergence and evolution of virulent forms of Pakistani militancy and terrorism, both in Pakistan’s Pashtun areas and across Pakistan. These dynamics have been reinforced by the Pakistan army/ISI’s continued embrace of Punjabi terrorists, and by the military focus of the US-led war on terror which has fuelled radicalisation on both sides of the Durand Line.
In this context tribal armies in the FATA have mutated into new forms of radical extremist groups such as Baitullah Mehsud’s TTP and Fazlullah’s TNSM. Al-Qaida has re-emerged and re-established something of its global reach, foreign fighters from as far as Algeria, European diasporas, western China and the Philippines have once again poured into the region, and the huge expansion of largely Saudi and locallyfunded madrassas has ensured a continual supply of young Afghans and Pakistanis ready to die for the militant cause.
The Pakistan army and ISI have presided over this rising tide of terrorism and religious extremism in the expectation that they could achieve their aims in Afghanistan through the Afghan Taliban while keeping control of Pakistani militancy and terrorism on their own side of the border. In the wake of the bombing of the Marriott hotel in Islamabad in September 2008, and of the escalation of terrorist violence in Pakistan’s cities which preceded it, that calculation has proven disastrously wrong.
Given the perilous situation in which the Pakistani state now finds itself, the question of why the Pakistan army/ISI has still not thrown its lot in with the US and NATO and unleashed the full force of the Army and the ISI against the Afghan Taliban, the tribal militants, and al-Qaida, requires an answer. Only two arguments make any sense: either the Pakistan Army-ISI is unwilling to do so or it is unable to do so. If the former, then that can only be because the Army-ISI still believes it can contain the militancy and terrorism within Pakistan. If this is the case, then one wonders why the Army-ISI continues to think that and how many more Marriotts on the push side, and what western incentives on the pull side will it take before the Army and ISI make a decisive break with past policy?
More gravely for Pakistan, for its neighbours, and for the West, the other possibility is that the Pakistan Army and ISI may genuinely have reached the practical limits of their ability to control militancy and terrorism. Pakistan has committed up to 120,000 troops to the FATA region and since September 2008 has not been able to make a substantive impact in Bajaur and Mohmand Agencies.
Perhaps the real key to understanding the situation lies in a synthesis of both arguments. Mullah Omar and the Quetta Shura is understood, through a decentralised command structure and with the support of al-Qaida, to broadly control the tribal militants in Pakistan, such as the TTP and TNSM, which pose the most direct threat to the state of Pakistan. Mullah Omar and the Pakistan Army-ISI are, thus, locked in a fearful stalemate: Mullah Omar checks the power of Pakistan’s militants and holds them back from escalating violence against the Pakistani state, and in return the Pakistan Army-ISI continues the support and protection of Mullah Omar and the Quetta Shura and pays lip-service to western demands for tough action against the Afghan Taliban.
Either way, the Pashtun areas of Pakistan are beyond the reach of the Pakistani state and it is difficult to see that they can be recovered. The situation in Swat, thus, stands as an expression of a larger crisis of state legitimacy which for all practical purposes will likely see another piece of Pakistan break away.
Pakistan wanted to be secular and so be it was the Indian Govt decision then.... India would be more than happy if Pakistan is stable and able, period.
but for the cricket team idea, i personally feel let it be the same... the height of cricket entertainment happens only during the India Pakistan match.... trust me... :-)
Comparing RSS and Taliban is like comparing water pistols to AK-47's. They are a bunch of idiotic thugs, and they dont have as much influence on the nation as a whole or any part of it. The day when they control a state of india is never gonna come.
Havent seen them with anything more complicated than a lathi and havent seen them telling ppl what they can wear and what they cant. Havent seen them saying who can get an education and who cannot. havent seen them telling women to cloak themselves up. Havent seen them hijacking ppl and slitting throats taking God's name on a video sent to news agencies. Havent seen them giving guns to children or toting guns themselves. Havent seen them strapping a bomb around their backs and blowing themselves up in public places. And above all they dont have an upper hand over the country's judiciary or executive.
And no way the day is gonna come when Indian govt is gonna secede any part of its territory to them to enforce any version of law that the RSS deems appropriate. They do anything more than a morcha and they go behind bars. Like what happened to their couterparts(?) in Blore a day before the Valentine's day. and yeah they became the laughing stock of the country when a campaign started by a journalist over facebook left them flooded with tonnes of pink underwear.
As for taliban's version of sharia, the excerpt from the Brigadier's article expresses it better than i ever could. Does sharia support whatever taliban did against women in Afghanistan? My muslim friends tell me thats not Islam and thats not sharia. Do tell me whether it is indeed the right version of sharia acc to ur opinion.
As for Hamid Gul, he has already proved his allegiances, so we can all guess what he would say.
being from other side of the border its normal to think like that but again its an assumption without proof. He worked with CIA at the time of Cold War and trained Jihadis of Ninties and Taliban of today and what you'll call him tomorrow you never know.
Can you please shed some light on Taliban Sharia and original Sharia and just for my info how do you differentiate Taliban and RSS
-----------------------------------------------------
When the eye becomes the heart, the heart becomes the eye ... Wasif Ali Wasif
Exactly FTL!! people should be able to choose what they need instead of militants imposing it on them.
Is the Taliban's version of sharia, the 'true sharia'?
and Hamid Gul, isnt he the same guy who was in some list of wanted criminals for instigating terror attacks and being hand-in-glove with the militants?
General (Rtd) Hameed Gul - Ex DG ISI has a different opinion on the same matter shall I post it too...
In my view if sharia law is applied with full lenght and true spirit that will be the best system for the people of Swat ans I said earlier people showed thier support to the system. In my view let the people choose them self what they need and just wait and watch if it is working well or not.
We can only imagine or speculate what is good for them without actually seeing the place or knowing the culture based on our assumptions.
Let me reiterate that true sharia is no threat to anyone
-----------------------------------------------------
When the eye becomes the heart, the heart becomes the eye ... Wasif Ali Wasif
Give the Taliban Swat, you may as well give them Islamabad
Shaukat Qadir
Last Updated: March 08. 2009 9:30AM UAE / March 8. 2009 5:30AM GMT The Taliban organisation in Pakistan is far from a monolithic structure; it is, rather, a loose union with a disputed leadership and undefined hierarchy. However, the undisputed Taliban leader in Swat is Maulana Fazlullah. Pakistan has tried to strike a peace deal with the Swat Taliban, in return for allowing them to impose Sharia, Islamic law, in Swat. Let us examine what is wrong with it.
First, the government’s deal has been brokered with Sufi Muhammed, Fazlullah’s father-in-law, not with Fazlullah – who, despite their relationship (or because of it), is not on the best of terms with Sufi. If Fazlullah accepts Sufi’s terms, it might result in Sufi becoming more powerful; or could deteriorate into an internecine turf war, doomed from the outset. Factor in that the Taliban are hated by the population for all they stand for and can rule only by force, and it is obvious that the deal can at best offer a breather and no more.
But there is far more wrong with this deal than just that it is doomed to fail; it should never have been offered. The Quran states again and again that Islam is progressive and has to be interpreted in accordance with the times; even Saudi Arabia, with its archaic laws, is attempting to change. Pakistan, on the other hand, is prepared to be held hostage to these self-styled saviours of Islam, who are actually nothing more than kafirs, the real infidel. Can any Muslim woman today emulate the precedent set by the Prophet’s first wife, Hazrat Bibi Khadija, and ask for the hand of any man in marriage, as she asked for the Prophet’s? Islam has been misinterpreted far enough; let us not let it go further.
I have consistently been among those who advocate negotiating with terrorists, though from a position of strength; the use of force alone will not work. I continue to quote the IRA and Sinn Fein as an example. But there is a line beyond which it is not possible for any state to cede its authority. It is possible to negotiate a mutually acceptable form of government that reflects the aspirations of the people, but no state should accept a state within a state, governed by force, irrespective of the wishes of the governed.
One meaning of the word Islam is peace. The Islamic greeting is assalam-u-alaikum, may peace be upon you; the Quran forbids its followers from killing innocent people or taking their own lives. The Taliban preach that not only is taking one’s own life as a suicide bomber the path to heaven, but the bomber is doing a favour to the victims: they too will have died in the cause of Allah and will attain the status of a shaheed, and will also go to heaven.
These are people who, by distorting Islam, find justification for “honour killings”, the killing of disobedient female offspring. One of the first edicts in Islam forbade the killing of female offspring, a custom prevalent in Arabia before the advent of Islam.
Islam asks its followers to seek knowledge and educate themselves. One of the most famous of the Prophet’s sayings is: “Seek knowledge, even if you have to travel to China for it.” These are people who condemn knowledge as un-Islamic; they burn schools for girls, throw acid on the faces of girls who defy them by seeking knowledge, and murder determined teachers.
Even if schools restart, what will they teach? If they have their own courts, what justice will they offer? Will not the next generation of Swatis be condemned to become Taliban?
They forget their history and declare democracy to be un-Islamic. The first Caliph, Hazrat Abu Bakr, was deemed to have been nominated by the Prophet, since he was asked by the Prophet to lead the Friday prayers when the Prophet fell ill. Yet he did not assume his office until the Friday congregation after the Prophet’s death, when he was accepted unopposed and unanimously by the congregation. The same occurred after Hazrat Abu Bakr’s death, when Hazrat Omer became Caliph. When Hazrat Omer died, Hazrat Ali decided to contest the nomination of Hazrat Osman, but withdrew when he realised that Hazrat Osman was likely to win. What is this if not an election, or democracy?
In fact, Islam was the first democracy: not only was the Caliph appointed in accordance with the wishes of the people, he was accountable to the people during his rule. Numerous instances are recorded in history when common people challenged ruling Caliphs and had to be satisfied.
Finally, this deal amounts to the opening of a Pandora’s Box: where will it stop? The other chapters of the Taliban are only waiting to ask for their own “Islamic” government. Is this the beginning of the real Talibanisation of the Northwest Frontier Province? If so, does no one realise that if they are permitted to take over a province, they will find time to consolidate and some day threaten Islamabad – something they are incapable of doing, now or ever, unless the state gives them such an opening in Swat?
http://www.thenational.ae/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090308/OPINION/502440338/1103
(Brig Gen Shaukat Qadir is a retired Pakistani military officer)
Brit: Was it the taliban's version of sharia? Are you implying that successive pakistan govts and administrations have been imposing a set of laws against the wishes of the pakistani people?
I may be wrong, but from what little I have read on the topic, SWAT used to follow Shariah Law till a few years ago when the government intervened.. So perhaps the people actually want it back ..
Well, was their support towards the end of violence and the start of an uneasy calm or was it towards Taliban's version of Sharia?
What other option does a people have when their own govt and army bow down to a group who wants to take the region to the Middle Ages?
As I said somewhere before, Taliban's conquest of Kabul was also greeted enthusiastically by the people , simply coz they had grown tired of bullets and bombs, not coz of any love towards their ideology. But what followed afterwards wasnt all rosy, was it?
hapy - go thru the posts again, have said it will never happen and Indians would never ever want it.. its impossible, i can dream, u cant even dream..people of india would never allow that and u know, its a strong democracy.. not ruled by the spy agencies and the militry like pak.
______________________________________________
Listen to Many..Speak to a few.
please check on the peace march happend in swat valley, people showed thier support already.
-----------------------------------------------------
When the eye becomes the heart, the heart becomes the eye ... Wasif Ali Wasif
well...communities following sharia law on their own is one thing . but a whole region forced, literally at gun point, to embrace a militant group's interpretation of sharia is a totally different thing.
Arien, at present India should focus on keeping its own self united, there are planty of people among them Tamils, Assam and Kashmir who do not want to be part of India. FOrget having wet dreams of merging Pakistan with India.
My friend Taliban is the ex govt of Afghanistan and sooner or later US and allies will be foreced to settle thier issues with them on table rather then battle fields and there is nothing wrong with it.
By the way dont mix sharia law, taliban and Al Qaeda they are all different entities there is exactly no need to be threatened with sharia law coz that was working very fine till 1969 long before the whole mess started.
-----------------------------------------------------
When the eye becomes the heart, the heart becomes the eye ... Wasif Ali Wasif
Well if I knew you had all those unwanted cars there I would have flown there to get one..lol
-----------------
HE WHO DARES WINS
UKEng: UAE is doing great, now that I am here ;)
Winn its the way Red Pope describes it.. Anyway I have corrected it.
How you doing buddy, hope all is well for you in UAE.
-----------------
HE WHO DARES WINS
The great Mahatama was devastated when the partition happened. He would have visited Pakistan if was not murdered by a Hindu fanatic..
-----------------
HE WHO DARES WINS
UKEng: what is an indue fanatic? :-p
Well, the EU kinda thing that UK eng suggested sounds intrsting but for that Pakistan would have to merge into a single entity first and project a unified decision making authority to the world. Any union with all those taliban mullahs and tribal leaders presiding in it would look like a travelling circus!
As an addition I would definitely say that partition was one of the better things that the Brits did in 1947. if not,
1. it would have slowly become an Islamic nation with all the other religions slowly sidelined/wiped out thus destroying the cultural diversity that is the hallmark of the region
2. this whole place would have become a fractured mozaic of warring factions like churchill predicted.
But again all this is mere conjencture.
they have to stay apart for the Cricket!! :-)
Just to explain that merger thing ever since the separation of both countries there was a group of people in Pak that want to capture thier previous days glory by capturing Delhi whereas in India there was a gang of people who were dreaming of United India (Akand Bharat) and both parties were striving for this. The merger is definitely not the solution both countries have to realize the importance of bringing peace and restrict thier cross border adventures, you just cant blame a single country for this.
-----------------------------------------------------
When the eye becomes the heart, the heart becomes the eye ... Wasif Ali Wasif
Nice point, britexpat.
I said a Union of States like the European Union. Every country having there own rules but also have policies that help each other and they can use each other when there are taking on the world..
But at the moment they are too busy talking to each other..
-----------------
HE WHO DARES WINS
THose are ofcourse the big Qs which requires solution. I was talkin about the culture , belief ..etc shouldne be a prob at all..
Anyways.. its not goin to happen. will never win the vote in India for sure.
______________________________________________
Listen to Many..Speak to a few.
They were the same "once".. Now both countries have moved on and developed differently.
Let's assume that there was a merger.. Where would the capital be ? Who would lead ? How would the parties align? How would the armed forces integrate ?
Too many variables...
Brit . It was one.. seperated to two. the so called culture , belief and identity are how old??.. they were the same, once.
______________________________________________
Listen to Many..Speak to a few.
until and unless the government has the complete control of the country, nothing is going to work. Then comes the question UKeng raised.. is Mr 10% trustable!!!
Most of them who knows the history of him, doubts. They should rather cooperate with the neighbour who is an emergic world economy and power and sort out issues within them with their help and progress together with them. after all , they were brothers.. let them live like cousins atleast..lol
_____________________________________________
Listen to Many..Speak to a few.
History has shown that "mergers" never work. All nations want to be independent and forge their own paths.
India amd Pakistan are two seperate nations, with their own cultures, beliefs and identities. They should learn to coexist and work together.
Brit/Ukeng/sd
I dont see anychance of a merge, Indians will for sure raise voice against it and its gona never ever happen.If it happens, good for pakistan, more headaches for india for sure in terms of stabilising the civil issues there.
But personally , They were parted by the british regime and their policies of devide and rule. They were brothers. Why would you say that NO NEED of a merge??
______________________________________________
Listen to Many..Speak to a few.
merge? no merger has taken place in Indian subcontinent in 1000 years, it will split and keep on splitting.
There is no need to merge.. However, there is a pressing need to co-exist and work with each other for the betterment of both.
Respond with your B*****T to latest post by UkEngQatar.
UkEngQatar: I agree with your histprical point of view but I would still stick to my earlier point of view of not merging the two nations.
Now, all we need is for someone to harness all of that and get them to see the bigger picture...that shd be easy,rite?lol!
LIVE and LET LIVE
get a life!if u cant take the heat...dont post here...yes, he can copy paste all he wants,but eventually dont u think we need to know wht we are trying to put across?or r we copy-pasting and replying just for adding points?
LIVE and LET LIVE
looking historically it does make sense that India which used to stretch from the Himalya's to the Indina Ocean from China, Burma in the east to Iran and Afganistaan (Persia) in the west.
The culture of the people from the sub continent is the same even though diverse. If they have been living together for 1000 years under different rulers why not make into a UNITED STATES of Sub Continent or Sub Continent Union. It is vision that people fail to see. How much it will do good for this whole region.
Just think outside of the box of nationality, reglion etc and think like what the Europeans are doing, Growning bigger in the Union every year.. Where as in this part of the world they are decreasing.. Kashmir etc all these issues will be much easier to solve if they all see themselves as one.. All States living side by side..
-----------------
HE WHO DARES WINS
2009doha is not making a statement here.
He is copy-pasting what someone else has researched.
If my view is B***** why waste your time commenting on it. Just ignore. You shouting like a child.
FYI - I am replying to views posted by UkEngQatar.
What a load of b*ull..,how can u say something like tht?if yr an indian,india's better off without racist ppl like u in her territory! plz do not add a billion of us to yr viewpoint....and 2009doha...whts yr point?
LIVE and LET LIVE
Both India and pakistan are seperate nations with diverse cultures. Theer is no need to come together as one unit, but there is a need to come together as partners and major players in Asia.
Both have internal problems. India is a democracy, with a very clear role for army. Perhaps, Pakistan needs to "copy" the Indian model.
I think Indians would not prefer to have pakistan (as suggested by some) added in our teritory.
We are better of without that part of land and its people.
You and india sort it out mate, nothing to do with the rest of us.
all the best..
Can you trust Mr 10%?
Better reunite with India..Atleast they have proper Democaracy..
-----------------
HE WHO DARES WINS
Or another piece of former India gaining Independance.