Waziristan today has come to symbolize the paradigm in which Pakistan finds itself. An epicentre of ‘terrorism’, a symbol of ‘Talibanization’ and now a field for what has been euphemistically called ‘mother of all battles’. Pakistan and Waziristan were not always like this. How we have come to this pass is crucial to analyse, but even more urgent is to assess that are we prepared enough to win this battle?
Is this just a battle or a war? Is the battle confined to South Waziristan? What are the implications beyond Waziristan? What lies beyond the battle? What will happen after South Waziristan has been secured? What are our plans after the area has been secured and captured? How are we going to treat captured combatants? What will be things be like in two, five, ten and twenty years from now?
It is clear that there are no short term measures that can address a problem as complex and deeply embedded as this. The military win will be down to appropriate strategy, superior operational and tactical skills, appropriately trained troops, coordinated intelligence and finally high morale and right motivation. But this battle is about more than just winning in Waziristan. A lot more.
This is a war that has whole of Pakistan as its battlefield. To be more precise it is the ‘hearts and minds’ of all Pakistanis that constitute the battlefield for this battle. This is a battle, as Ayaz Amir put it ‘to reclaim the idea of Pakistan and create space for a better future’. This is about the meaning of who we are. This is about the future of Pakistan and our generations. Therefore we have no other recourse other than to win.
Crucially, we have to accept that this war has been forced upon us, by none other than but by ourselves. Do we as a society and nation even recognize that TTP (Terrorist Tehrik of Pakistan) and the philosophy it purports to represent, is a hydra headed monster that we have helped ourselves to unleash in our midst? How as a society are we going to cope with this? What is our long term national strategy to curtail this terror and kill this monster?
At the risk of repetition, two aspects should be mentioned briefly. First, What do Taliban represent, and second, how it all started? Taliban’s nihilistic interpretation of Islam is amply, though not completely, represented by their social mores. Their law necessitates men to have long beard and unrestricted rights over life and property of the others, mainly weak and oppressed such as women and children and any enemies, which more or less includes everybody not with them. They restrict women to their home, not to go out even for work or education and in some cases even medical treatment. They hate education, sports for women, music, dancing, laughing, hanging pictures in homes and clapping. While they are happy to take advantage of, and accept the latest western weapons and technology, and not to mention the mighty ‘Greenback’; they hate and ban movies, television, videos etc as incarnation of the western devil. Unless of course, they are using the same to show a grisly beheading. This then is their ideology, which is the driving force behind their incessant desire to kill and maim all who disagree with them; and brainwash young and poor ready to be killed in their cause.
It is fundamental to understand their ideology and the phenomenon of Talibanization, since in the long run, the military win is not, and cannot be, the sole measure of success against the terrorism. Victory in this battle should be the start of the bigger task that we face, that of reconstructing the Pakistani society. I almost feel like paraphrasing the Prophet, at the risk of being declared an infidel, when while returning from a ghazawaa, he said that we now go from a lesser jihad to a greater jihad. This brings us to the second aspect. How did this all begin?
Without delving into the details, for which there is neither space nor time here, this can be summed up as Pakistani State’s overarching role and obsessive desire in defining and sponsoring meaning of Islam and Pakistan. While it is generally blamed on Zia, State’s manipulation of religion goes back in its origins to independence. Anti-Ahmedi riots and failure of ‘Ulema’ to agree on a single definition of a Muslim in 1950s and naked use by Ayub khan of Pirs and Barelvis in 1960s for his political purposes, are but just two of the examples that support this thesis. Bhutto’s Islamic socialism and 1973 constitution that declared Pakistan as Islamic Republic, continued in the same vein.
No comments:
Post a Comment