Pragmatic approach to militancy

History tells us that crises of the magnitude Pakistan faces today did overwhelm some countries forcing their capitulation while some others survived, even emerged stronger, depending on how much realistically their people perceived the crises and how much more pragmatically they devised their counter-strategies.
We as a people and a nation are today confronted with a crisis of apocalyptic dimensions - almost of the dimensions that led to the break-up of Pakistan in 1971. Then we had failed to comprehend the enormity of the crisis and led by misguided passion and poor leadership refused to take in the reality on the ground and there it was, the then East Pakistan became Bangladesh. Hard times test the souls of men.
Today, once again, thanks to the continuing political confusion on our western border, compounded by administrative follies, Pakistan is confronted with a lethal challenge to its national unity and territorial integrity. And, once again we seem to be fumbling and failing in firming up a realistic outlook to help forge a pragmatic approach, mainly for the poor political leadership, biased intellectual appreciation and blurred security perceptions.
Prime Minister Gilani says the Predator-drone attacks inside Pakistan are "intolerable", but we have "indications" these would stop when Barack Obama enters the White House next January. Quite a few experts, including former foreign secretary Shamshad Ahmad, say we should approach the UN Security Council to seek international intervention against the intrusive actions of the coalition forces, but the suggestion is unacceptable to the foreign ministry.
The military top brass denies getting prior information of drone intrusions, but General David McKiernan, who heads US-led allied forces in Afghanistan, insists "we have a Predator feed going down to the border co-ordination centre at Torkham Gate that's looked at by the Pakistan Military, Afghan Military and the International Security Assistance Force". In simple words, what we have with us today is a distorted version of reality on the ground, hence this confusion paralysing national capability to think clearly and move decisively.
Meanwhile, violence is on the rise. What can happen on a single day can be judged from the happenings of last Thursday. There was the suicide bombing of a mosque in Bajaur Agency in which the leader of the anti-militants 'lashker' and eight others were killed and many injured. Security forces stepped up operation in the area and, according to ISPR, killed 24 militants including 'foreigners'. The same day nine civilians lost their lives when a mortar shell fired by security forces landed on a house. Another 35 were taken prisoners.
As the night fell, Bannu city came under a rocket attack. On the political front, the Prime Minister, addressing the National Assembly, lambasted the United States, and the parliamentary committee constituted to implement the consensus resolution met but remained divided with differing viewpoints aired by its members. On the diplomatic front, American Ambassador was summoned to the Foreign Office and handed a demarche protesting over the US drone attack in Bannu area the night before. This was all in one day, indicating how time sensitive is the need for a review of the situation on the western border.
As and when that review is undertaken we need to understand that in this volatile situation and shifting sands there are a few constants that cannot be overlooked. For one, Pak-US inter-dependence in combating militancy (read Talibanisation) is an inescapable fact and it should be conceded openly. And in this regard Pakistan's closest friends including China, Saudi Arabia and Turkey too will chip in their support.
While Saudi Arabia is pitted against Al-Qaeda, China is extremely wary of religious extremists. An India-centric military establishment of Pakistan is conscious of the fact that should Pakistan fail in taming militancy in the tribal region an international intervention would materialise with India in the vanguard. That is all the more a reason that Pakistan should win the war against militancy on its own.
The other constant in this scenario is Pakistan's civilian leadership that has so far singularly failed in activating non-military options. First and foremost it should have succeeded in separating the hardcore terrorists from the rest of the population. Secondly, it should have worked ceaselessly to fully mainstream the tribal people by extending the legal and constitutional coverage to them. Even now it is not too late to bring into play non-military options of political dialogue, economic incentives and mediatory potential of the jirga system.
It indeed is a time sensitive situation in which the government must act fast, instead of waiting for Barack Obama to take over. In consultation with their military and civilian advisors, the President and the Prime Minister should firm up a line of action to realistically tackle the issue in all seriousness, and speak on it only when inescapable. The problem facing the country is too serious to brook equivocation and empty protestations.