Awami National Party (ANP) President Asfandyar Wali is angry, and rightly so, at all those who have been criticising his party for having negotiated the Swat peace deal in the form of Adl Regulation with Tehrik-e-Nifaz-e-Shriat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM) chief Sufi Mohammad.
Addressing a press conference in Karachi last Saturday, he lashed out at his party's critics, reminding them that the controversial Adl system was first implemented by the PPP government in 1994 and later renewed by the PML-N government in 1999. He did not mention though that the previous implementation of the Adl system came about, too, because of Sufi Mohammad's armed rebellions.
But he reminded his audience that a top Human Rights Commission (HRCP) official, Syed Iqbal Haider, a vociferous opponent of the Adl Regulation, was federal law minister at the time of the 1994 agreement, which he supported. Asfandyar Wali went on to remark with uncontrolled sarcasm, "Surprisingly, he is now opposing it." In other words, if the so-called Islamic justice system was kosher then for our two largest parties it should not be so objectionable now.
Actually, those two parties have put their stamp of approval on the present deal as well. Yet there is a huge difference in what happened then and now. Those opposed to the deal are distressed not as much about the Adl Regulation being a parallel legal system and violative of the Constitution as they are about the bigger picture in which the Swat peace deal was concluded. Sufi Mohammad may be content with what he got, the people surrounding him are not.
Although the defenders of the deal say Swat's is an isolated case, and that it has nothing to do with the Tehrik-e-Taliban's agenda, facts on the ground tell a different story. Sufi's son-in-law, Mullah Fazalullha a.k.a. Mullah Radio, who led the insurgency in Swat, is known to be directly linked with the Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud.
Last month, ie, on March 11, the Swat Taliban took out a flag march in different parts of Buner and Swabi districts, driving even through the Mardan cantonment to show what their designs are. They have since occupied Buner. If anyone still has any doubts about their intentions, those should be removed by the pronouncements of Swat Taliban spokesman, Muslim Khan, who has been regularly issuing press statements on the situation in Malakand Division.
He has been telling the media the Taliban will not lay down their arms (contrary to the government agreement with Sufi Mohammad), that they do not believe in democracy, and care little for the Constitution. As recently as Monday, two days after Asfandyar Wali's strong defence of the Swat deal, gunmen kidnapped six security personnel and an ambulance driver in two separate incidents in the Charbagh area and Khwazakhela tehsil.
It could be the handiwork of some criminal elements (which would be equally scandalous) but the fact remains the Adl Regulation is under enforcement, yet the Taliban have shown no inclination to give up their arms. More to the point, writ of the state does not exist in Swat. That is the big difference between the past and the present 'Nifaz-e-Shariat'. It is what worries people like Iqbal Haider and others opposed to the deal.
Surely, the ANP is equally worried, if not more than anyone else since Swat is under its jurisdiction and Taliban infested Fata is not very far, either. Also, it needs to be noted that ANP is the only party among a dozen or so mainstream political parties, which stands by its secularist founding ideal. It can be accused of anything but being a Taliban sympathiser.
In fact, it has been in the sights of Taliban for quite sometime for its harsh criticism of their ideology. Last October, Asfandar Wali himself was attacked by a suicide bomber while receiving Eid greetings from well-wishers at his ancestral Wali Bagh home in Charsaddah. He was lucky enough to survive, not so his personal guard and a police constable who died while trying to protect him.
Earlier in February, 25 people were killed when a suicide bomber targeted an ANP election rally in Charsaddah district. In more recent months, there have been several attempts to kill some other ANP leaders. The people of Swat had voted for the ANP, but its legislators could not protect their own families and moved to the safety of Peshawar or Islamabad.
For a time, Asfandyar Wali also left NWFP to reside in Islamabad, resorting to rather tough rhetoric against the Taliban. But that did not help. ANP was an NWFP based party and hence its leaders had to return to the province. If that required a peace deal with the devil, that had to be done.
To those pointing accusatory fingers at his party, Asfandyar had an important question to ask at the press conference: What is the alternative they suggest? So far there has been no coherent answer, though the huffing and puffing over the Swat deal continues with all sorts of people appearing on TV talk shows to castigate the ANP for having surrendered before the forces of darkness.
Indeed, there has been a frightful surrender, but not by the political parties. It hardly needs saying that whether it is a law and order problem beyond the control of civil administration or an armed insurgency, like in the present instance, the military has to act in aid of civilian authority to restore peace. It has thus far failed to do that job.
What we see in Swat, of course, did not happen in a day. It unfolded slowly on the watch of the former president General Pervez Musharraf (Retd). The media regularly reported on Mullah Fazalullah's pro-Taliban activities and an anti-government campaign he conducted through his FM radio.
Civil society groups kept expressing concern over the increasing influence of Fazalullah-led insurgents, and the brutalities they committed to strike terror in the hearts of the populace, majority of whom would later vote for the secularist ANP in the February 2008 elections.
But the general purposely looked the other way, just like the Lal Masjid case, as Mullah Fazalullah expanded his influence day by day exploiting rampant poverty to recruit young men as fighters and employing terror tactics, aided by foreign jehadists, to silence ordinary people. Only when things spun completely out of control was the Army sent in. And after a brief confrontation the effort petered out. That is how the surrender took place.
It calls for some accountability. Now that we are where we are, what is the way forward? The Adl Regulation is not going to thwart the threat the Taliban present. We need a well thought-out strategy to deal with the situation.
For their part the political parties must put their acts together and take a joint stand. The Jamaat-i-Islami and the Jamiat-e-Ulema-e-Islam (Fazlur Rehman) have been making some noises in support of Adl Regulation. They have some explaining to do as to which side they are on, the Taliban's or that of the state of Pakistan?
On the practical level, both peace deals and the use of force are needed. Since the threat comes from armed insurgents, our military must demonstrate it is equal to the task for which it exists. Let it establish the writ of the state in Swat and wherever else insurgents are challenging it.
Comments
Comments are closed.