Speech by Ambassador Tariq Fatemi, Foreign Policy Advisor to Mr. Nawaz Sharif; Chairman, Pakistan Muslim League

Transcription

1 Speech by Ambassador Tariq Fatemi, Foreign Policy Advisor to Mr. Nawaz Sharif; Chairman, Pakistan Muslim League The Dangers in Pakistan: Can They Ever Be Overcome? Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington, DC. 26 May, 2009.

2 Distinguished Guests, Ladies and Gentlemen and of course, my dear friend, Ashley Tellis. It is always a pleasure to come to an outstanding place of learning and research such a Carnegie, though it is also some what overwhelming to be asked to speak in front of such an eminent group of scholars, academicians and defense and foreign policy experts and analysts, as I see in this hall. Pakistan is today a functioning democracy, with an elected government, an independent judiciary and a vibrant media. We have an elected President while the Prime Minister enjoys strong support in both Houses of Parliament and the Opposition is led by an extremely popular politician who has extended his support to the government to strengthen the institutions of democracy. And for the first time, a small but courageous civil society has made its presence felt on the country s political landscape. Pakistan also has one of the world s largest disciplined, professional standing armies. And, the country is also a confirmed nuclear weapon state. A country of the size and strength of Pakistan, with its many assets, should be viewed as a strong and stable power. In any case, it should not have to face the kind of questions being regularly raised by foreign leaders, as well as by the media. A few weeks ago, even a Pakistani scholar wrote: Pakistan is close to the brink, perhaps not to a meltdown of the government, but to a permanent state of anarchy, as the Islamist revolutionaries led by the Taliban and their many allies take more territory and state power shrinks. We can expect a slow, insidious, long burning fuse of fear, terror and paralysis that the Taliban have lit because the State is unable and partly unwilling to douse. The frequent doomsday scenarios emerging from Washington are of course, the most alarming. More recently, a respected US military official warned that the current dispensation in Pakistan had at best two more weeks. And last month, President Obama expressed the fear that the civilian government in Pakistan was much too fragile to handle the challenges facing it, while Secretary Clinton expressed the fear that the Pakistan government had basically abdicated to the Taliban its responsibilities. For good measure, she added in her statement of April 25 that if the advancing Taliban were to essentially topple the government then they would have the keys to the nuclear arsenal of Pakistan we cannot contemplate that. In a situation where most people are convinced that the collapse of Pakistan is not only unavoidable but inevitable, some even wonder if the state can overcome the challenges confronting it. However, it is important to recall that while the current crisis can be traced to the deal signed by the Frontier government with the militants in the Swat valley in mid-april, the roots of the problem go back many years, even decades. But back to the Swat deal for now, which notwithstanding serious misgivings expressed by many, Pakistan s National Assembly and the President approved on April 14. The government s deal with the Taliban was deeply disappointing to the people of Pakistan and

3 deeply disturbing to the international community. It was viewed as evidence of the government s lack of will and commitment, especially after the supremely confident Taliban responded by announcing their rejection of democracy and the institutions of state, including the legal system. And, on April 21 the Taliban moved into the adjoining districts of Buner, Shangla, and Dir. However, soon thereafter and especially since President Zardari s summit meeting in Washington earlier this month, the Pakistan Army has mounted a massive military operation in Swat and the adjoining areas, demonstrating far greater resolve and commitment than before. The going has been tough; the Taliban have fought with grit and determination. As a result of the military operations, over 2 million locals have had to flee their homes and seek shelter in the adjoining towns and cities. This mass exodus will inevitably have its fall-out in the country, encouraging many to question the wisdom of the government s decision to launch military operations, for it is seen as fresh evidence of government s failure to anticipate the consequences and carrying out the necessary homework before initiating military action. Why and how have the Taliban emerged as such a major danger to Pakistan? It is a long and complicated story that goes back to the late 70 s when the Soviet Union invaded and occupied Afghanistan. Thereafter, global politics, regional rivalries, domestic politics and Pashtun religious and cultural sentiments all went into a toxic mix that helped create the circumstances that led to the birth of Islamic militancy in Afghanistan and Pakistan. When in the aftermath of 9/11, the US forces ousted the Taliban from Afghanistan, they failed to destroy the Al-Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban leadership, which permitted them to escape to Pakistan, where they were able to establish themselves in the tribal areas known at FATA. General Musharraf, the country s military ruler, played an extremely clever game with the United States as well as with his own people. While he wowed to promote US interests, he continued to bestow his favors upon the Taliban, who were seen as a good insurance policy in case the Americans decided to leave Afghanistan. The Taliban were also viewed as potential allies against India. Gradually but surely, the Pakistan Taliban began to organize their own militia and to openly propagate their political agenda for Pakistan. Across the border, the Afghan Taliban also succeeded in reconstituting their insurgency, aided by their Pakistani allies. New and hitherto unknown local militants, including Maulana Fazlullah, son-in-law of Sufi Muhammad, began to assert their authority and gain support of Al-Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban. While the Bush Administration poured nearly 12 billion dollars into Pakistan, 80% of it went to the Army, while little was spent on the social sectors or to strengthen Pakistan s capacity for counter-insurgency. Despite, or possibly because most of the U.S. assistance was spent on propping up an authoritarian regime, anti-american sentiments greatly intensified in Pakistan, not only among the Pashtuns, but among members of the largest ethnic group, the Panjabis, who too have been deeply impacted by Taliban sentiments.

4 While some of the reasons for the rise of authoritarianism and militancy can be traced to the circumstances of the country s birth; many more are on account of the sheer incompetence of its ruling elite. Born in bloodshed and raised in turmoil, Pakistan had to undergo the additional burden of a perpetual confrontation with a larger and inimical neighbor. It was the need to ensure its survival in the face of this existentialist threat that influenced Pakistan s leadership, both domestically and externally. It was this factor that led Pakistan to seek an alliance relationship with the United States and thus become an active participant in the super power confrontation. Many of the problems plaguing the state can be traced to this phenomenon---the massive allocation of the nation s resources to the defense sector, which led to the armed forces claiming to be not only the defender of the nation s frontiers but also the protector of its ideological moorings. This became the raison d etre for the Army s frequent interventions in national politics, trashing of the constitution, denial of human rights and a near-total neglect of the social sector. This resulted in the country becoming a virtual garrison state, with the security and intelligence agencies dominating the political landscape, while proponents of democracy and the rule of law were pushed into the background. Over the years, the budgetary allocation for health, education and the social sectors remained minimal and no effort made to strengthen the judiciary, the legislature or other organs of state. While any effort to identify persons or events responsible for Pakistan s current problems would be a contentious exercise, there is no denying that many of today s ills can be traced to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December This event was seized by the world s major powers to promote their own agendas, while the Pakistani military ruler, who only months earlier had sent the country s elected Prime Minister to the gallows, immediately recognized in it the opportunity to gain international legitimacy. The global coalition that came together to confront the Soviets was responsible for carrying out the largest and most successful covert operation ever mounted. Afghan bravery, American weaponry, Saudi money and Pakistani willingness to host the refugees and provide the Mujahideen the opportunity to train, arm and regroup on its soil, proved a formidable combination, finally convincing the Gorbachev Politburo to abandon Afghanistan. This was a historic victory for the Afghans and also the first time that the Russians had been pushed back from land occupied by them. Once the Soviet troops had withdrawn, the Bush Administration modified its priorities and shifted its focus elsewhere. In real terms, Washington ended its special relationship with Pakistan, which meant the suspension of all assistance to its erstwhile ally. Instead, Washington s primary effort was focused on preventing Pakistan from pursuing its nuclear weapons program. The debris of the Afghan adventure was left at Pakistan s doorstep, literally and figuratively. The country continues to suffer from the fall-out of that disastrous policy. Before it could recover and establish strong democratic institutions, the army intervened once again, seizing power in October 1999 and declaring its intention to oust the politicians for good and establish its own skewered version of democracy. As in the past, fortune smiled on this

5 authoritarian regime as well, when the 9/11 tragedy proved opportune for it to end its international isolation. The same person, with whom President Clinton had refused to be photographed, was called a buddy by President Bush and even when the entire nation stood up against him, Washington continued to characterize the military ruler as indispensable. What greater contempt could Washington show towards the people of Pakistan! What ails Pakistan today is a legacy of history, in which the cast of characters has been many and virtually all of them have left much to be desired. Domestic politics, regional rivalries and global confrontation have all played a role in the malaise that currently afflicts Pakistan. If the military regimes have been responsible for destroying the democratic institutions of state, its politicians too have left a lot to be desired. Resultantly, the institutions of state are in a state of ruin. They are either frighteningly corrupt or totally ineffective and therefore unresponsive to the needs of the people. Some may believe that laying the blame for current problems at the doorstep of the previous military regime is not going to resolve them nor help in finding a way out of the mess. Nevertheless, if Pakistan and for that matter, the US are to learn from the mistakes of the past, some understanding of where we went wrong is essential. For a start, the United States must not be deterred from its commitment to promoting democracy in countries with which it desires deep and meaningful relations. Admittedly, democracy is neither neat nor necessarily efficient, especially when it comes to dealing with complex foreign policy issues. But it is the only system that can create national consensus in favor of a policy, which then makes it legitimate and therefore credible and effective. Moreover, Pakistan is a multi-ethnic state, where one of its constituent elements, the Punjab represents 65% of the country s population. It thus dominates the nation s military and civil bureaucracy and, on most occasions, its political life as well. The smaller provinces deeply resent Punjab s domination and the only way to reduce their fears and anxieties is to ensure that the country is governed as a federal parliamentary system. Failure to ensure this has contributed to making the country highly polarized along geographic, religious, ethnic, sectarian, gender and economic lines. This has prevented the social cohesion necessary for broad-based, inclusive growth and the development of a national approach to national problems. Regrettably, the United States has shown a preference for military regimes in the belief - false as history demonstrates - that they are more stable and make better friends. This has made the US unpopular, especially in the smaller provinces. It is therefore essential that the Obama Administration come out irrevocably and unambiguously against any effort to disturb the civilian democratic dispensation. The rise of extremism and militancy in Pakistan and its close collaboration with extremists in Afghanistan and their sympathy with Al Qaeda has made the world view Pakistan as the epicenter of global terrorism. The international community is increasingly convinced that Pakistan lacks not only the capacity to confront the extremists, but the will to do so as well.

6 While it is prepared to assist Pakistan strengthen its capacity, Islamabad has to demonstrate the will necessary to match the capacity that the US is prepared to provide. But because the world fears that the government is not showing the desired level of commitment to this goal, its concern has grown manifold, particularly in the context of Pakistan s nuclear weapons. The world is convinced that with the religious extremists increasing their influence, it is not beyond the realm of possibility that nuclear technology, or nuclear assets could fall into the hands of the terrorists. This is seen in terms of a colossal catastrophe that the world is not prepared to countenance. What then are the challenges confronting Pakistan in the coming weeks and months. I would place them in three categories: domestic, regional and international On the domestic front, the GOP has to demonstrate far greater resolve and commitment in confronting the extremists, than has been the case so far. Being a democratically elected government, it can and should reach out to the other political parties to create a national consensus in favor of confronting the militants. To do this, the government has to bring the media and civil society on board and to co-opt the religious elements as well, so that the atrocities of the militants can be given wide publicity and their actions denounced by mainstream religious personalities. More importantly, a comprehensive, multi-faceted strategy needs to be developed, and this could consist of : i) dialogue and negotiations with the moderates; ii) massive economic investment in the affected areas; iii) social and administrative reforms and iv) military operations, when and where required. Fortunately, some of the Taliban s recent actions, such as lashing of a young girl in Swat and the beheading of its opponents created widespread revulsion against them. The government also finally accepted the advice by the country s most popular political leader, Mr. Nawaz Sharif, that it call for an All Parties Conference, which should discuss this issue and thereafter come out strongly against any deal with those who want their demands to be accepted at gun point. According to media reports, in a rare show of unity, leaders of 43 political parties and religious groups endorsed the military operation, but it was the clear stance taken by Mr. Nawaz Sharif that swung the balance of opinion in the meeting and ensured the unanimous adoption of the 15 point resolution. The second challenge is to ensure investment in the people. For too long, Islamabad has simply ignored the poor of the country, resulting in their increasing poverty and marginalization. During the past nine years, the rich have become richer, while the poor have simply slid into a bottomless pit, from which they see no escape. Their anger and alienation makes them susceptible to the lures of the obscurantists. The third challenge is recognition by the political elite that they have to ensure far better governance than has been provided so far. The politicians have to get their act together. They may not get another chance. The Taliban claim that it wants to create an egalitarian society, where social needs would be met and inexpensive and speedy justice ensured has proven a powerful attraction to the poor and disenfranchised. This can only be countered by a justice system that is inexpensive, speedy, fair and transparent.

7 Education, in particular, remains the most neglected sector and this has been taken advantage off by the extremists, who have captured the religious schools and turned them into breeding grounds for fellow-travelers. According to authoritative sources, the government spends only about 2.5% of GDP on health and education, whereas most of those countries that have grown on a sustained basis spend at least 7%. The growth that one saw over the past years was growth without development. Pakistan s challenge is to ensure that it is able to spend the US assistance in people-oriented programs that bring about meaningful improvement is the lives of the people. Another major problem is the growing centripetal tendencies in the country. This has deepened because of the policies of the authoritarian regime, weakening the commitment of people in the smaller provinces, especially in Baluchistan, to the concept of Pakistan. It is also a fact that foreign powers have been involved for years in stirring up trouble in this strategically important province. While these foreign influences have to be countered, the most effective strategy would be grant the provinces maximum provincial autonomy, as was promised to them in the 1973 Constitution, and let them run their own affairs, including having the right to benefits from their natural resources. On the regional front, the most important challenge for Pakistan is to stabilize its relations with India. The first step is resumption of the Composite Dialogue Process, on which India pressed the pause button after the Mumbai terror attacks in November Thereafter, they have to pick up the thread of the negotiations where it was abandoned in March This appears more likely now that the recent elections in India have brought back the Congress Party into power, with a more convincing mandate; while in Pakistan, Mr. Nawaz Sharif has come out strongly in favor of genuinely good relations with India. While the two countries must make every effort to resolve their differences bilaterally, the US has to go back to the concept originally articulated by President Obama during his election campaign. In other words, the US has to use its influence on India, to impress on her the long term advantages of resolving its many differences with Pakistan and this has to include the issue of Kashmir. The US should also appreciate that it is not enough to proclaim that India no longer constitutes a threat to Pakistan and that Islamabad s concern should be the extremists. Even those who favor good relations with India would be reluctant to accept the US contention that India no longer harbors unfriendly sentiments towards Pakistan history is as yet too recent and too raw for this to be accepted and in any case, India s current activities in Afghanistan are a cause of genuine concern to Pakistan. After all in the past decade alone, India has twice threatened war on Pakistan the first in December, 2002 and then again in November It is therefore understandable that Pakistan is unable to devote all its resources on the Western borders till such time that the problem of Kashmir has been resolved. The next challenge for Pakistan is to learn to treat Afghanistan as an independent, sovereign country, rather than as an opportunity to extend its influence into Central Asia. In other words, the belief that Afghanistan provides a strategic depth to Pakistan in its

8 confrontation with India needs to be abandoned. However for this to be concretized, one of the things that the Obama Administration could consider is to work towards restoration of Afghanistan s traditional neutral role in the region. Coupled to this should be an effort to convince Kabul to accept the Durand Line as the international frontier with Pakistan. As regards relations with the US, the challenges are enormous. Pakistan and the US have to establish relations in which there is far greater trust and confidence than has been the case so far. Islamabad cannot and should not agree to conditions which it feels is unwilling or unable to fulfill. If need be, the understandings arrived at between the two countries during the Musharraf regime, could be debated in Parliament so as to gain support for them. This will help in forging a national consensus in favor of such a policy. Pakistan should make it clear that it prefers greater economic assistance from the US as compared to funds for military purchases. Attaching onerous conditionalities to the assistance package are neither practical nor productive. In fact, we should also impress on the Obama Administration that greater market access for Pakistan s exports would have a more durable and deeper impact on Pakistan s economy, as compared to cash hand-outs, which encourage misuse and even corruption. Pakistan has to convince the US that providing it with the technology and weaponry needed to confront the extremists would be more economic and effective. Drone attacks are deeply humiliating and therefore reinforce anti-american sentiments. In fact, the US should also be persuaded to agree to their joint operations. This would reduce criticism of the US and add to the credibility of the elected government. Pakistan also has to impress upon Washington that nostalgia for military regimes deepens anti-us sentiments and calls into question the legitimacy and credibility of the elected set-up. Pakistan has to recognize that US concerns about the safety and security of its nuclear weapons may well be exaggerated but can not be dismissed. It should be willing to consider US offer of help and assistance, provided of course Pakistan s control and capability is not compromised or weakened, in any way. What are the prospects of Pakistan being able to confront the many serious dangers confronting it? One, we have an elected democratic dispensation as well as a vibrant and responsible opposition, both of which are cognizant of the dangers confronting the country. It also appears that many of the politicians appreciate that they have to demonstrate much better performance and a higher degree of commitment to responsible and responsive governance. Two, the manner in which the opposition parties, in particular the PML(N), have cooperated with the government on important national issues, while refraining from any effort to embarrass it, is proof of their growing maturity and wisdom.

9 Three, Musharraf s effort to destroy the judiciary not only failed but instead triggered a national movement against the authoritarian regime. This was a remarkable development, for it not only restored an independent judiciary but gave birth to a courageous and vocal civil society that refused to be browbeaten into silence. Four, Pakistan is one of the few Third World countries that has a large, independent and fearless media that has become the guardian of the peoples rights. Five, Pakistan has one of the best trained, professional and dedicated armed forces, which constitutes an extremely important factor ensuring peace and stability in the country. Six, the Taliban s crude and cruel tactics have exposed their true credentials and alienated large sections of the urban population, while strengthening moderate sentiments in the country. Seven, there is growing unanimity in the country that both Pakistan and India should make every effort to settle their differences and devote their resources to improving the lot of millions living a life of pain and deprivation. And finally, it is important to note that while the overwhelming majority of Pakistanis are Muslims, they are moderate in their beliefs and modern in their outlook. They are closer to the Sufi traditions than to the other schools that advocate a narrow and inward looking approach. This is borne out by the fact that the country s founding fathers were Western educated, middle-class professionals, rather than hereditary rulers or religious scholars. In fact, the religious parties have never fared well in our elections and the country s most enduring and popular politicians have been those that have advocated a moderate, progressive and modern outlook. These are some of the factors that encourage me to believe that notwithstanding the many negative prognostications, Pakistan has both the strength and the endurance to overcome its current difficulties. The overwhelming majority are honest, hardworking resilient individuals, who have more than amply demonstrated that they are second to none when it comes to skill, intelligence, initiative and imagination. What they need is honest, accountable and responsible political leadership at home that continues to enjoy the understanding and assistance of friends and well wishers abroad.

10