Pakistan News And Discussion-11

[Guest]

<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Internal Security Threats: Counter-Terrorism    </b>
Source FT.com
If America is the terrorist...
Khaled Ahmed
Counter-terrorism is more dangerous for the government in Pakistan than terrorism is for terrorists

Pakistan’s undertaking to end terrorism is sabotaged by a lack of conviction. It doesn’t believe that there is terrorism. It equally lacks the conviction that counter-terrorist policies are its own. At the popular and intellectual level, efforts against terrorism are confounded by the insistence to first ‘define terrorism’. In this discussion, America invariably emerges as the terrorist.

Is there terrorism in Pakistan? There is an overwhelming consensus that there is no terrorism in Pakistan. The violence that one sees is a reaction to the policy of ‘enslavement’ to the United States. The United States is not fighting a war against terrorism but a war against Islam. The trouble in the Tribal Areas fills the vacuum of the dereliction of the state when it facilitated the American invasion of Afghanistan. Most politicians and their followers deny that there are any ‘foreigners’ in Waziristan.

Even those who acknowledge the existence of terrorism in Pakistan, begin the discussion by condemning the United States. The inevitable reference to Iraq bleeds the American case against terrorism of all legitimacy. Obfuscation sets in when intellectuals demanding a ‘correct’ definition of terrorism equate the collateral damage of war to the killing of innocent people by suicide-bombers. ‘Facts’ about terrorism appearing in the national press are ignored for these reasons, but also because of the power of intimidation of the Islamists who actually agree with the strategy of suicide-bombing.

<b>Facts that need to be ignored:</b> In the first six months of 2007, Pakistan suffered 558 terrorist attacks that claimed 1019 lives. As far as the incidents of terrorism are concerned, the highest number occurred in Balochistan, 238, but the fatalities there, 94, don’t compare with the deaths, 723, in the Tribal Areas. The NWFP suffered 155 attacks with 160 deaths. It is the Tribal Areas where the people are being forcibly moulded to become the support base of the terrorists. Other areas are simply ‘external’ targets away from the ‘ground zero’ of the Tribal Areas. The Tribal Areas could be the largest base of international terrorism in the world.

The politics of denial must ignore all evidence of counter-terrorist ‘success’. The security forces of Pakistan arrested 853 terrorists in the first six months of 2007. These included 32 Al Qaeda operatives, 172 Taliban warriors and 488 ‘insurgents’ against the state. Those arrested also included 115 from the banned religious groups. Where were the Al Qaeda men (Arab, Uzbek, Kyrgyz, Chechen, etc.) arrested from? Mostly from Wana in South Waziristan, which the world thinks is where Osama bin Laden could be hiding. The collective rage (the state plus the religious groups plus the population) against the ‘intelligence’ that Osama bin Laden could be in the Tribal Areas strikes at the root of counter-terrorism in the country.

<b>‘Umma’ versus the West and counter-terrorism:</b> There is little clarity about the ‘morality’ of fighting terrorism. Since the collapse of Arab nationalism in the Middle East, all ‘definitional’ matters are referred to the religious leaders. Based on networking, most clerics in the Islamic world derive strength from supporting and propagating the edicts issued by Arab clerics against counter-terrorism. Added to this is the jurisprudence of the Palestinian issue in the Middle East. The ‘injustice’ of what has been done to the Palestinians by the United States booby-traps all focus on national issues.

The terrorism of sectarian wars promised most to be considered ‘national’ and not linked ‘globally’ to the United States. Yet, each time Shias and Sunnis were massacred in Pakistan both communities accused the United States for having ‘planned’ the killings. A ‘global’ nexus was established after every sectarian killing to prevent the development of the morality of fighting terrorism inside Pakistan. The Shia of Pakistan were dubbed partners of the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq; the Shia-killers were linked by the Shia clerics to the United States through the middleman’s role played by the ISI.

<b>Anti-Americanism as counter-terrorism:</b> If not terrorism, who is killing us? No doubt, America. The logic of this argument is developed through very tortuous reasoning. The first part is simple. If there is terrorism in Pakistan it can’t be done by a Muslim because Islam forbids a Muslim from killing another Muslim. If terrorism is a Muslim phenomenon then it should happen inside the United States. Since it is happening in Pakistan, it must be engineered by Washington. Amazingly, discussants on TV channels are linking the recent Al Qaeda suicide, Abdullah Mehsud, to an American plan to kill the Chinese in Pakistan. Wasn’t he released from Guantanamo Bay prematurely for this reason?

Counter-terrorism is more dangerous for the government in Pakistan than terrorism is for terrorists. Not all the establishment in Islamabad is convinced that Pakistan should accept the latest American ‘pressure tactic’ in the shape of a Congress Bill to get Islamabad to pursue the Taliban and Islamic extremists. The biggest persuader may be Islamist ‘intimidation’, but the stated reason is the ‘people of Pakistan’ and that ultimately includes democracy that Musharraf is postponing.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->