Pakistan Press on Pakistan's Performance, West Asian Developments and Afghanistan: New Age Islam's Selection, 17 September 2020
By New
Age Islam Edit Bureau
17
September 2020
·
By
I.A. Rehman
·
By
Themrise Khan
·
By
Sahar Atrache
·
By
Saad Hafiz
·
By
Imran Jan
·
By
Durdana Najam
------
Pakistan
Either Ignores Whatever Is Said About Its Performance or Denies the Very Basis
of The Criticism
By I.A.
Rehman
17 Sep 2020
NO country
likes to be told what is wrong with it but responsible states do not dismiss
criticism without assessing the element of truth contained in adverse comments
on their performance. Pakistan is not among such countries. It either ignores
whatever is said about its performance by friend or foe or denies the very
basis of the criticism.
Recently,
the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) asked Islamabad not to extend the
tenure of its Commission of Inquiry into Enforced Disappearances (COIED) as it
had failed to achieve its objective. Domestic opinion feels even more strongly
about the futility of expecting this institution to deliver. Further, it
generates a false impression that the needful is being done to deal with
enforced disappearances and the people are prevented from demanding alternative
institutions to address what undoubtedly is one of Pakistan’s most painful
human rights challenges.
Now Human
Rights Watch (HRW), the widely respected international monitor, has issued a
statement Pakistan’s Hypocrisy on Press Freedom: Editor’s Jailing Shows Reality
of Media Crackdown. It says “The NAB has been widely criticised as being used
for political purposes and it’s evident that the charges against [Mir
Shakil-ur-] Rehman were politically motivated. Rehman’s ordeal epitomises the
fast-shrinking space for dissent and criticism in Pakistan.”
The
statement adds: “In Pakistan arbitrary arrests and baseless criminal
prosecutions are often used as instruments of press censorship. So long as
Rahman and others in the media are punished for practising journalism, Prime
Minister Khan’s statement that ‘I don’t mind criticism’ is not worth the paper
it won’t be printed on.”
Any
organisation urging Pakistan to solve the matter of enforced disappearances is
acting as a friend.
Unfortunately,
Islamabad’s attitude towards both the ICJ and HRW is characterised by crass
opportunism. When these organisations assail Indian atrocities in held Kashmir
it uses their observations as the most authoritative and objective denunciation
of New Delhi’s perfidy. They are accepted as totally unbiased defenders of rule
of law and unadulterated justice. But if they point to anything wrong in the
policies or conduct of Pakistan they are accused of all possible biases. That
this attitude needs to be corrected cannot be disputed.
Sometimes
observations by international rights bodies are unwelcome for being at variance
with the official narrative. But in case of one of the issues under discussion,
namely, enforced disappearances, there is no permanent official narrative. The
Supreme Court started hearing petitions for the recovery of victims of enforced
disappearances in 2007. On its suggestion, a commission comprising three
retired judges of high courts was set up in 2010 and it completed its report on
the last day of the year. Despite persistent demand by civil society
organisations the commission’s report has not been released, but one of its
recommendations, that a commission be set up to recover the victims of enforced
disappearance and pursue legal remedies, was accepted. This is how the present
commission of inquiry was set up in 2011 and the Supreme Court stopped hearing
cases of enforced disappearances.
Throughout
the nine years of the COIED’s existence the UN Working Group on Enforced
Disappearances, ICJ and Pakistan’s rights organisations have been demanding its
upgradation and the allocation of adequate resources to it. Now domestic as
well as international opinion is calling for replacement of the useless
commission with a genuine coin.
That this
demand is wholly in Pakistan’s national interest is obvious. Enforced
disappearance is a crime in international law and it should be so recognised by
Pakistan’s Penal Code. Enforced disappearances have blighted the lives of
thousands of families and alienated large communities from the state. Hence any
organisation urging Pakistan to solve this matter is actually acting as its
friend and deserves to be listened to with due respect.
However,
replacement of the existing commission with a better one will solve only part
of the problem. Equally important is the need to ratify the UN Convention for
the prevention of enforced disappearances so as to bring Pakistan’s efforts to
deal with the problem in line with the international campaign. It is also
necessary to make a law that declares enforced disappearance a crime and
provides for the punishment of culprits and for compensation to the victims. A
bill to achieve this purpose was moved in the federal parliament in 2014. If
the present government is not satisfied with this bill it may draft a new bill
but doing nothing is no answer.
As regards
the second issue, the complaint that the space for media freedom is shrinking
is indeed contrary to the official narrative, which holds that the media is
absolutely free. This matter can be resolved by examining evidence that the two
sides can produce. If the media is a victim of official acts of omission and
commission as is evident in the revival of press advice in an uglier form, in
discrimination in the release of state advertisements and advice to advertisers
not to give ads to certain newspapers, if free circulation of any newspaper is
not allowed in certain areas, if journalists ‘disappear’, if the fact of
thousands of media employees becoming jobless does not attract the attention of
the government, then the official narrative has no leg to stand on.
It would be
a great pity if in the 21st century journalists are expected to explain that
encroaching on media freedom is contrary to the interests of the state and the
people of Pakistan. Without a free and independent media there will be no
countervailing force to prevent the people in command from dragging the state
and the people into an abyss of ignominy and oblivion. Responsible societies
value friends who point out their shortcomings. If Pakistan chooses any other
course it cannot avoid paying the cost which might be unaffordable.
Tailpiece:
The Lahore CCPO is being denounced for deviating from the dominant narrative
about the motorway gang rape. But how many in the country’s male-dominated,
patriarchal and woman-baiting society think otherwise? Besides, the official
publicity for the affair and stories of police fumbling gleefully presented on
the TV and demonisation of suspects are likely to boomerang on the inept
authorities.
https://www.dawn.com/news/1580119/listen-to-the-critics
-----
The
Fight for Equality
By
Themrise Khan
September
17, 2020
Can the
current generation of Pakistani women achieve the impossible? Can they set
Pakistan’s women free?
The
women-led movement for justice, equality and rights, has had a long history in
Pakistan. From pre-Partition women Muslim Leaguers fighting alongside Jinnah to
realize an independent nation, free from British colonial rule, to the
post-Partition formation of the All Pakistan Women’s Association (APWA), to the
relentless protests by the Women’s Action Forum (WAF) that were tear-gassed and
baton-charged in the 1980s, the fight has come a long way.
But has it changed
anything for women in Pakistan?
This is not
a critique of the women’s rights movement, in any way. Nor is it disrespect or
disregard for the struggle and sacrifice that thousands of women across the
country have made for decades to ensure women have equal rights. We are where
we are today because of these sacrifices.
But the
truth is that where we are today is nowhere close to where we want to be, or
more importantly, where we deserve to be.
Recent
events have galvanized Pakistan’s women for all the right reasons. We as women
– young, old, privileged, under-privileged – are at risk every day in Pakistan.
In our families, in our workplaces, in our social environments. Even in our
digital environments. We remain at risk with men in our lives and without them.
So what is
missing in our struggle and sacrifices that over 70 years on, women in Pakistan
still remain one of the most at-risk groups across the country? An at-risk
group that comprises almost half of the total population and cuts across class,
wealth and religious barriers. And a group that is in physical danger of its
life, not just legally or socially.
Social
movements that have led to structural and systemic change, today’s buzzwords,
have been relentless in their cause. They have faced ostracization,
vilification and even death in the face of resistance. But these sacrifices
have often led to strengthening the movement rather than diminish its
influence.
The role of
female peasants in the Tehbaga uprising in 1940s Bengal, or the Abeokuta Women’s
Tax Revolt in 1940s colonial Nigeria, and the Mexican Zapatista Movement in the
1990s, are only a few that come to mind. Movements that not just impacted laws
and unjust practices against women, but also led to defining what a sustained
and organized social movement could achieve.
Our very
own struggles to push for the Muslim Family Law Ordinance in the 1960s and
against the Hudood Ordinance in the 1980s are examples of sustained and
powerful engagement with the establishment. Engagements that saw massive street
protests, violence against women by law-enforcement and even imprisonment.
These were
the movements that I grew up around and which influenced my life. A coming
together of women from all walks of life, young and old, urban and rural, bound
by one purpose and one purpose alone – to demand that they be given their due
share.
But
somewhere along the way, the movement lost steam and faded away. Even when we
played host to the first female prime minister in the Muslim world. It remained
in the shadows, but it was overwhelmed by a political storm. In my own
profession as a development activist, it was hidden away under international
donor fantasies of ‘empowerment’. I cannot help but correlate a decline in the
rights and status of women during that time to what it is now.
The
beginnings of the annual Aurat March in 2018, was meant to have been the
tectonic shift in the progressive women’s movement in Pakistan. A phoenix
rising from the ashes of patriarchy and political oppression. And to some
extent it has been. Spawned by a new generation of Pakistani women who are
technologically savvy, creative, self-aware and entrepreneurial, it has the
makings of something better.
But it also
has far, far more to fight for now, than we did 30 or 40 years ago. The extent
to which women are now seen as mere objects that can be violated and ignored
has grown manifold in this time. Where only streets were the location of
dissent and disdain, now we have the workplace and digital realms as well.
Where we had a more limited section of male society who were a threat to us,
now it is society as a whole that is the threat, – both men and even women of
all sorts.
Growing
wealth and income inequality and overlapping beliefs between tradition and
modernity are also impacting the fight. We can no longer assume that those who
belong to the high end of the spectrum may be more tolerant, liberal and
believing in equality. Or that those who fall at the bottom end of the spectrum
are more conservative, rigid and rights-averse.
It is all
this and more that this new generation of women have to fight against. And they
can and they must. But the fight is also more fragmented. Because the things to
fight for have become more fragmented. Provinces have drifted apart. Some worse
off than others, making some women’s issues worse off (and possibly further
away) than others. Twitter is the urban female activists’ best friend and
enemy. Rural women barely have any platform at all, let alone access to the
internet.
The fight
is long and hard and the new generation is largely committed to it. But such
fights need sustained momentum, sacrifices above and beyond what we can perhaps
allow in our lives in this global age of capitalism and it must be relentless
at all levels – public, private, online, offline. It cannot just be defined by
the Aurat March. It has to be more. Much, much more. As the recent action taken
by female journalists has been against their online vilification.
Mine and
previous generations may not have been entirely successful in giving Pakistani
women their due share. I can only hope this ‘naya’ generation of women is more
successful. Naya Pakistan certainly hasn’t been very kind to us so far.
Themrise
Khan is an independent specialist and researcher in international development,
social policy and global migration.
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/715850-the-fight-for-equality
-----
Gaza In
Quarantine
By Sahar
Atrache
September
17, 2020
In late
August, the coronavirus, which causes Covid-19, found a foothold in the Gaza
Strip, one of the most densely populated territories in the World.
Since then,
infections have spiked significantly, with nearly 1,000 new positive cases
reported in the last two weeks alone.
Now, Gaza
faces a health catastrophe that will be difficult to contain and mitigate
without swift and significant aid.
The
detection of community transmission in the Strip marked a grim turn in what had
been a relatively successful prevention strategy. From the onset of the
pandemic through much of August, fewer than 100 cases had been reported - all
among travellers returning from Israel and Egypt and all of whom were
systematically quarantined.
Gaza is
particularly vulnerable to the spread of Covid-19. Its weak healthcare system
barely serves the daily needs of the area’s nearly 2 million people and is not
equipped to handle a pandemic that has overwhelmed even the most advanced
healthcare systems in the world.
That system
has been debilitated by years of blockades, violence, and a dearth of funding.
It suffers from ubiquitous shortages of drugs, equipment, supplies, and
personnel.
The World
Health Organization (WHO) warns that Gaza’s hospitals can handle only 350
Covid-19 patients. But with more than 1,200 cases already, the virus will
likely sicken thousands of people. And with fewer than 100 ICU beds and even
fewer ventilators, Covid-19 could push Gaza’s healthcare system over the brink.
To make
matters worse, the pandemic comes against the backdrop of renewed violence and
access restrictions. In August, during a three-week escalation between Israel
and Hamas, Israel tightened the blockade, banning the entry of construction
materials and fuel to Gaza, which has forced the enclave’s only power plant to
shut down. By early September, the Strip regained calm after a successful – yet
likely temporary – Qatari-led de-escalation agreement. Still, the Qatari
mediation does not lessen the effects of Gaza’s blockade, nor will it prevent a
future outburst of violence.
All this is
taking place in communities reeling under the weight of a decade-long
humanitarian crisis - triggered by 13 years of blockades with varying degrees
of restriction and periodic war.
There is a
real risk that Gaza cannot withstand the economic shockwaves of the Covid-19
pandemic. More than 80 percent of people in Gaza depend on humanitarian aid to
survive, and the long-term socioeconomic repercussions of a months-long
lockdown could be devastating. Thousands of Gazans have already completely or
partially lost their income, which has exacerbated a high unemployment rate
estimated at more than 50 percent prior to the Coronavirus.
A chronic
shortage of humanitarian funding for Gaza, exacerbated by major recent cuts in
US funding, has made the delivery of even the most basic services a challenge.
The Trump administration’s 2018 decision to end US funding to the United
Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) was and remains deeply problematic.
Now, more
than ever, this policy needs to be reversed. The virus knows no borders, and
this is no time to politicise aid. Quite the contrary, in the face of the worst
pandemic the world has experienced in more than a century, global efforts
should come together to mitigate these risks worldwide.
Amid
lockdowns and a blockade, Gazans now face a ‘quarantine within a quarantine’.
It took only a few cases for the virus to spread quickly inside the Strip. At
the very least, the terms of the blockade need to be revised to help the
population cope with the pandemic and the area’s long-term humanitarian crisis.
Israel
should commit to ensuring that the blockade is not used as a form of collective
punishment against the Palestinians living in Gaza. At the minimum, Israel
should allow construction material or goods aimed at humanitarian aid,
development projects, or the health sector to enter the territory. It also
should refrain from banning fuel – a basic and critical commodity.
International
donors – including the US – must increase their support to help Gaza through
the worst of the outbreak. They should immediately provide medical equipment
including ventilators, personal protective equipment (PPE), and testing kits.
In March,
UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres called for a global ceasefire to focus on
“the true [Covid-19] fight of our lives”. This call is true in Gaza today more
than ever.
Excerpted
from: ‘Gaza’s ‘quarantine within a quarantine’ must end’
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/715851-gaza-in-quarantine
-----
Democracy
and Security Are Connected in West Asia
By Saad
Hafiz
SEPTEMBER
17, 2020
The
Israeli-UAE normalization agreement is an optimistic sign of old animosity
between Israel and Arab states dissipating. Significantly, the deal comes
decades after a similar thaw between Israel, Egypt, and Jordan. The reality is
that the Israeli-UAE breakthrough, followed by Bahrain, is part of a trend
where authoritarian Arab regimes choose self-preservation over any pretensions
to support Palestinian rights.
The truth
is, Israel, one of the region’s few democracies, is making a peace deal with
yet another authoritarian Arab state. Ironically, Israel is finding it
expedient to support authoritarian rulers in the Middle East, like its patron
the United States.
For their
part, Arab rulers look to Israel for protection against the twin threats of
radical Islam and Iran. But in the absence of a true partnership between Jews
and Arabs, peace strategies built on coercion and deterrence are unlikely to
have a long-term future.
Historically,
external support for democracy and human rights in the Middle East has taken a
back-seat to support dictators in the name of stability and peace. This myopic
policy has contributed to the fact that democracy is near non-existent in the
region. As a result, the Middle East is littered with authoritarian states or
equally authoritarian regimes and entities with democratic or radical guise.
With their
autonomy and dignity restored, the Palestinian people must aim to build a
democratic state in contrast to the authoritarian states in much of the Arab
and Muslim worlds
It is hard
to gauge public opinion on Israeli recognition because of the tight controls on
the media and political activity in most Arab states. But the reluctance of
pivotal Saudi Arabia to follow the UAE suggests that other countries will want
to proceed cautiously. The rulers perhaps fear domestic unrest, knowing that
public opinion doesn’t support ties with Israel without progress on the
Palestinian issue.
So far,
there is little evidence that the Arab public at large has developed warm
feelings for Israelis or that the “psychological barrier” of Palestine that has
long impeded ties between Israelis and Arabs is fading. Although genuine steps
towards peace in the Middle East are welcome, just reduced hostility between
Israel and Arab governments is not enough.
Despite
reports of secret negotiations with Israel, other countries widely rumored to
jump on the peace bandwagon have not followed the UAE. For the moment, Saudi
Arabia and Oman have publicly expressed their continued support for a two-state
solution, as a pre-condition to normalizing ties with Israel.
Nevertheless,
as more Arab countries signal that they are ready to live with Israel’s
occupation of Palestine, it reduces the options for the Palestinians. Unlike
the past two Israeli-Arab peace agreements, the UAE deal doesn’t offer any
succor to the Palestinians.
The 1978
Israeli-Egypt agreements and the 1994 Israeli-Jordan at least demanded an
Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories and the formation of the
Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Gaza, leading to the creation of a
Palestinian state.
In fact,
Israel paid a low price for the UAE relationship by agreeing to defer its
threat to annex more West Bank territory. The muted reaction from governments
in the region confirms a long-known fact that no Arab country is prepared to
confront Israel for the sake of the beleaguered Palestinians.
But other
than helping President Donald Trump’s re-election chances, providing a
distraction to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s corruption charges, and
opening doors for UAE Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed to buy more
sophisticated US weapons, it is unclear how the Israeli-UAE deal is the
blueprint for lasting peace in the Middle East.
The hard
facts are that the Israel-UAE deal will increase divisions among Arab and
Muslim states. Israel will continue to pound the Palestinians for perceived
transgressions as the two sides are too far apart to start a meaningful dialogue.
And despite governmental moves towards peace, generations of Arabs and Muslims
brought up on questioning Israel’s legitimacy and seeing endless Palestinian
suffering are even less likely to wholeheartedly back the normalization of
relations.
The only way
forward lies in political compromise and dropping maximalist demands. For
instance, with security guarantees, Israel should agree to a viable Palestinian
state. With their autonomy and dignity restored, the Palestinian people must
aim to build a democratic state in contrast to the authoritarian states in much
of the Arab and Muslim worlds.
A tall
order indeed, but until then, the prospects for lasting peace in the Middle
East seems a distant dream.
Saad Hafiz
is an analyst and commentator on politics, peace, and security issues. He can
be reached at shgcci@gmail.com
https://dailytimes.com.pk/667477/democracy-and-security-are-connected-in-west-asia/
-----
Afghans
— Destined to Lose
By Imran
Jan
September
17, 2020
In
Charsadda, I always saw Afghan men selling deliciously baked naan (bread) and
freshly squeezed sugarcane juice. After customers would consume the juice, the
Afghan vendors would clean the empty glass in a bucket full of water hanging by
the cart. It wasn’t the most hygienic practice but we enjoyed the juice. Back
then, we drank water directly from a hose. There was not much fear in society.
Some of us
used to tease them by calling them Afghani and Kabuli to remind them how it was
a badge of ridicule to be an Afghani mohajir. One day, one of them said he
didn’t mind being called an Afghani. He told me I should always call him by
that name, just not for the sake of ridiculing. His only problem with that name
was the intention behind it. He was proud of his identity.
He told me
he used to belong to a very noble family of Kabul where they had great respect
owing to their strong roots going back centuries. All had been toppled with the
1979 Soviet invasion, and then whatever was left, was gone with the 2001 US
invasion. They were not roadside vendors and scavengers in their country but
conditions compelled them to take up any work. Their fault was their geography
and that they focused more on their culture and identity than the ability to
manufacture lethal weapons. Afghanistan has been a battleground for decades
only because they have been militarily defenseless.
When the
Soviets invaded, too many respectful and honourable Afghans ended up as
refugees around the world. The brave Afghan men fought hard and liberated their
land — an example of such an insurgency is hard to find. It’s in Pashtun blood.
Afghans are wired to fight but destined to lose.
When the
war ended and the Soviets withdrew, many around the world benefited. Many
ex-Soviet states were liberated and became sovereign states. Germany became one
after both its halves were unified. America became the sole superpower, feeling
proud of its might and victory. Pakistan became a nuclear state during that
war, only unofficially. One nation got misery and degradation: Afghanistan.
Warlords became
the new owners of the country, each laying claim to their own territory.
Mayhem, bloodshed, and injustice became the new face of Afghanistan. To fight
the injustice, the Taliban movement was born. Afghanistan became an assembly
line for exporting radicalism globally. Today, peace is being negotiated
between the Taliban and Kabul in Doha. Peace this time has a serious chance.
But again, there are gainers and losers in this. America will get what it
wanted: the end of its longest war. America is ending the war because it’s
hurting America not because it feels for the countless innocent Afghan deaths.
More importantly, America is controlling this withdrawal’s meaning.
Once again,
the transition of power is going to be with the blessing of Washington DC. But
what do we have for the losers? Afghanistan’s longest war may not end soon.
Afghans do not control the meaning of this deal and their country’s future.
Another wave of violence and bloodshed will soon be unleashed after the peace
is executed, which is ironic. This peace would yield its waste (violence)
before any produce: a peaceful and developing Afghanistan.
But the
future could be alarming. The peace talks between Kabul and the Taliban were
supposed to happen within 10 days after the US-Taliban signed a deal in
February. It, however, took six months. In a post-US withdrawal Afghanistan, a
Kabul aided by India would create tantrums over every little and big issue. At
worst, a nuclear standoff between Pakistan and India is not unthinkable.
Afghans would lose again because when elephants fight, it’s the grass that is
trampled.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2264288/afghans-destined-to-lose
------
Afghans
Will Have to Unite To Live Peacefully
By
Durdana Najam
September
17, 2020
Afghanistan
cannot reform unless its citizens own the country in a manner that they condemn
disunity among varying tribes and clans. It is because of the Afghans rather
than of the US that the country has been falling from one crisis to another
with an almost complete erasure of civic sanity and rule of law. Every time
there is a friction among Afghans, a vacuum is left to take advantage of by
foreign elements. It is to close these gaps that the inter-Afghan dialogue
takes precedence among the three points on the agenda upon which the US and the
Afghan Taliban have agreed to end the war. Unless this seed of discord is
sorted out, all other imperatives such as the withdrawal of US-led forces,
disallowing Afghan soil from being used for terrorism, and a complete ceasefire
would elude the peace process, long before it bears fruit.
When the US
left Afghanistan in 1989, which the former now confesses to being a hasty
decision, the latter fell into an unending spiral of ethnic violence that
eventually put the Taliban in the saddle. From 1992 to 1996, during the Battle
of Kabul, as the fight came to be known, the city was torn apart with incessant
bombardment from the heavily armed foreign backed forces. It was not until eyes
were cast on a lone unified group, the Taliban, who had a formula composed in
Sharia to put together the withering Afghans, that the fires and brimstones
fell silent. Hardly had the country settled that a forced compliance with
religious norms and values, as interpreted by the Taliban, made life difficult
and almost suffocating, for women especially. Education was reformed and made
incompatible with the modern technological syllabus of the 21st century. As the
social environment struggled to breathe, the country plunged into a new wave of
extremism that eventually earned the wrath of the US wounded after 9/11.
Although not a single Afghan was involved in the massacre, the very reason that
Afghanistan was fanning terrorism and extremism, the plea had been generated
successfully to bomb it to extinction. The Taliban were dethroned and the
US-led NATO forces occupied the country.
Ironically
enough, if the Taliban were unable to unite or develop Afghanistan, the US-led
Western forces despite all the wealth and technology at their disposal failed
in this regard, even after staying there for almost two decades. In fact, it
was under their nose that corruption in Afghanistan got embedded in the system.
Today, the economy is burdened with drug money and state institutions are
structured on an extractive system of governance that benefits the elite only.
The ruling elite of the existing Unity government and before that the
government under Hamid Karzai had enjoyed influence and control limited only to
their palaces and a few urban cities. The rest, almost 70% of Afghanistan, has
fallen into the hands of the Taliban.
That makes
unity among the political rivals in Afghanistan extremely important.
It is in
this backdrop that Pakistan has hosted the summits of Afghan leaders from
different political leanings in June 2019.
Though
there was a long list of issues for discussion, one overriding message the
conference intended to give was the undeniable composition of Afghanistan’s
political landscape comprising representation from diverse ethnic groups. In
attendance were Afghan leaders such as Gulbadin Hekmatyar of the Hezb-e-Islami
political party; Karim Khalili of the Hizb-e-Wahdat party, the representative
of ethnic Hazaras; Atta Muhammad Noor, an ethnic Tajik from Jamiat-e-Islami;
Fouzia Kofi, politician and women’s rights activist; Ismail Khan, the warlord;
and many others. To exhibit Pakistan’s neutrality and to show that it has no
favourites, neither the Taliban nor anyone from the government were invited to
attend the conference.
The Lahore
Process, as the conference was called, emphasised, besides other things, the
importance of an inter-Afghan coordination for any meaningful conclusion of the
conflict in their country.
The Taliban
had been loath to recognise the Afghan government. For them the power lies with
the US and had been insisting to talk to them only. However, after a long
persuasion, sanity finally dawned on them leading to an inter-Afghan dialogue
in Doha.
Defence
experts see Ashraf Ghani getting increasingly irrelevant in Afghanistan’s power
equation, and do not see his space in the future political dispensation of the
country. Ghani in collusion with India had tried to derail the US-Taliban peace
agreement, but Trump’s unwavering resolve to come out of Afghanistan failed
them. And in spite of Pakistan’s diminishing influence on the Taliban, the
latter had been instrumental in removing communication barriers among them and
the US.
To make the
inter-Afghan dialogue successful, all the forces within Afghanistan have to
shed their tribal and ethnic egocentrism. Zalmay Khalilzad, the US special
envoy for Afghanistan, once floated the idea of putting a national government
to facilitate peace, but Ghani dismissed the idea.
For long
the Afghans have been accusing Pakistan of interfering in the latter’s domestic
politics. There could be a reality to this accusation, but the onus of this sin
is to be equally shared by the Afghan leadership who had been orchestrating
India’s influence in their country in the manner of a power-sharing
arrangement. While it meant India’s presence on both the eastern and the
western borders, it also meant stretching Pakistan’s military resources to an
extent that it might have crumbled under its own weight.
Pakistan’s
military under the new leadership is clear about exercising a non-interference
policy in Afghanistan. Pakistan has successfully defeated terrorism on its soil
and would not allow it to return from its source in Afghanistan. The Afghan
government and its stakeholders would have to craft policies that unite rather
than divide regional politics. India’s desire to proxy Afghanistan for its
regional domination cannot be allowed to materialise.
If the
Afghans are serious about bringing their country out of the four decades of
quagmire, and putting it on the path of progress, they should not mind losing
personal clout for the collective good. It indeed would be an acid test.
https://tribune.com.pk/story/2264294/afghans-will-have-to-unite-to-live-peacefully
----
URL: https://newageislam.com/pakistan-press/pakistan-press-pakistan-performance,-west/d/122871
New Age Islam, Islam
Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism