Beyond Debate on Drones

It is commonly said that crises bring with them a set of challenges and opportunities alike. But, in order to convert these challenges into opportunities, a dynamic and visionary leadership broad-based consensus on, and unshakeable faith in, the national purpose.

In the absence of a clear direction, crises only culminate in confounding the confusion and sharpening the already existing divides.

As if the fluster among Pakistan’s political leadership wasn’t enough, the ‘droning’ of TTP chief Hakimullah Mehsud ensued in a hullabaloo and a more candid and pronounced debate between those who advocate talks with Taliban, and those who consider the whole idea simply absurd and impracticable.

Though drone attacks have been consistently detested across the entire spectrum of Pakistani opinion, the one that killed Hakimullah Mehsud acquired the centre stage of national consciousness with every political leader and party beating the anti-drone mantra. Leading the anti-drone chorus, PTI leader Imran Khan went on to say that Nato supplies would be halted at every cost if the federal government failed to take any action. A unanimous resolution was adopted by the KPK assembly to provide sanction to such an action. An elaborate divide appeared in the National Assembly after the anti-drone resolution was moved as some opposition legislators expressed their reservations on such an extreme step.

Two statements from the heads of JUI-F and Jamaat-i-Islami added fuel to the fire as they further entangled the nation in confusion. Coming from two influential politico-religious leaders, both statements created a furor at almost all levels. Both leaders were chastised by media and the public alike but still they chose to stick to their stated positions.

The recent debate presents some very important strands to analyse, for they provide a basis to understand the currents of time that characterise the present-day Pakistan. The following is instructive in this regard:

First, there is not even an iota of disagreement that the drone strikes are a violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty. Nevertheless, these have, indubitably, annihilated many key TTP and Al-Qaeda leaders. Though the data regarding civilians’ killings is disputed, drones have been described as effective weapons of preference in a rough, tough and rugged terrain such as North and South Waziristan.

Second, within days after PM’s recent US visit, the drone attack did convey Washington’s intent to continue with the programme that has, as they believe, proved hugely effective in eliminating threats to the US security. Hence, the Taliban’s demand for a full stop to drone attacks before any peace talks with the government is erroneous indeed as is their plan to avenge the killing of their leader suspecting a nexus between Pakistan and the US for drone attacks. The Taliban are at fault if they assume that the government gave a go ahead to the US to eliminate Hakimullah. As Interior Minister Ch Nisar put it, ‘Brick by brick in the last seven weeks we tried to evolve a process by which we could bring peace to Pakistan and what have you (the US) done?’

From a functional angle, this whole narrative is flawed. It gives an impression as if drones are the sole cause of unabated terrorism and militancy in Pakistan. They think that the moment drone attacks cease, terrorism in Pakistan would be a part of history, and all those challenging the writ of the state will join the mainstream and will become the peaceful citizens.
 There is not even an iota of disagreement that the drone strikes are a violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty. Nevertheless, these have, indubitably, annihilated many key TTP and Al-Qaeda leaders.
 To cap it all, this debate has somehow pushed the ravages caused by these savages on the backburner. There is hardly any mention of 50,000 deaths of civilians and the security personnel who laid down their lives in the line of duty. It is strange that those outmanoeuvering each other to confer title of ‘martyrdom’ on Hakimullah Mehsud have forgotten to mention the ‘exploits’ of their hero. But then there is always a method to madness!

No doubt, all conflicts come to an end through dialogue. It is also true that had military power alone been the ultimate solution, the US, equipped with the latest arsenal and the most powerful military, would have decimated the Taliban a long time ago. What is lost sight of during this debate is the point that should a state initiate dialogue with the militant outfits from position of weakness? By doing so, the Pakistani state would provide them with a space to dictate their terms. The consequences of this approach are easily discernible.

Another important point to remember is that these terrorists are not fighting the state merely due to some alleged injustices or latter’s alliance with the US. Rather, they want to impose their narrow-minded agenda of religious conservatism on the people of Pakistan. That’s why Taliban are not ready to enter into any talks under the umbrella of Constitution of Pakistan, as it is ‘un-Islamic’ and ‘secular’.

Those who think that with the complete drawdown of the US and Nato forces from Afghanistan, peace will prevail and things would come back to normalcy are living in a fool’s paradise. The American withdrawal would give birth to new dynamics and intensified regional proxy wars, which would ultimately suck Pakistan into its depths. It is high time we come out of our self-created delusions and form holistic worldview based on the country’s interests.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.