Connect with us

South Asia

Madrassa Outcry: A Victim of Its Own Fundamentalism

Brian Hughes

Published

on

The Pakistani madrasa has become a deeply troubling aspect of Islamic education to Western politicians and public. The images of religious teachings that focus on deep anti-Americanism, terrorists ideologies, and methods of jihad have dominated this space in Western conscience. There’s a certain amount of ambiguity inherent in these schools that has been replaced, not with answers, but estimates and false conclusions. To understand the most fundamentalist of Islamic education in Pakistan, there’s a need to examine the Deoband school of India, the foundation in which the modern Pakistani madrassa was built on.

The Deoband school began in roughly 1857, but its curriculum is based on the eighteenth century Dars’I Nizami, a set of thirteen core texts that are used in Deobandi institutions over 6-8 years. After a failed revolt against British India in 1857, the ulema formed madrassas under a perceived threat of Hindu religious pressure, Western influence, and Christian missionaries. They believed they were under siege in their own country and formed a close knit educational culture that was self labeled as an “educational jihad.” Run without state funding, registration, or curriculum review, India’s Muslim’s were forming a small protective culture around their believers as the larger Indian society evolved around them.

When Pakistan was established in 1947, many Deobandi ulema travelled to Pakistan and erected madrassas to sway the country from falling into secularism or foreign religiosity. The Pakistani Deoband schools are still considered the most fundamentalist, the most likely to inspire young jihadists, and the madrassas most likely to be targeted by reformists. Yet, these schools are historically misunderstood and the reasons for the once venerable institution to fall into jihadist influence are many.

At the height of the Cold War, the United States saw an opportunity in Afghanistan that represented the Soviet Union’s ‘Vietnam’ moment. While the weapons supplied to the Mujahideen has been well documented, the amount of persuasion that Washington extended to the Mujahideen reached into the madrassas, many of which were of the Deoband tradition. Textbooks were created by the University of Nebraska at Omaha for $50 million and distributed, predominantly to the Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA), that distorted the words of the Koran to focus on the lesser jihad, defeating outward evil – communists in particular. This strategy largely succeeded in the FATA and the Mujahideen proved more than formidable for the Soviet Union, allowing the United States to quickly abandon the region. Developments in the madrassas and Pakistan after those events have created an environment of fundamentalist Islamic education unprecedented in history.

Since 1988, the number of madrassas in Pakistan have swelled from 3000 to over ten times that number. In 2005, the number stood at 35,000 and recent estimates show some leveling off, with about 40,000 today, but does not include the unregistered Deobandi schools in the FATA. This was achieved not only by US dollars entering the FATA and Pakistani government, but by the complete failure of the Pakistani state controlled public education system, with parents doing whatever they can to receive a decent education for their children. Contemporaneously, the Pakistani population burgeoned phenomenally in this period, from 34 million in 1951 to nearly 200 million today. With little educational development from the state, including the building of woefully needed schools, the madrassa filled the immense void. Additionally, once the Soviets packed up and left the area to the ongoing civil war that has yet to subside, the United States paid little attention to Central Asia until September 11, 2001.

In the wake of September 11, the US made a push to alter fundamentalism in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Armed with a belief that the madrassas were essentially weapons of mass destruction, producing and training jihadists, the US demanded closing madrassas possibly linked to terrorism, changing the curriculum, and pushing children to attend public school. Nearly a quarter billion dollars were given to Pakistan to reform the madrassas. To change the very core of Islamic education was not in the clerics interests and push back was considerable. Furthermore, many madrassas refused to accept money if it jeopardized their autonomy. There was little accountability for where the money went and most scholars can find little trace as to what it was used for.

Madrassa educators believed that the West was targeting the foundation of Islam, to eradicate Islam, to forever alter it in a way that only benefits the West. While this is evident anti-American sentiment, the sentiment extended to the Pakistani government, who are seen as Western collaborators. Washington attempted to change the madrassas by enlisting Islamabad, but failed to take into account that both entities were highly criticized within the madrassas for meddling in their religious affairs. By attempting to reform the madrasas, change curriculum, and push public education, this belief was only strengthened. Thus, US policy focused on changing the Pakistani educational culture into a pluralistic state governed public educational model. However, this does not take into account how the madrassas, or even the people, function within the governmental model. Madrassas rely on autonomy and non-interference from foreign agents to teach Islamic fundamentalism unencumbered. Not only do many madrassas not accept money from the state, they openly do not trust Islamabad. As Pakistan sways on what to do with the madrassas, they’ve lost the trust of the people in the areas where militant madrassas most likely exist.

After September 11, Pakistan reorganized and reformed the madrassa framework with a 2002 ordinance. Interestingly, President Musharraf attempted to pass a similar bill in August of 2001, but was unable to do so. After the passing of the bill, Islamic scholars described a crisis of confidence between the government and madrassas and spoke of corruption and lack of consistency in government policy. With no support from the madrassa, the reorganization and reforms failed. Then, in 2010, Islamabad reversed course by adopting an 18th amendment to their constitution and increased autonomy among its providences, noticeably in its curriculum and religious leanings for madrassa. Pakistan has long attempted to gain more control of the madrassas, especially as their burgeoned in the 1980s and then again after September 11. However, with the passing of the 18th amendment, Pakistan recognized the ineffectualness of such policy. However, when terrorist attacks occur in Pakistan, the state retaliates often by striking at the FATA. A single 2006 madrassa retaliatory strike killed 82 students in Burjh, heightening distrust and hostility between government and Islamic educational leaders. Therefore, the process Pakistan has deployed has had little cohesion, leaving those in the FATA and poorer areas with little trust and comprehension of what might policy the next government may enact.

The United States policy has centered around greater Pakistani control of madrassas scholarly materials and US aid to build more public schools. This has also come at a time when drone strikes have established themselves as the future of warfare. Not only do clerics and poorer provinces mistrust their own government, but they actively suspect corruption and collusion between Washington and Islamabad, a difficult combination to win trust or deploy soft power by building schools. Conversely, Pakistan has made token attempts to follow the United States’ demands, while periodically striking the FATA and madrassas when terrorists threats in Islamabad become more severe. This bifurcated policy builds distrust, suspicion, and resentment among Pakistanis. Since September 11, the narrative has read as us vs. them, secularism vs. fundamentalism, state-sponsored vs. local, modern vs. traditional, the West vs. Central Asia. This narrative has only led to a protectionist culture within a greater society of perceived threat that has produced only polarization and harsher policies. There is a need to not discount religious communities and allow them to function within the state as citizens, with both sides recognizing that some schools produce terrorists. Without trust and remedying the cultural segregation, the ‘jihadi schools’ will continue to function hidden by a blanket of polarization that is pitting thousands of historically distinguished fundamentalist madrassas against its own government.

Brian Hughes is currently a student in the International Security and Intelligence Studies program at Bellevue University in Omaha, NE, USA.

Continue Reading
Comments

South Asia

The Day Afghanistan Changed Forever

Hamidullah Bamik

Published

on

The ongoing war in Afghanistan began 18 years ago by the United States and NATO, and apparently, the September 11 was one of the main reasons for the US attack on Afghanistan. This war began with the aim of the fall of the Taliban regime and the elimination of al-Qaeda’s bases in Afghanistan. Although the US and NATO forces defeated the Taliban in the early days, the Taliban’s defeat in 2001 was temporary and the Taliban began its war operations in different parts of the country soon. Now, it has become stronger than the early of days of the twenty-first century over the past 17 years. Insecurity has spread from the south to the northern regions of the country, and now much of the territory of Afghanistan is outside the control of the government.

During the Jihad against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, thousands of Arab fighters fought alongside the Afghans against the Soviet Union, and subsequently, they were sheltered by the Mujahidin under the leadership of Mr. Rabbani, the second president of the Islamic State of Afghanistan after the fall of Democratic Republic of Afghanistan regimes. Then, when the Taliban dominated more than 90 percent of Afghanistan’s territory, including al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, a number of Arabs who had been living in Afghanistan since 1996, supported the Taliban groups in Afghanistan.

With the occurrence of September 11, 2001, that members of the al-Qaeda network were accused of taking part in the incident, the United States attacked Afghanistan and began a bloody war in the country after the fall of the Taliban regime. Osama bin Laden was in Afghanistan, and President George W. Bush announced on September 20, 2001, his stance against the Taliban government as following:

I.All al-Qaeda leaders should be handed over to the United States;

II.All foreign prisoners in the Taliban’s custody should be released and submitted to the United States;

III.All the terrorist training camps should be closed in Afghanistan;

IV.And the Taliban regime should allow the United States to have full access to Al-Qaeda camps for inspection.

The Taliban government stated through its embassy in Pakistan that the United States has not yet provided any evidence of Osama bin Laden’s involvement in the September 11 attacks. According to Taliban ambassador Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeif in Islamabad, the Taliban government made great efforts to verify the incident, but the United States did not retreat from the decision to invade Afghanistan. According to him, the September 11 attacks were not accidental, but the United States had already planned military presence in Afghanistan in order to secure its long-term interests in the region. The Taliban three times offered Osama bin Laden’s trial to the US government for the September 11 events, rejected by the United States every three times.

On October 07, 2001, the US air strikes began, and on October 31, the United Nation’s Forces joined Kabul with the help of US air strikes, and the Taliban regime was overthrown. On November 25, the Bonn Conference on Afghanistan was held, and within 10 days, it established a temporary administration headed by Hamid Karzai. These successive accidents occurred rapidly that surprised everyone in Afghanistan. People were dancing and singing on the streets and roads celebrating the defeat of the Taliban and welcoming the United Nation Forces led by the US. But unfortunately, the positive changes and bestowed joys were temporary. By elapsing year, the situation of Afghanistan was getting worse than the previous year. Afghans were encountering challenges and problems that were rare in their nature and severity. This paper aims to analyze the events after the overthrow of the Taliban regime that changed the feature and situation of Afghanistan forever.

The Challenges that Afghanistan Rarely Experienced Prior to 11/9 Attacks

Roaming of regional and international terrorist groups into Afghanistan: After the fall of the Taliban’s regime in Nov. 2001, the number of terrorist groups increased in Afghanistan. It is said that there are 21 terrorist groups fighting with the Afghan Armed Forces and international forces stationed in Afghanistan. These groups include Tehreek-e-Taliban Afghanistan and the Haqqani Network, Jamaat al-Dawa al-Quran, ISIL, al-Qaeda, al-Qaeda in southern Asia, al-Mujahideen party, Taliban militant, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, Islamic Movement Movement, Movement Al-Jihad Bangladesh, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Jash Mohammad, Lashkar-e-Taiba, Tariq Guider’s group, Jamaat-e-Alahar, Jondallah, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, Islamic Movement of Turkmenistan, Islamic Jihad and Qods Force.

Climbing of poverty and unemployment: Afghanistan is one of the poorest countries in the world and is widely supported by the foreign countries, even though the country’s economic growth is said to be about 2.6 percent by the end of the year. According to a new survey issued in Afghanistan in comparison to a decade ago, poverty increased by 21%.According to the source, the poverty line has risen from 38% in 1391 to 54% in 1395. The level of poverty is growing in Afghanistan simultaneously with an infusion of billions of dollars by foreign countries into Afghanistan. The United States Agency for the Reconstruction of Afghanistan (SIGAR) articulates that the United States contributed to Afghanistan from 2002 to January 30, 2013, was about $ 1.4 billion more than the Marshall Plan budget for the reconstruction of 16 Western European countries after World War II.

Heavy human loss: studies and issued reports echo that the number of foreign military victims in Afghanistan since the start of the war in 2001 to 2018, in total, 3,546 foreign troops have been killed from 30 countries in Afghanistan, with 2408 from the United States, 455 from the UK, and 158 from Canada, had the highest casualties in war against the Taliban in Afghanistan. After the attack on al-Qaeda on September 11, 2001, the US-led coalition invaded Afghanistan on October 7th and overthrew the Taliban regime, but the war has continued so far, during which time Afghan security forces and civilians also suffered heavy casualties. As per the reports by the foreign independent researchers, since the fall of Taliban’s regime up to now, around 13,000 Afghan armed forces, including local police have been killed in the war against the insurgents.

According to a Brown University research report from the United States, the Afghan conflict since 2001, when the Taliban regime collapsed by US-led forces, has left nearly 100,000 dead and injured. The study, titled “War Expenditures,” conducted by the Watson Institute for International Studies at Brown University in the United States, addresses the casualties associated with war and displacement in Afghanistan and Pakistan from 2001 to 2014. The findings show that 26,270 Afghan civilians lost their lives as a direct consequence of the war and wounded 29,900 ones. The total death toll reported in this report includes civilian casualties, Taliban and other insurgent groups, US and coalition forces, as well as welfare workers and journalists.

Unprecedented natural resource losses: Afghanistan’s mineral resources, estimated at between $ 1 trillion and $ 3 trillion, have been an attractive potential for a long time. But the same mineral resources also fueled war and armed conflicts in Afghanistan. In a country like Afghanistan where formerly widespread corruption, an active insurgency, and scarcity of infrastructure and institutions have crippled it, mineral resources represent another potential source of instability. Millions of dollars go through pockets of armed groups, insurgents and armed forces through the extraction of illegal mines, while Afghan people benefit from only a small portion of the wealth generated from these projects. The Afghan government benefits little from its natural mines. It is estimated that there are currently about 1,400 illegal mine extractions in Afghanistan. According to the Global Witness report, 2016, “Military earnings of warlords and Taliban from a small Badakhshan region are equal to the total income of the Afghan Government’s natural resources sector.”In 2014, armed groups from two districts of the Diodara mine in Karan and the Manjan in Badakhshan province earned about $ 20 million. Illegal extraction of mines only undermines the impact of the Afghan security forces and the legitimacy of the state, but also it is a major obstacle to the development of the economy, including the mining industry.

Increasing violence against women: Afghanistan’s Independent Human Rights Commission’s statistics echo that violence against women has increased in recent years. For example, Afghanistan’s Independent Human Rights Commission’s 2017 annual report shows that violence against women in Afghanistan has increased by 8.6%.The report states that 5575 cases of violence have been registered in 2017. This figure was 5132 in 2016.It projects a huge increase in violence against women over the past years. Of the total recorded violence, more than 1,500 cases of physical violence, more than 360 cases of sexual violence, more than 1,800 verbal and psychological violence, more than 1,100 cases of economic violence and remaining violence have been reported in response to behaviors that are traditionally (social traditions) are disgraceful. In the reported physical violence section, more than 1,200 cases of beatings, 10 incidents, 57 injuries, 45 forced labor and 234 deaths were included. The Independent Human Rights Commission says that the statistics do not show the full reality due to the extent of this problem, and many cases of violence against women are likely to remain hidden for reasons of custom and lack of security.

Mass migration and brain drain: the number of Afghan citizens who left the country in 2014 is more than those who left the country in 2001. According to United Nations statistics, since 2002, about 5 million immigrants have returned to Afghanistan, but the trend has fallen sharply over the past two years, and in 2014, only about 10,000 people have returned to Afghanistan. While in the first eight months of 2015, more than 122,000 Afghan citizens have requested asylum from European countries. Compared to the first six months of 2014, this figure that represents around 24,000 Afghan citizens who fled Afghanistan indicate a shocking increase in migration. Now the citizens of Afghanistan are the second largest refugee group in Europe. Among those who leave Afghanistan for other countries are mostly educated persons and professionals. The withdrawal of highly educated and highly trained people from Afghanistan is one of the bitter consequences of the war in that country. For sure, the withdrawal of human resources from Afghanistan will undermine its human resources. Many Afghan experts consider the deterioration of the security situation, the recession and the loss of labor opportunities and corruption in various organizations of the country as the main source of people’s frustration for the future.

Escalation of addicted persons and narcotics trade: in Afghanistan, drug addiction has become one of the most important health and social crises in recent years, and it can be said that due to the large volume of poppy production, on the one hand, the consequences of three decades of conflict, unemployment, and the weakness of strategic health programs, on the other hand, has heightened this dilemma its shadow every day. A recent study by the International Department of Counter Narcotics and the Law Enforcement of the US Department of State in cooperation with Afghan Ministries of Public Health and Counter Narcotics project that 11 percent of the Afghan population uses drugs. More surprisingly, according to some surveys, 12 to 41 percent of police forces are addicted to cannabis (New York Times, 2011). Similarly, in recent years, there has been an increase in drug use, and in particular, the use of drug injection throughout Afghanistan (Ted et al., 2009).This is due to the increase in the availability of and increased opium production in Afghanistan (UNODC, 2012), due to poor social and economic opportunities (Ted et al., 2009), the return of addicted migrants to Afghanistan (Hankins et al., 2002). The number of drug addicts in Afghanistan reached 920,000 in Afghanistan in 2005, according to Afghan Minister of Health 2005 report. The figure reached more than a million in 2009 and reached three million in 2014 that demonstrate a shocking increase.

Weak sovereignty despite granted billions of dollars by foreign countries: the US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction 2016 report demonstrates that the United States since 2001 up to now had contributed $ 59.8 billion to equip, reinforce and train the armed forces of Afghanistan (40.2 billion to the army and 19.6 billion to the police) excluding 2017 and 2018 and other international donors’ contributions. The report adds that the Afghan government is controlling just over 61 percent of the country’s land, which has 68.5 percent of the country’s population (22 million out of 32.1 million). However, according to the report, 28.4 percent of the country’s land, which is home to 22.7 percent of the population (7.3 million), is in conflict and more than 10 percent of the rest of the country’s land is home to two million and eight thousand people (8.7% of the population) are under the control of insurgents.

Conclusion

Some analysts believe that the reappearance of al-Qaeda, Taliban control over parts of Afghanistan and the emergence of ISIL in the country indicate that Afghanistan is on the downside in its security. Moreover, the national and international critics’ voice regarding Afghanistan’s reconstruction process after 2001 is rampant and gets more widespread every day. They are criticizing the mismanagement of reconstruction works, spending international aids, prevailing financial and administrative corruption, lack of fairness and transparency in political process such as election and so on. What is disputed is the magnitude and quality of the changes that have taken place in Afghanistan over the past years. Some analysts believe the changes that Afghanistan underwent could be more fundamental and constructive if the Afghan government’s leaders have had serious determination in rebuilding the infrastructures of Afghanistan after the fall of Taliban regime in Nov. 2001. However, still, there is time until the end of the presence of foreign troops by 2024 to change the situation in Afghanistan.

Continue Reading

South Asia

Fall of Dhaka: Lessons Pakistan should Never Forget

Published

on

In 1971, nearly five decades ago Pakistan lost its eastern part after civil war; loss of that part is one of the biggest tragedies in the history of this country. Pakistan not only loss its geography but also its face that how political, economic and ethnic grievances, if not solved timely could divide a nation which was founded on the base of ideology. It brings us to the point that ideologies do play important role in bringing people together to form a nation but they cannot act as binding factor if political, lingual and cultural liberties are not respected by the all segments of the nation.

Fall of Dhaka  endorsed the proverb that “you cannot always create a situation but can always exploit one”, when India took a benefit of the worsening situation in eastern border and not only send its forces but also provide finances and arms to the gorillas. Resultantly, the internal conflict took the situation of civil war in Eastern Pakistan and full fledge war between Indian and Pakistan.

In 1971, other external powers from whom intervention was expected to stop the war never intervened to stop the war as result Pakistan had to rely on itself. This act of external powers like US and China reveals that there are no permanent friends and enemies in international system but only permanent interests. So, to protect one’s own interests and sovereignty only reliable allay is one’s self. This lesson learned by Pakistan in 1971 war was duly endorsed by the India’s 1974 nuclear test, which brought Pakistan closer to the decision of nuclearization for its security vis-à-vis India.

Most important lessons from 1971 for Pakistan lies with the internal situation of country actors like only played their part in exploiting the situation but not in creating the situation. Today Pakistan has secured itself against Indian aggression and has also learned that if internal situation ever goes South it will be exploited by India. Moreover, Pakistan knows that Indian intelligence agencies are playing their part in supporting the banned military outfits in Pakistan; its example is arrest of Kulboshen Yadev, serving officer of Indian Navy from Baluchistan. Who later on excepted that RAW is supporting and funding Balcuh Liberation Army. But the question here arises why parties like BLA come into being? Its first answer could be that because there are always anti-state element within the state. But, another reason could be the grievances which are not addressed by the governments and resultantly armed movements are started to solve these grievances.

However, need of the hour is that elected governments should work more towards the political rights of the neglected parts of country which are continuously demanding these rights. At the moment, different segments in society are demanding the separate provinces for themselves because their issues are not streamlined in larger provinces. One such example is demand of Seraiki province by the people of South Punjab, which should be readily accepted. Not only the demand of Seraiki Province but of other provinces as well. Moreover, we should have learned from the fall of Dhaka and have taken the measures to included Gilgit-Baltistan into national streamline as this is the demand of the people of that area. So, that their issues and voice could reach into the parliament through their elected representatives.

Another alarming factor is the rise of ethnicity in the country. One cannot deny the role of ethnicity in bringing the 1971 upon Pakistan.  now, after 48 years of 1971 Pakistan is still divided into ethnic conflicts and different ethnic minorities are targeted inn different part of the country. The positive aspects are that ethnicity is not supported by any government but its mere existence in state is alarming and should be controlled.

These issues which Pakistan is facing should be addressed properly and resolved as we have learned from 1971 that they have the potential to become national security threats and can even lead to the disintegration of the country. It is also the responsibility of governments to cater political and economic rights of its citizens as it promotes national integration and put county on the path of prosperity.

Continue Reading

South Asia

Pakistan Can Play Important Role in Afghan Peace Process

Published

on

No sufficient food, No education, No health Care, Severe shortage of electricity, Shortage of fuel, are witnessed in Afghanistan. It seems the sufferings of Afghans are going to end. The world has realized that it is enough and now think in restoration of peace and stability in Afghanistan. The common man has suffered for more than 4 decades, which started with USSR invasion of Afghanistan and then internal power struggle among various factions of Afghanistan and finally after 9-11 incident US, NATO and allied forces entered into Afghanistan. NATO allies have been fighting in Afghanistan for 17 long years, but are still without control anywhere in the country. Even now, the US Army cannot move freely and fearlessly outside of Bagram Airbase. Taliban forces still control major parts of the country.

Afghanistan, is a landlocked country located withinSouth-Central Asia. Afghanistan is bordered by Pakistan, Iran, Turkmenistan,Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and China. With its population of 35 million approximately, having a GDP (nominal) of 22 billion US dollars in total, andper capita income of 600 Dollars only. Rich with minerals and natural resources,and well-known for its fruits and nuts, still suffering and laying among the least developed country of the world, ranked 177. Four decades of war hasdamaged the whole country and whole nation is victim of war imposed on them.

Its geopolitical location is vital for the wholeregion, as it connects Central Asia, Iran, China, and Russia, with Pakistanleading towards Warm Waters – Arabian Sea or Indian Ocean. All of the countries are suffering due to instability in Afghanistan and desires a long lasting peace and stability in Afghanistan. 

In fact, Afghanistan was never totally ruled by foreign powers, although in the country’s history many misadventures happened.The people of Afghanistan always defeated invaders. It has been invaded by Alexander the Great, Mauryas, Muslim Arabs, Mongols, British, Soviets and since2001, by the United States with NATO-allied countries. But it has proved itselfunconquerable. Afghans are brave people and believe in freedom only.

All of regional countries, including central AsianStates, Russia, Iran, China and Pakistan were trying to bring Peace and Stability in Afghanistan. Several initiatives for peace in Afghanistan were taken in past, but none was successful as they were not involved or owned by locals –Taliban and were opposed by US and its allies. The US-backed elected Governments in Afghanistan, do not enjoy popularity among masses and may notrepresent the voice of common Afghan national.

Pakistan, being neighbors with a long common border, understands Afghanistan well. We share rivers, mountains and a common culture, language and ethnicity and language. That is why we understand Afghanistan much better than anybody else. The role which Pakistan can play, no other nation can. There is no other country to substitute Pakistan in this regard. US was trying involve India in Afghan Issues, but due to the reason it does not have any land linkage, neither any cultural or ethnic commonalities with Afghan,cannot understand their society or issues and helpless in resolving their issues. The world may acknowledge Pakistan sacrifices and positive role in thisregion. Pakistan sincerely wishes for peace and stability in Afghanistan, andas we have suffered losses of around 75,000 lives and $250 billion due to unrest in Afghanistan. We will be the first nation to support peace and stability in Afghanistan.

Pakistan was very close ally with the US-led Westalliance, for almost seven decades. We were partners during the Cold Waragainst “Communism Threat” and a frontline state against the USSR invasion ofAfghanistan, a strong supporter and close ally during the war on terror.Pakistan was strongest ally with West out-side NATO. Pakistan can play a vitalrole in a sustainable solution to the Afghan conflict. Complete withdrawal andan Afghan-led solution is the only permanent way out. Pakistan can facilitate an honorable and safe passage for US withdrawal.

Prime Minister, Imran Khan, a longtime critic of theAfghan war, is in the driving seat in Pakistan. In his maiden speech after winning the election on July 26, he expressed his wish to resolve Afghan issues. Hisstance, though very unpopular a few years ago, is extremely popular now,domestically as well as internationally, especially coincides with the currently emerged Americans approach. The US government knows that Pakistanunder Khan’s leadership can woo the Taliban into accepting some kind oflong-term ceasefire.

Pakistan wants to help with the Afghan process; peace in Afghanistan would be the best thing that could happen to Pakistan in adecades, but certainly not at Pakistan’s expense. US has asked Pakistan tobring the Taliban back to the table. How can Pakistan do this when the US had previously intentionally derailed the quadrilateral peace process? Recently killing of Senator Sami-ul-Haq, who enjoys immense good-will among Taliban, wasa conspiracy to sabotage “Peace Process”.

The US has to wake up to the realities in Pakistan. It cannot expect on one hand to cancel Pakistan’s Coalition Support Fund reimbursements and on the other hand signing multibillion-dollar projects withIndia and still expect Pakistan to commit wholeheartedly to American interestsin Afghanistan. Criticizing Pakistan on “religious freedom” issues, while ignoring Israel and India, who are engaged in genocide and worst atrocities against muslin and other minorities in their countries. On one hand the USobjects to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and resists Pakistan’s economic takeoff. But on the other hand it breaks its own rules when it allows India tobuy defense equipment from both Russia (S-400) and the US and initiates an armsrace in the region. Arming India could destabilize the whole region and constitute a direct threat to its smaller neighbors. Putting sanction on “IranTrade” but giving exception to India unjustifiably. The Americans need torestore trust practically, through their actions, verbal statement may not besufficient.

The Taliban have been very clear in their demands from the very beginning, and that is a complete withdrawal of the US and its allied forces from Afghanistan. However, this might not be acceptable to the US so easily at this stage. But there are people in US who thinks that after spending trillion of dollars, and still no achievement on ground, is blunder. Tax payerare asking the government for accountability of heavy expenditures and wastage of their tax collected money. We hope, in the wider interest of humanity, US may show flexibility. It will be good for Afghanistan, the region and over-all for whole world.

Pakistan was close ally with US for 7 decades and willing to work closely with US and want to play its inevitable role in Peace and Stability of Afghanistan and Region. But we need a long term, friendship and cooperation with US, based on UN charter on the same lines how China-Pakistan friendship is booming and ever-green. We may not be “hired Gun”and “sub-contractor” for a miner part of any misadventure, which can be disposed-off after its utilization. Our role should be acknowledged and positive and sustainable and long term. We were good friends and wanted to begood friends forever. Our interests are emerging toward convergence and we must understand the emerging geopolitics. Let’s think tanks , intellectuals and bureaucracy (Civil and Military) in both countries work hard to bring the two nation on same page and work together in complete harmony for better tomorrow. Keep on struggling to achieve our common goals and realize our common dreams.

Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2018 Modern Diplomacy