Pakistan pursues its policy to maintain peace and stability by using force or holding a meaningful dialogue. However, policymakers suggested that the government should fight terrorism as the peace talks could not yield positive results in the past.
However, this is a difficult choice to fight someone invisible without holding any part of a land or influence to go after them. The terrorists carry out attacks and run into their hideouts or disappear into the civilian population. Then how could such a war be won by using force?
If the forces chase them or hit them, there might be serious civilian and collateral damage. Some quarters have already been trying to create obstacles in the way of conducting operations. No war could be won without the popular support of the people, but there seems some political vacuum or some politicians trying to create confusion to discredit the ongoing fight against terrorism.
All Political Forces Should Fully Support Government Policy to Eradicate Terrorism from Pakistan
Irrespective of the political differences, all political forces should fully support the government policy to eradicate terrorism from the country. If one analyses the terrorist incidents, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, formerly a Federally Administered Tribal Area, and Baluchistan are worst-hit by the latest upsurge in the terrorism wave.
The terrorism issue is a national rather than international issue and this cannot be fought or tackled politically in isolation. The Afghan Taliban has recently offered to facilitate peace talks between the government and the outlawed Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan; however, Islamabad rejected the offer and asked Kabul to take action against them. No action by Kabul deteriorated diplomatic ties between the two countries.
Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf, which is ruling in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province, has always supported a peaceful settlement of the issue, but the ground realities revealed the other side of the picture. No one denies the fact that there should be a peaceful resolution of the conflict, but how? There needs to be a consensus among the political parties to have a national plan, fully backed by all. After the deadly attack on the Army Public School, Peshawar in 2014, all the political parties including the then-provincial government of PTI have unanimously decided no more talks with the terrorists. A national action plan was devised to root out terrorism in any form.
The Chief Minister of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Ali Amin Gandapur has publicly announced to initiation of peace talks with the TTP through Afghanistan. The announcement erred a new debate about whether a federating unit or a provincial government can initiate such a policy without the support of the federal government. The KP government announcement to take a lead on its own was questioned by the federal government as terrorism is not mere a localized issue but has multifaceted dimensions.
Legal and political experts see it as just a political stunt, and it may have serious implications for the security of the country. There is a debate that the provincial government is empowered under the law to take some measures for maintaining law and order, which falls in its domain. However, critics and opponents argue one province cannot involve a foreign country without the key and leading role of the federal government.
Why the federal government is opposing peace negotiations with the Taliban? Looking into the conditions of the defunct Pakistani Taliban, it wanted to hand over the bordering tribal region back to the Taliban, where it could have a parallel system. Secondly, the Taliban put a condition that their members would keep weapons with them and they would continue their activities as an organization.
The then government of Pakistan asked the militants to surrender to the state writ and avail of a general amnesty and the government would launch a rehabilitation program for the surrendered militants, but the TTP did not accept these conditions. Pakistan asked them to come back and live a normal life, so they would be protected.
However, the efforts that continued for almost a year from September 2021 to November 2022, ended with more chaos and destruction. The militants used to regroup and reorganize their groups during the peace process time. These peace talks brought more acts of terrorism. Thousands of militants and their families returned to Pakistan from Afghanistan during 2021-22, which is now a serious threat to peace and security.
Afghanistan and Pakistan
There is a difference between the geopolitical scenario in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The US-led foreign troops arrived to fight the terrorism, but they had ultimately planned to leave Afghanistan. So, peace talks between the US and Afghan Taliban have different dimensions than the militants in Pakistan. One cannot compare both scenarios and should be reviewed separately.
TTP is against the constitution of Pakistan
In Pakistan, the banned TTP is against the constitution of Pakistan and the political system. Secondly, they want to occupy the government through the use of terrorism, which is another obstacle in the way of peace talks. Thirdly, it is feared that Pakistani militants, living inside Afghanistan have close links with the terrorist outfits, and have a regional and global agenda.
If one sees the outcomes of past peace deals or negotiations with the banned TTP, they could never be considered for bringing peace. They never stopped but recruited more resulting in the stability of the related regions, where peace deals were reached.
All options are available, whether having a meaningless peace process or fighting them to protect people’s lives. A national dialogue is needed to take all the stakeholders on board and agree on a policy. The stakeholders should discuss the outcomes of previous peace talks and deals, and also the war during the last two decades. The military operations across the bordering region helped dislocate the militants, and there are no more no-go-areas or any region under the direct influence of the militants, but yes, scattered attacks are there, which could be fought with the public’s support.
