Pakistan at War

“The Constitution is not an instrument for government to restrain the people; it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government – lest it come to dominate our lives and our interests.” [Patrick Henry, 1736-1799]


There is little doubt that Pakistan is under attack by the combined forces of Al Qaeda and Taliban. It is equally clear that the war is not going well: Waziristan is lost. Most of the major towns of Swat from Madian to Kalam have fallen in rapid succession with Pakistan’s security forces surrendering to the enemy in droves.

Al Qaeda consists of a closely knit group of foreign militants who seek to take over Pakistan as a base for conducting their global war strategy. The Taliban are the products of the indigenous madrassah infrastructure with a local agenda of establishing Taliban rule through a decentralized state structure run by autonomous war lords. The two have come together having decided to make Pakistan rather than Afghanistan their principal concern. The logic is stunningly simple. Afghanistan is a barren, resource short country and capturing it more difficult in the face of NATO and US troops. By contrast Pakistan they reckon is relatively easy pickings. Here they face mainly paramilitary forces which are inadequately equipped, poorly trained and lacking the will to fight their ideological brothers. The Pakistan military, a considerably more formidable foe has not yet been brought into full play. Behind Pakistan’s security forces is a collapsing political system and a leadership in conflict with its own people. Thus the spoils of war for the Al Qaeda – Taliban combine appears to be not only relatively easier to get but incomparably greater with Pakistan’s fertile river valleys, its industry and a nuclear arsenal.

What is the Al Qaeda – Taliban war strategy against Pakistan? It is comparable to the one used by Chandra Gupta Maurya against the Nanda empire in fourth century B.C. According to Megasthenes (the Greek ambassador who visited India in 300 B.C.), Alexander when he was in Taxila in 326 B.C. had a meeting with Sandrokoptos (later discovered to be Chandra Gupta Maurya). He asked Alexander what his strategy should be to defeat the Nanda empire whose outer periphery he operated in. Alexander directed his attention to a nine year old boy eating a roti nearby. The boy tackled the roti by first nibbling at its crisp circumference. He would then presumably make forays into the soft centre to pick up a boorki (morsel). Apparently Chandra Gupta tried the same strategy successfully to defeat Nanda and capture his empire.

The Al Qaeda - Taliban strategy is eerily similar: having established themselves in Waziristan through a series of pitched battles with security forces, they are gradually enlarging the area under their control through various militias run by warlords. At the same time they make occasional forays deep into Pakistan through suicide bombings. These are designed to demonstrate their out reach, demoralize the security forces and create a sense of uncertainty that adversely affects the economy. Examples include the suicide bombing attacks against (i) Pakistan’s elite counter terrorism unit based in Tarbela Ghazi on September 13 this year; (ii) against the Defence Ministry bus near the GHQ in Rawalpindi on 4th September and (iii) against a bus full of air force personnel near the Sarghoda airbase on 1st November; (iv) The assassination attempts against President Musharraf, Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz and more recently against Ms. Benazir Bhutto. Each of these leaders fortunately survived but the suicide bombings created a terrible spectacle of death and destruction.

While the Taliban militias are being used for conventional military operations, the suicide bombers reportedly run by Al Qaeda are being used as a strategic weapon to sap morale. By demonstrating the inability of the state to protect its soldiers and citizens in its very heartland, Al Qaeda aims to undermine the legitimacy of the state: a legitimacy that is partly drawn from its primary function of protecting the life and property of the citizens. Lal Masjid was a special case of this approach where Al Qaeda elements with local support established an outpost to engage in a fight to the finish with the army.

It is clear that this is a war for the very survival of Pakistan’s state and society. The question at this critical moment is how to prosecute this war successfully. In the short term five propositions may be considered:

First, there must be a full scale deployment of the army to confront the advancing enemy with Pakistan’s fully military might. If necessary the support of the US and NATO forces ought to be elicited.

Second, Pakistan’s establishment must finally purge itself of the erroneous belief (in case it still lingers), that the Taliban can ever be used as a strategic ally either in establishing a pro Pakistan government in a post Karzai Afghanistan or as a force multiplier in a possible future war with India. The Taliban are enemies not friends of Pakistan.

Third, the war cannot be conducted successfully by the military alone but requires the support of the people. This involves institutionalizing the will of the people through a democratic, constitutional rule.

Fourth, while conducting military operations against Al Qaeda - Taliban it would be counter productive to open a second front against the citizens of Pakistan, whose support is essential for achieving victory in war. Therefore suspending the constitution, depriving the citizens of their fundamental rights, and coercing and arresting them when they protest, is inconsistent with the objective of winning the war against Al Qaeda – Taliban.

The fifth proposition that follows from the above is that the constitution and fundamental rights must be restored forthwith, political prisoners released, the Chief Justice along with other detained judges brought back to their rightful office, and elections held under a neutral caretaker government that is acceptable to all political parties.

In conclusion it is pertinent to mention that the morale of soldiers and citizens of a country is sustained by celebrating its heroes. In this case there are two sets of heroes. Those who have made sacrifices in military combat and those who have striven to restore the rule of law which is as vital to the survival of the state as military victory. Amongst the heroes of military combat are those who during the Lal Masjid operation wrote a golden chapter in the annals of counter insurgency operations, with their valor and skill. The nation ought to salute Colonel Haroon ul Islam, Major Sarfraz and others who led from the front and died for Pakistan. Equally worthy of the nation’s honour are the heroes of the struggle for constitutional rule.
Amongst these we must include, Barristers Aitzaz Ahsan, Munir A Malik, Ali Ahmed Kurd who led the lawyers movement and of course Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry and the panel of judges who refused to take oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO).

The courage, brilliance and steadfastness of these heroes have inspired the nation. The people of Pakistan today stand ready to defend their freedom and their homeland. Let the government hearken to their call by restoring constitutional rule that gives strength to the sinews of battle.