| |
The Bonn Summit and after
Threats and realities in Afghanistan
by D. Suba Chandran
THE Bonn Summit, the latest on a series of international conferences on the future of Afghanistan, just got over in Germany. Commenting on the summit and Pakistan’s refusal to attend this event, The Daily Times, a leading English daily of Pakistan, in its editorial observed, “If Pakistan is not onboard, particularly now when it has adopted a confrontational policy, there will be a new civil war in Afghanistan post-2014”. Is this the reality in the Af-Pak region that stability cannot be achieved in Afghanistan post-2014, without Pakistan? Or is this a threat to the international community on what Pakistan is capable of doing? Or both? First, a short note on the Bonn Summit and a reality-check of Afghanistan post-2014. President Hamid Karzai asked for the continuation of political, military and economic support to Kabul, at least for the next 10 years — meaning up to 2025 — and he got it. According to his estimates, Afghanistan would require minimum $10 billion annually during the next decade. To sustain the security of Afghanistan, its economy and a decent living standard, Mr Karzai would, in fact, need more than a mere $10 billion. But what the international community wanted from Mr Karzai were certain promises in return. The first major concern is the process of governance and the management of the economy. Will Mr Karzai be able to provide governance, at least of South Asian standards? Will the Afghan government, more importantly, its military and police, at least be able to secure the popular support against the Taliban, forget fighting and winning them? With the international troops, especially the European soldiers, starting to leave Afghanistan, their aid to Kabul is likely to decline drastically, as their interest in the Af-Pak region will not remain at the same level. Their primary interest is likely to be focused on organising periodic conferences to analyse what lessons they have learnt! Now coming to Pakistan, what is likely to be Islamabad’s strategy after the Bonn Summit? It was unfortunate that Pakistan skipped the summit, protesting against the NATO (read the US) strikes, days before the Bonn Summit, on two Pakistani posts across the Durand Line, killing more than 24 soldiers. Immediately after the attacks there was national outrage against the US and also Pakistan’s policies towards supporting the NATO troops in Afghanistan. The political leadership, mainly to address the growing public hostility, immediately stopped the NATO supply lines into Afghanistan through Pakistan, asked the US to vacate the Shamsi airbase in Balochistan (which the US has been using), and announced that it would not take part in the Bonn Summit. General Kayani declared that he had granted full liberty to his troops to respond, if they were attacked. Clearly, Pakistan raised its rhetoric vis-à-vis the US and Afghanistan. In retrospect, Pakistan must be regretting its decision not to attend the Bonn conference. While Islamabad and its military, like any other country in the world, have every right to defend their sovereignty and take appropriate actions, the decision on the Bonn Summit was, perhaps, taken in haste. Now when the summit is over, a section may feel they have lost an opportunity, while another may think that Pakistan has proved a point by not going to Bonn. A majority within Pakistan would like to insist that without Pakistan, a solution could not be found. Back to the original question — is this a reality or a threat, or both? Undoubtedly, Afghanistan cannot get stability without active and positive inputs from Pakistan. This is a reality. However, an unstable Afghanistan will not be in Islamabad’s interests and may seriously undermine the security situation within Pakistan. The more Afghanistan remains unstable, the more Pakistan is likely to feel the pangs of it. Half of the ills that Pakistan is facing today started with instability in Afghanistan in the 1980s. The movement of refugees across the Durand Line and their multiple camps created new forms of insecurity in Pakistan. The Taliban, meaning students, were the products of not only the madarsas of the NWFP and FATA, but also of refugee camps. Undoubtedly, the Taliban factions were used, perhaps abused, by the Pakistani establishment in the mid-1990s, but Islamabad cannot be wholly blamed for “creating” them. The Taliban were already there, the outcome of Afghan jihad-I in the 1980s. A section within Pakistan simply made use of them, for their own objectives, widely believed to a part of their “strategic depth” idea. While Pakistan seemed to be succeeding in finding “strategic depth”, it came to haunt them during the last decade. The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has killed more Pakistanis than the American drones have done. The TTP has struck deep inside Pakistan; in fact, all over the country — Karachi, Lahore, Islamabad and Peshawar. While the question of Pakistan’s sovereignty is limited to the Abbottabad raid (killing of Osama bin Laden), multiple drone attacks (none outside FATA) and a few cross-border raids, including the latest one, tell a different story. The TTP has violated Pakistan’s sovereignty much more than the American troops and drone attacks. The TTP would not have become a monster going after Pakistan’s interests, had Afghanistan been stable. A section within Pakistan, especially the moderates, believes an unstable Afghanistan is not in Pakistan’s interests; they even would like to rethink the “strategic depth” idea vis-à-vis Kabul. However, there is another section, mostly in the military, the ISI and the radical groups, that considers that Afghanistan is their trump card. This section considers that the international community, especially the US, is completely trapped in Afghanistan. They not only want an early exit, but also a face-saving one. The international community, especially NATO, cannot afford a bloody exit. Pakistan knows this too well. It is no secret that Pakistan has deep linkages within the Taliban and the Haqqani network. The US and NATO are well aware of this; to be fair to the Pakistani handlers of the Taliban, the US, in fact, has used this linkage when it wanted to reach the Taliban in its effort to contact the “moderate” or “good” sections. True, Pakistan has not taken part in the Bonn Summit. But it knows very well that it has the capabilities to make NATO’s exit really painful from Afghanistan. Even the international community is well aware of the dangers that Pakistan could pose to the future of Afghanistan. It is not the $10 billion that Mr Karzai has requested for in Bonn that would lead to a stable Afghanistan. Rather, it would be Pakistan. And Islamabad, the ISI and the military knows this conundrum too well. However, what the above section within Pakistan does not understand, or does not want to accept is that an unstable Afghanistan is not in their interest. Worse, they believe they could control Afghanistan. Such a belief is not only unrealistic, but also naive and dangerous. From the Greeks under Alexander the Great to the Americans under President Obama, no one has been able to subdue the various Afghan factions, especially the Pashtuns. If the Pakistanis under President Zardari, General Kayani and General Pasha believe that they can, they should, in fact, be allowed to do what they want. Afghanistan would become a strategic trap for them, rather than providing any “strategic depth”. Let the international community call Pakistan’s bluff. They would never be able to control Afghanistan; any attempt would only be suicidal. The threats that Afghanistan poses to Islamabad are more than what Pakistan poses to
Kabul.
The writer is Director, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, and Visiting Professor, Pakistan Studies Programme, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.
 |
| |
 |
The reunion
by Jagvir Goyal
My wife had two very dear friends during college days — Protima and Manju. The friendship was close and every small event of life was shared by her with them. The relationship continued till each of the three-some got married. In the seventies and the eighties, there was no Facebook, nor were any mobiles or email addresses. So, engrossed by her new set-up and then the kids, my wife lost whatever whereabouts of her friends she had. Only their names figured in her talks about the college, the university and the pre-marital days. Twenty-five years after the marriage, she started remembering them a lot. How could I find them? She would often mumble and fall silent. During such moments, I resolved to locate her friends though I never committed this to her. One day, while sitting together, I asked her where Protima got married. She thought a lot, then remembered, “To someone in Kota. Her father-in-law had a big chemist’s shop. That’s all I know.” That night I sat at my PC and searched the internet. A list of chemists in Kota sprang up. “What was her full name?” I asked. “Protima Oberoi”, she replied. I short-listed a few drug stores owned by the people of same caste. Next morning, I started ringing them up, one by one. “Would there be some Protima Oberoi in your family?” the question was odd but I persisted, explaining the reason behind. A firm “No” followed by a hung-up would happen every time. Exactly when I started getting wary of the exercise, a person replied, “Why, yes! She is my wife!” Then a long talk followed. Protima came on the line. There was a heart-to-heart talk between the two lost friends, the telephone bill notwithstanding. “Do you sing as beautifully as you used to during university days?” my wife asked. “My daughter sings now,” laughed Protima. “She is getting married next month. Join us then!” And it was hard for my wife to erase her frozen image and imagine the young, chubby Protima having a marriageable daughter! One friend discovered, I asked about the second too. “I know nothing except that Manju had found a job in IDBI Bank and was married in a Luthra family”, she told me. There is a saying that Delhi people never leave Delhi. Now, it applies to NCR also. Since my wife and Manju were together in Faridabad, as an arrow in the dark, I enlisted all branches of IDBI Bank in Faridabad and Delhi and kept the list with me. One fine day, I began dialling the numbers of IDBI Bank branches. There was no breakthrough. Due to some work, I had to leave the list halfway down. In the evening, I resumed the task. I didn’t know when the clock struck 6 p.m. “Oh! The banks might be closed”, I thought as I dialled the last number. Someone not sounding like a bank employee picked up the phone. A wrong number, I thought, yet asked him. He was the watchman of the branch. I repeated the question I had asked a dozen times by now, “Is there someone called Manju Luthra in your bank?” “She is the Chief Manager here,” came the reply. “Now she has gone home. Ring up tomorrow,” he said and hung up. Stunned, I kept sitting like a statue. Then a sort of euphoria of discovering something impossible took me over. Next day, again, a heart-to-heart talk between my wife, her face beaming with joy, and Manju followed. “You have fulfilled my long-pending desire,” my wife said. “I never thought I would ever meet them again in life”. I revelled in my accomplishment. Next morning, when I got up, my wife came to me with a cup of tea. “You know, I had a very dear friend, named Suman, during my childhood days. Could you find her too?” I sat with my mouth
gaping.
|
| |
Women must get their due
The myths created by landlords in Pakistan to deny women the right to inherit land by refusing to give them in marriage, or marrying adult women to children, so as to retain land under family ownership, have been exposed many times over.
I.A Rehman
 PAKISTAN'S women will have a great deal to celebrate if parliament can adopt the three bills concerning them that are on its agenda. A bill to turn the National Commission on the Status of Women into an autonomous body for the empowerment of women and elimination of all forms of discrimination against them has recently been introduced in the National Assembly. The need for a permanent commission with sufficient authority to assail the various forms of injustice being done to women is evident and the proposed measure should not attract controversy. There may be some difference of opinion among the political parties on the degree of freedom Pakistani women should enjoy but there can be no disagreement on women's rights being respected as human rights. One should like to hope that this bill of fundamental importance to the movement for women's emancipation and empowerment will be vigorously pushed through both Houses of parliament and enacted at an early date, with the maximum possible unanimity. A bill to effectively deal with incidents of burning women with acid or otherwise is before the Senate. Nobody can say that the burning of women to death or disfiguring their faces is not a heinous crime. Besides, the measure has already been discussed threadbare by the legislators. One step more and it should become law. The third bill that aims at the eradication of some of the most evil practices against women was recently unanimously passed by the National Assembly and rightly hailed by all supporters of women's causes. The measure provides for stiff punishment for young girls' so-called marriage to the Holy Book, or forcibly offering them in marriage to settle a civil dispute or a criminal liability, or depriving women of their inheritance through deceitful means. The provision relating to the last mentioned crime is particularly significant. While all provisions of the bill address some of the worst forms of excesses against women, this one has a direct bearing on their right to economic independence, without which they cannot acquire their due status as equal and productive members of society. The importance of the move can be judged from the history of resistance to any attempt to secure women's right to inheritance, especially to landed property. When the first Sharia Bill was introduced in the Central Legislative Assembly of India in the 1930s, Muslim landlords in the House had only one concern - that their practice of preferring rivaj (custom) to the Sharia should not be interfered with. (And Mohammad Ali Jinnah agreed to push the bill only because it promised some relief to Muslim women.) The West Punjab bill of 1948, that upheld women's right to inherit land, led to a revolt by the feudals in the Muslim League party and a split was averted with great difficulty. Some time ago, the Law and Justice Commission expressed its concern at the denial of women's right to inheritance although it was respected by Islam and the law both. In the case of the present bill, too, the feudal lobby lowered itself further in public esteem by blocking its adoption through sheer cussedness. The myths created by landlords to deny women's right to inherit land by refusing to give them in marriage, or marrying adult women to children, so as to retain land under family ownership, have been exposed many times over. Nobody believes the tales about women giving up their claim to inheritance out of love for their brothers, who in many cases are only looking for excuses to kill their female siblings for 'honour'. The plea that women are given dowry in lieu of their share in inheritance is absurd because no landlord deducts from his son's inheritance the heavy expenses incurred on his wedding extravaganzas. Quite a few well-meaning people have declined to share human rights activists' joy at the adoption of the bill on anti-women social practices in view of the poor record of implementation of laws, especially those that promise relief to the female population. They have a point but that does not justify giving up all progressive legislation. Laws are useful milestones on the route to social progress. Besides, everybody knows that laws alone cannot bring about social change even if they are duly implemented by a strong government. Wherever governments are found wanting in will or means of enforcing the laws, the greater becomes the responsibility of civil society to carry the reform agenda forward. The fight against feudal biases against women is going to be long and bitter. While every effort should be made to prevent the state from abdicating its duties, the major burden of change will have to be borne by society, not only women but also, and more essentially, men. A welcome feature of the latter two of the three bills is the fact that they were introduced by women parliamentarians in their private capacity and their progress has been made possible by the government's support for them. Some credit to the beleaguered government! This vindicates the decision to increase women's seats in parliament as women belonging to different political parties have been able to forge unity on critical issues and they have also shown a highly laudable capacity to initiate sound legislative proposals. Further, the case for allowing private members' business more time and greater respect has been strengthened. Efforts to reduce the government's interference in private members' bills will now be in order. Is it too much to expect that these three bills and the ill-starred bill on prevention of domestic violence will be adopted within the current parliamentary year? By arrangement with Dawn, Islamabad
|
