PERISCOPE ON PAKISTAN
"Banned" terrorists banned again

Pervez Musharraf has applied the "medicine as before" and banned both the sectarian and the jehadi terrorists for whom Pakistan is home and sanctuary but it remains to be seen in what form and nomenclature they will re-emerge as they did the last time they were banned. He managed the last time to assuage international pressure to tame his homegrown terrorists by banning them but letting them have the freedom of the nation at large. This time it may well be that he cannot fool all the people all the time.

DAILY TIMES maintains: "Pakistan should sort out its sectarian and religious-extremist scene not because the world outside is saying so but because Pakistan needs to bring its law and order situation to normalcy.

"The three big ‘renamed’ organisations banned once again are Millat Islamia (Sipah Sahaba), Islami Tehreek Pakistan (Tehreek Jafariya) and Khuddamul Islam (Jaish Muhammad). Allama Sajid Naqvi has been arrested and raids are being conducted in Bahawalpur to apprehend Maulana Masood Azhar of the Jaish.

"The original ban was imposed on these organisations by the UN Security Council which still receives regularreports on the implementation of its directives under Resolution 1373. It is reasonable to assume that Pakistan did not do enough to enforce the resolution in letter and spirit. The organisations were allowed to function under new names, which was an eye-wash. The leaders were not put out of operation; indeed, in some cases they were allowed to function rather brazenly.

"For example, Maulana Azam Tariq of the renamed Sipah Sahaba was allowed to contest the 2002 general election ‘by mistake’ and become a member of the National Assembly where he went on to become ‘that crucial single vote’ which gave the Jamali government its majority. Allama Sajid Naqvi was allowed to rename his organisation and become a member (since removed) of the grand religious alliance called the MMA. Maulana Masood Azhar was not successfully prosecuted at a court of law. He was allowed to go back to his home town, kept under wraps for a while, then allowed to continue with his political activities which included collecting funds for jehad and giving sermons at mosques across the country. Two weeks ago, he addressed hundreds of Army jawans and officers at the central mosque in Lahore Cantonment which is controlled by the Army. That the police is now conducting raids for his arrest confirms that he was allowed to roam freely despite court orders."

DAILY TIMES adds: "When the first incident occurred the government quickly blamed the ‘foreign hand’ and ignored the outcry of the victim community that named Sipah Sahaba and Jaish as the culprits. No action was taken even after the truth became known to the public. While still in suspended animation the government was then confronted with a terrible sequel in Karachi when workers of the state space agency SUPARCO were done to death. This was immediately followed by the murder of the Sipah Sahaba chief, Maulana Azam Tariq, in Islamabad.

"The international image of Pakistan went down the tubes after news of the shenanigans of these ‘renamed’ organisations was aired outside the country. In a recent survey conducted in the European Union which absorbs 33 per cent of our exports - 48 per cent of the people thought ‘that Pakistan was a threat to world peace’. The pronouncements of some of these extremist leaders have worsened the conditions of trade for Pakistan.

"The leader of Jamatal Daawa (old Lashkar Tayyaba) daily issues public threats to the outside world. He was recently allowed to hold his annual ‘mammoth’ meeting outside his usual Muridke base near Lahore. The Lashkar Tayyaba was banned but Jamatal Daawa has been alive and kicking as usual. Now the government has put the organisation ‘under surveillance’. What good that will do remains to be seen."

DAWN says editorially: "The banning of three militant and sectarian outfit and sealing of their offices may be a right step in the short term, but it will prove of little help in containing the problem of extremism. Arbitrary clampdowns, such as the present one, cannot be a long-term solution to the problem of militancy and intolerance troubling the country, however pressing the need to check both these tendencies.

"The three organisations were banned earlier also but had managed to re-emerge under different names. This is because their leadership and militant cadre were left free and intact, presumably for lack of credible evidence against them.

"The case for the closure of the seminaries run by the three organisations could turn out to be even weaker, as no charges of illegal or criminal activity have been leveled against them. If these were indeed involved in the training of militants and sectarian terrorists, then the government should have also arrested the people who are indulging in such activities.

"The Taliban themselves were largely a product of such seminaries. But after the latter’s coming to power in Kabul, a realisation began to dawn on the political and military establishment in Pakistan that many of these seminaries were becoming a breeding ground for religious extremism, intolerance and bigotry. Then came September 11, and in its wake the official policy shift away from support for religious militants.

DAWN points out: "The Registration and Regulation of Madrasas Ordinance. 2002 was a step in the right direction, and had the government not backtracked on its key provision of making the registration of madrasas a mandatory requirement, the situation perhaps would have been different by now. Instead, it succumbed to pressure exerted by religious parties and groups and settled for voluntary registration.

"The Madrasa Education Board set up under the ordinance also has remained a dormant entity. The provisions pertaining to the mandatory auditing of funds that many religious institutions receive from abroad, especially Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, and the teaching of English, Urdu, mathematics and science as part of the madrasa syllabus also have not been implemented.

NEWS puts its finger on the malaise thus: "Banning the banned parties indicates the problem the government faces with the likelihood of these outfits repeatedly re-appearing to keep their organisations intact. The heavy overlay of violence that grew out of the Klashnikov culture during the Afghan civil war needs to be reversed finally.

"The proliferation of such organisations suggests that terrorism is a growth industry which requires nothing more than an automatic weapon and a willingness to risk one’s life. But they must not be misconstrued with freedom fighters or those struggling against oppression who require the same inputs. They fight for a nobler cause that has moral justification whereas terrorists are involved in destruction of humanity. The trouble arises when one is mistaken for the other and where there should be condemnation there is approval and where it should be supported it is declared as terrorism.

"But, while the government’s efforts to end terrorism seem to be gaining ground, it needs to change its policy and adopt a strategy that will eliminate the causes that encourage people to opt for a violent solution. Both economic factors and the overall social and political milieu breed extremism. Not only the quality of life needs to be improved and the masses involved in constructive pursuits but that an effort should be made to create a moderate, tolerant and peaceful society. ADNI Bureau

Vajpayee's peace move prove infectious

By Ghazanfar Butt

When Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee an-nounced the 12-point peace programme for Jammu and Kashmir, many felt that he was too optimistic. The reaction from Pakistan was tongue-in-cheek with statements like UN involvement in the Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus service or offer of medical aid to victims of Army action in Jammu and Kashmir, but New Delhi ignored the negative aspects. Now Pakistan Prime Minister Zafarullah Khan Jamali has announced a cease-fire offer effective from Id.

The offer has been accepted by India without any prevarication. The response was that the cease-fire should be extended to the Actual Ground Position in Siachin too. The Directors General of Military Operations in New Delhi and Islamabad have had consultations and confirmed that the guns would fall silent on both sides on Id.

There has been no declared ‘war’ on the Line of Control in Jammu and Kashmir for a ‘cease-fire’ to be effected. The firing had to be resorted to by Indian Security Forces when the Pakistan Army was giving covering fire to infiltrators from across the border; and once the firing started, one could expect escalation. But there has been no serious attempt by either side to cross the Line of Control, ever since the end of the Kargil conflict.

The ‘cease-fire’ would enable security forces on either side to relax a little, without lowering their guard. The Government of India has indicated that the Security Forces would be on guard against infiltrators and action against the terrorists in the State would continue.

In Jammu and Kashmir, the announcement by Pakistan of the cease-fire and the response by India has been widely welcomed. The Greater Kashmir (25/11) hoped that the decisions "will pave the way for the final resolution of the Kashmir dispute. Now that good sense has prevailed on Pakistan, the Indians must react accordingly. Both the Prime Ministers must bear in mind that their misadventures along the LoC are wreaking havoc with the lives of Kashmiris."

The Kashmir Monitor (25/11) said: "Measures like starting Srinagar-Muzaffarabad bus and silencing the guns across the Loc could help in creating an atmosphere conducive for initiating a positive dialogue for the resolution of Kashmir dispute"

To coincide with the cease-fire along the LoC and in Siachin, the All Party Hurriyat Conference announced its willingness to talk to the Government of India. It is expected that the talks would commence soon after the State Assembly elections are over. No one expects that the talks will produce immediate results. The Hurriyat may have a road map, but the formulations have to be acceptable to the people of Jammu and Kashmir. When Beg-Parthasarathy talks were held in the Seventies followed by Dr Sheikh Abdullah --Indira Gandhi parleys, the Sheikh Abdullah was in a position to deliver. But that is hardly the position of the Hurriyat leaders.

As the Kashmir Images (25/11) commented: "The recent declaration of the Hurriyat to represent the hue that denotes the people of the Valley is appreciable. The Hurriyat arrived late, but the fortunate and the good thing is that it did arrive after all. The Hurriyat has accounted that it has a road map for Kashmir, a road map for the resolution of the matters affecting the people of the valley. The road map should be broadly constituted by involving the people – the intelligentia, the academicians, the veteran leaders of the mainstream, the think tanks and all from within the Valley …and intelligentia from the sub-continent from India and Pakistan as well."

The optimist in Prime Minister Vajpayee could gauge the feelings of the people of Jammu and Kashmir and the rest of the country while announcing the peace proposals. Across the border, the Government in Pakistan also had to respond to people’s desire. No ruler can afford to ignore the aspirations of the people for long. There may have been pressures from the United States (six fundamentalist outfits banned earlier but re-christened later were banned again in Pakistan during the middle of November), the United Kingdom (Prime Minister Tony Blair recently said the violence in Kashmir was due to terrorism) but the basic fact is that Pakistan had to make an effort to promote peace to respond to the aspirations of its own people. As former Federal Minister Dr Mubashar Hassan said in a statement (24/11) "Our President, Prime Minister, Foreign Minister and the teams of Foreign and Defence Establishments deserve credit and congratulations. They have earned the gratitude of the people. …What is now essential on Pakistan’s side is a period of dignified restraint on rhetoric. Let not our drum beaters go to town about the excellent measures our government has proposed what may be in their opinion an inadequate response from India. Let it not be a competition between the two as to who has offered what and which offer is more worthy of praise. The ultimate objective is to convert the offers into a series of deeds or measures implemented to usher an era of permanent tranquility and peace in South Asia."