In the near future, Pakistan will go Islamist. Not Islamic--that's what it is now--but Islamist. You know, like Iran. But, perhaps to an even greater extent.
There are a number of indicators in the open literature that show a continuation and even an increase in trends within Pakistan which extend back at least three decades. These include the recent poll showing limited support for fighting either al-Qaeda or Taliban. Take a look at the details in, http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/oct07/PakAlQaeda_Oct07_quaire.pdf.
Another poll found strong support for the greater inclusion of Sharia (Islamic customary law) in the legal system of Pakistan. According to the poll by Terror Free Tomorrow, seveny-six percent of those questioned favored including Sharia. See the results of last month's poll at http://www.terrorfreetomorrow.org/upimagestft/Pakistan%20Poll%20Report.pdf.
The same sources make it clear that any unilateral US effort at "hot pursuit" of Taliban or its foreign components into Pakistan would be rejected by the majority of the Pakistani population. Any effort by Musharraf or a Musharraf-Bhutto combination to allow US raids into the Tribal Agencies would be particularly fraught with political peril as only a small minority of borderland dwellers go so far as to approve of a purely Pakistani military effort against the guerrillas.
Ready for more unpleasant news from "our key ally" Pakistan?
OK. Here it is. Between a third and a half of the Pakistanis have a favorable opinion of the various groups ranging from al-Qaeda (at the low end of approval) through Taliban (in the middle of the range) to various indigenous Jihadist groups (at the high end.) Put together with the emphasis on customary Islamic law, which is a key component of Islamism's ideology, the approval of Jihadist groups makes clear that the Pakistanis are not inclined to support the American efforts against Islamism/Jihadism.
Regardless of the soothing mood music coming from our State Department (for a Pakistani report of the Muzak from State, see http://paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?193233), the reality is quite different. Neither the 150 megabucks per month expended by us on Pakistan since 2001 nor the current administration's call for an additional 60 megabucks to be focused at the Tribal Agencies, particularly North Waziristan, has made any measurable difference in the ani-US, pro-Islamist stance of the Pakistani population.
The search for "moderates" in Pakistan reminds the Geek of the similar chasing after mirages during the Iranian Hostage Crisis of 1979-80. There may be "moderates" in Pakistan today as there may have been individuals of similar inclination in Iran twenty-eight years ago.
So what!
"Moderates" in Iran back then or in Pakistan today are utterly irrelevant. If they exist, they are so insignificant in numbers or so unimportant in political or military position that they might as well live on the back side of the moon.
The US State Department may actually believe what its spokesman said the other day that "Pakistan is undergoing a political transition... [including] moderate forces within the Pakistani political system working together for a moderate Pakistan". If the deep thinkers in Foggy Bottom actually think this is the truth, they aren't worth the money we're paying them.
Remember the Pakistani Army and Inter-Services Intelligence agency were behind the creation and success of Taliban in Afghanistan. Remember, A.Q. Khan could not have engaged in his wholesale efforts at nuclear proliferation without the knowledge and agreement of the same two organisations. Remember, the performance of the Pakistani Army despite recent small scale successes has been somewhere between poor and inexcusably pathetic.
US pressure may have resulted in the deployment of nearly 100,000 military and para-military personnel into conflict areas. But this pressure cannot make the armed forces perform well nor maintain a will to combat over time. The Times of India reports in detail on some of the losses and difficulties encountered by the Pakistani forces as they reluctantly lumber into action. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Multiple_conflicts_bleed_Pak_army/articleshow/2503763.cms.
The Paks have promised an "all out" military effort to rid the Tribal Agency border region of Taliban and similar "militants." But, they have made the same promise in the past. Repeatedly. Considering the heavy losses and poor morale of the troops, this promise will not last long.
The current administration needs to get a grip on a fundamental reality.
We are not engaged in a "Global War on Terrorism" as it would have us believe. We are actually fighting a total war against Islamism and its armed component, Jihadism. This means simply that the real battlefield is not the mountains along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.
The real battlefield in Pakistan and elsewhere is the minds, the collective worldview of the people. The genuine strategic challenge is to find a way to convince a critical mass of the Pakistani population (as well as the populations of other Islamic countries) that the best future for them does not rest with the cramped Islamist notions but with the melding of Islamic and Western ideas and structures.
The development and application of that type of strategy will not be simple nor fast. All that can be said is that without acknowledgement of the actual enemy in the current struggle, there is no chance of doing it.
We had better do it now and well. Remember, Pakistan is a nuclear power.
We had better shift gears darn fast--Pakistan is like an eighteen wheeler balanced on the edge of a steep cliff. It may tumble tomorrow.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The Geek wrote: "The genuine strategic challenge is to find a way to convince a critical mass of the Pakistani population (as well as the populations of other Islamic countries) that the best future for them does not rest with the cramped Islamist notions but with the melding of Islamic and Western ideas and structures."
Is anyone out there doing this effectively, in your view?
The melding referred to has been taking place in small, scattered and totally uncoordinated ways for some years now. Turkey has been the prime arena for this but the efforts have neither been rewarded or acknowledged by the US and EU.
Similar signs have been seen in past years in places as far removed from each other as Sudan (yeah, the Geek knows that sounds weird) and Indonesia.
Basic Western concepts such as the dignity and autonomy of the individual are not incompatible with the Quran, particularly the earlier segments written before the conquest of Mecca. Neither are such matters as gender equality necessarily at odds with basic Islamic scripture.
Islam, like all other religions of revelation is subject to human interpretation done in the context of current requirements and realities. Orthodox Judaism has done this with relative success for a long time. So have segments of Christianity.
Islam has attempted to do this but has been distracted by the deep sectarian splits, the absence of an effective mechanism of coordinated debate on theology and the national rivalries of various states including Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Admittedly the process of melding Islamic and Western ideas to the benefit of Muslims will be neither quick nor easy, but it is the best hope of ending the Second Cold War without a massive hot war outbreak. The US and other countries should--no, MUST engage the Islamic world in a meaningful challenge to see the positive results for Muslims which will occur if the Islamist notion of global caliphate is discarded in favor of choosing the best of the
West to merge with the central beliefs of Islam.
At the same time it is necessary for the US and the West to impose costs on the Islamists. These costs need not necessarily involve breaking things and killing people but they must be real. The Geek admits that doing this will entail costs for the American people (think the costs of reducing energy dependence upon Mideast oil if nothing else), but so did the First Cold War.
Following this approach will be both frustrating and long term, but so also was the First Cold War. Just keep in mind who won that one.
Post a Comment