Has General Raheel more clarity than his predecessors?

What makes the army chief General Raheel Sharif different from his two predecessors — General Parvez Musharraf and Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani — in fighting the war against terrorism? It is obvious that he is clearer than his predecessors in his counter-terrorism narrative, which led to a military crucial to get complete control of the area for the safe return of about one million IDPs.
The holding of “Pakistan Day” parade despite high security concern was to give a clear message to the world about the success of operation Zarb-e Azb at the time when the armed forces are already engaged in one of their toughest battles against militants.
Will Gen. Raheel be able to change the jihadi narrative of the late General Ziaul Haq, which his two predecessors could not do?Though Gen. Kayani in his second tenure did publicly express that Pakistan’s biggest threat — sectarianism and extremism — was internal and not external, he did not launch a decisive war on these threats.
A source involved in the ongoing operation disclosed that the decision had been taken to go after every group involved in terrorism or had taken arms to impose its so-called ideology.
“We will go after all religious, ethnic or militant wings. From madrassas to campuses, we will not allow anyone to take arms whether at the Karachi University or the Punjab University or any madrassa,” he disclosed.
The thinking in the military circles looks quite clear that Pakistan and terrorism can’t go together. The message was quite clear and that could be one of the reasons why they came hard both in North Waziristan and in Karachi. Punjab is next on the list.
A massive operation is under consideration in the Punjab against all militant groups, particularly sectarian outfits, as well those spreading militancy in the educational institutions.
So, how different is Gen. Raheel from Gen. Musharraf and Gen. Kayani? While Musharraf banned both Jihadi and sectarian groups, his government hardly went after them.
His target was confined to major al-Qaeda operatives and handover of its key leaders like Khalid Sheikh Mohammad and Ramzi bin al-Sheiba to the US and hundreds of others. But, Musharraf and his team followed the policy of “good and bad terrorists.” He decided not to touch the “jihadi groups” though they remained banned but on “paper.”
Since he became politically ambitious, his political agenda overcame the national security concern. He ruled Pakistan for almost nine years and it made him unpopular with both extremists and democrats.
Unlike Musharraf, General Kayani had no political ambitions but despite his two terms as army chief and successful operation in Swat, he remained reluctant in some other key security related issues. Some of his colleagues believe he should not have taken another term.
Gen. Raheel is more clear in his counterterrorism narrative that there should not be any “if and buts” in dealing with terrorism or “good and bad terrorists.” Thus, he intends to go after “all militants” at least and this is what he has been doing.
He does not look politically ambitious and all political parties appreciated his position during the “dharna politics” when he told them to resolve their differences politically without involving the army. It went well with the political circles. However, it did cause disappointment in some opposition circles but he took a correct position.
Pakistan’s western and eastern boarders remained problematic during Musharraf and Kayani’s era while they also did not go all-out against sectarian outfits and the alleged militant wings of political parties.
The Afghan government led by President Ashraf Ghani and Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah have appreciated Pakistan’s efforts. The cooperation between the two governments led to major operations on the western boarder and inside Afghanistan.
Pakistan’s civil and military leadership is on one page on Zarb-e-Azb and the National Action Plan, NAP.
There is also a sign of improvement on the eastern front.
Much now depend on our relations with India and the attitude of the Indian government led by hardline Narendra Modi. Pakistan is concerned about the alleged Indian involvement in Balochistan.
While India’s accusation against Pakistan of cross-border terrorism have died down and there are no fresh border violations on the eastern front from the Indian forces in the recent weeks, the resumption of secretary level talks can pay way for a meaningful dialogue.
The political leadership provided consensus on operation Zarb-e-Azb and later on the NAP for which credit also goes to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif. He also played key role in improving relations with India and Afghanistan.
His strategy was different from the PPP government. Sharif in the first six months held direct talks with the TTP and even took his arch-rival Imran Khan into confidence. Again, after the Army Public School attack, he called an All Parties Conference to build national consensus on terrorism.
A stable democracy, strong civil institutions, an independent judiciary and mature media are some of the key factors for the success in the decisive war against terrorism and extremism.Defeat is not the option either for General Raheel Sharif or for Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif.The writer is the senior analyst and columnist of GEO, The News and Jang.