Taliban, Musharraf and other hot topics

Musharraf’s trial and talks with the Taliban were the most talked about topics till the unveiling of the Abbottabad Commission Report. Both issues were debated and discussed at length.
First, the Taliban talks. There are opposing schools of thought on this – one in favour of negotiations and the other dead set against them. Those favouring talks put forward the argument, and rightly so, that if only use of brute force could have solved the problem that would have happened long ago. But that is not the case. Neither have militants been eliminated nor have military operations weakened their resolve. On the contrary, they are more dangerous than before.
Those who oppose talks with the Taliban refer to past agreements that they think were violated by the Taliban. This argument is not tenable for the simple reason that the agreements were not violated by the Taliban but sabotaged by the US. The first such agreement that was concluded between the army and the Taliban (General Safdar Husain and commander Nek Mohammad Wazir) in the Shakai area of South Waziristan was blown to smithereens within hours by the US drone attack that killed Nek Muhammad.
The US, it may be recalled, was in no mood at that time even to hear the word Taliban, leave alone talking to them, and was against Pakistan entering into any agreement whatsoever with the Taliban. The latest attack to sabotage an agreement was the recent one on Waliur Rehman Mehsud, widely believed to have been nominated by the TTP leadership to conduct negotiations with the government of Pakistan. However, he was killed in a US drone strike near Miran Shah in North Waziristan.
Some people argue that peace talks have never been taken seriously by the Taliban and that they use such occasions as breathing space for regrouping and replenishing their resources. This argument, if taken seriously, belittles our own troops by making it seem like they do not take necessary precautionary measures which should have been a part of their training as well as the defence strategy.
While arguing for or against negotiations with the Taliban we overlook yet another important aspect required for the success of such endeavours. This is to address the core issue of militancy, which has caused friction between the government and the general public in this so-called war on terror imposed upon us by a dictator on one telephone call from Washington. The government wants to remain a frontline ally of the US and at the same time conclude an agreement with the Taliban.
The Taliban are not buying that. They, like the general public, would like the government to reconsider its policy towards the war in accordance with its own national interests rather than those of others. We want to have good relations with every country, including the US, but not at the cost of our own security.
Only if it does this will the government win the hearts and minds of the people who are at present shying away from fully supporting the armed forces deployed in that region.
The US, which invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and is the root cause of militancy in the region, has already started talks with the Taliban after having unsuccessfully used all means at its disposal to eliminate them with force. If the US can enter into negotiations with its worst enemy what is so drastically wrong with us that we cannot talk to our own citizens who have gone astray for one reason or another?
Now to Musharraf’s trial. Not being a legal expert, I cannot offer any comment from that perspective but merely look at it from an ordinary citizen's point of view. One question that comes to mind is whether his rule was good or bad for the country. In other words, was his taking over power unconstitutionally, forcibly and the subsequent imposition of emergency beneficial for the nation? And have the policies that he pursued done the country any good?
Since the action of October 12, 1999 – though illegal and unconstitutional – has already been dealt with by the competent authority let us, for the time being, leave it there and move forward. The declaration of emergency in the country when the situation did not warrant it was equally bad, illegal and unconstitutional and was declared so by the apex court and so were his other policies that he imposed on the nation.
Despite all his wrongdoings, efforts are afoot these days to propagate the fear that if he is tried for treason under the constitution, it may lead to provoking the army into taking action. In other words, the army may topple the elected government of Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif once again.
Only time will tell whether the army reacts or not, but what is amply clear is that the people of Pakistan are in no mood to accept any illegal and unconstitutional interference. Gen Musharraf has not performed any great and inestimable services to the army that it will take up the cudgels on his behalf, especially at this point when it is cognisant of the mood of the people and is also embroiled in quelling terrorist activity in the country.
His trial does not mean the army is under trial. It is the trial of an individual and that too of a retiree who lived in exile for obvious reasons and returned to the country for personal political purposes, against the discreet advice of the institution to which he once belonged. So let us not drag the army into his trial.
The court has already initiated proceedings in the matter and now wants to take the case to its logical conclusion. Since the government has now acted correctly and in accordance with the constitution by lending support to the Supreme Court, we should appreciate it and not derail the process.
Musharraf's nine-year rule was full of misadventures but the worst among them was his disrespect to the Quaid by dishonouring the commitment he had made with the tribesmen in 1948 when they joined Pakistan after Jinnah’s agreement to withdraw armed forces from there, assuring them no interference in their affairs would take place without taking them into confidence.
The general broke the Quaid’s pledge by inducting the army in Fata without consulting the people there. This is equal to, if not worse than, imposing emergency in the country. This action became the real cause of militancy in the area, which is now spreading all over the country. Musharraf must be held accountable for the destruction wrought in Fata and for the life of each and every innocent man, woman and child lost in this unwanted war on terror.
The writer is a former ambassador. Email: waziruk@hotmail.com