Terrorism and potential responses to it have divided the Pakistani society in increasingly visible ways. One of the most fascinating as well as disturbing aspect of this is the evolution and dilemma of those who are self-avowedly ‘liberal’ in Pakistan.

I do not identify as a liberal across all issues and neither do I want to arrogate to myself the power to define a liberal -- since that would kill the whole point of liberalism, I suppose. But those who call themselves liberal are searching for a definition of the Pakistani liberal. This is not without problems since definitions ask you to fall within a circle -- or risk exclusion.

This is particularly damaging for societies fighting a threat as potent as terrorism.

If the terrorists, led by Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, are our enemy then they are increasingly winning on one important front. They have managed to ensure enough fissures within this society that there is not even a general consensus on how to contain and tackle the threat.

But let’s forget about the TTP for a minute and let’s see whether we are also making it worse for ourselves.

What are the choices here: Be for the Taliban or against them? And if you are against them, would you consider all ways of eliminating them legitimate? Is anyone killing terrorists or suspected terrorists a hero? Is extra-judicial killing to be celebrated because the state prosecution system for whatever reasons is broken? Is killing the enemy more important or is it more precious to uphold the system that we claim to defend?

I do not have the slightest doubt that the late Chaudhry Aslam was a brave cop. But bravery and actions worth emulating or celebrating are not always the same thing. Our enemies could be brave but that does not mean we ignore the underlying beliefs (or lack thereof) responsible for their actions.

I do not have enough information about the late Ch. Aslam’s life to say whether most of his actions or ’encounters’ against the terrorists were legitimate or otherwise. But many people, although preciously few, have raised questions about making a complete hero out of someone who engaged in many controversial actions. This is not meant to suggest that cops or servicemen who lay down their lives should not be celebrated. Their sacrifices must be honoured. But this must not detract us from our duty of asking difficult questions -- especially of those who use state-sanctioned violence in our name.

The self-avowed liberals should take particular note of this. Intellectual consistency is important -- especially when trying to win over a divided polity. The irony, if we were to ignore these things, would be that terrorists and liberals would agree on something: "if a broken system cannot punish those we consider criminals, kill them. It is worth it." And if you see this war as a battle of hearts and minds, then such a shift would show that the TTP is winning the minds -- even of many self-avowed liberals.

I can only hope that readers will not twist the above argument to make this about the US drone strikes. The legality of the drone strikes by a foreign power (which considers itself engaged in a theatre of war) is a separate debate from how we conduct or measure ourselves when dealing with a situation that we at least partially treat as a law enforcement problem -- not strictly a military one.

The other problem that I see as equally fascinating and disturbing is this fetish for new legislation in Pakistan. And here is something that quite remarkably very few talk about: each year hundreds of reports and seminars mention that ‘enforcement’ of laws is a problem. Now if we recognise that the problem is enforcement, what makes so many of us think that a new law will somehow improve things?

The same problem remains before and after: enforcement.

This is not meant to suggest that we should stop discussing new legislation -- but there seems an increasingly bizarre fascination with new offences, new tribunals, new remedies etc. This helps governments of course. They have something tangible to point to and say "achievement". In many ways, by emphasising their fetish for new legislation, many self-avowed liberal activists play into the hands of the state. Consider the issue of harassment or intimidation online, for example on social media. Almost every prominent voice in the country on privacy and digital rights has advocated new legislation for checking online harassment, intimidation etc.

To make matters worse, internet related advocacy has also demanded that government should appoint a special body to investigate and prosecute such crimes. Think about it for a second. Can there be anything worse for privacy or freedom of expression on the internet? I assure you, as a lawyer, that any attorney in the government camp will happily accede to your demands for creating a new more powerful body to check online harassment etc. The same attorney will also come up with harsh penalties in the new law. And why? Because all this serves no one else other than the government.

By inviting the government to expand its power and sphere of influence when it comes to control and punishment of online content, the internet rights activists have committed a grave mistake. It comes as no surprise that the PM and his lawyers are now in the process of finalising new legislation to better ‘protect’ citizens.

Remember the trouble with enforcement? Once the government has a law that you like it will only punish the actions the government dislikes, not you. Of course there will be token instances of prosecution of the odd offence here and there but it will give government new control for controlling and punishing online content and behaviour.

A better fight for activists would be to focus on enforcement of existing laws -- but of course that is unglamorous. It is also, admittedly, much tougher and with fewer guaranteed seminars in 5-star hotels.

While claiming to stand for a Pakistan that respects human rights, many liberals have celebrated violence and failed to question the ways in which we are fighting our war. And while shouting the rhetoric of the power of social media, the self-avowed Pakistani liberal has handed the government a tool to gag us all. Thus, the self-avowed liberals might themselves have done the greatest damage to their cause, i.e. making their position intellectually hollow.

There might be no turning back now.