An exaggerated version

The POST, Sun, Nov,04, 2007.

Pervaiz Iqbal Cheema

The article entitled ‘Where Jihad Lives Now’ that has been recently published in an American magazine Newsweek painting a bleak picture of Pakistan implying that it is heading towards a civil war has invoked strong reactions among many Pakistanis. Even the outsiders look at it rather suspiciously. Viewed mostly as the product of anti-Pakistan brigade of journalists, presumably prompted and supported by those who not just dislike the Pakistanis but also the creation of Pakistan and its ability to acquire the nuclear weapons, many rational individuals scrutinized the article and found it indeed unnecessarily exaggerated. It is a matter of satisfaction that the government of the US has not bought the exaggerated view of the magazine. 

It is not surprising for a Pakistani to read a highly exaggerated version in an American magazine along with inadvertent or deliberate distortion of facts. The exaggeration itself entails distortion of facts. However the worrying aspects is that exaggerated version of an event or a situation invariably tend to send wrong signals to many unconcerned and neutrals. It can be safely assumed that a deliberately exaggerated version is bound to be a product of contrived policy of those. 

The article maintains that ‘no other country on earth is arguably more dangerous than Pakistan’. To support this contention the writers mention factors like political instability, a network of radical Islamist, an abundance of angry young anti western recruits, secluded training areas, the state of the art electronic technology, regular air service to the West and the security services that do not always do what they are supposed to do.

Since it birth Pakistan has gone through some patches of instability and each time it has come out of them rather stronger and more stable. Patches of instability invariable inculcate a greater sense of responsibility and one frequently witnesses its manifestation in the subsequent years. Not only the year 2007 is an election year in which all political parties get engaged in impressing the public the good work they have done or intend to do in future if elected but developments that are product of global politics especially that directly effect Pakistan have been somewhat pronounced. 

As far as the existence of radical Islamist and anti-western feelings in Pakistan is concerned, suffice it to state that it is mainly the product American policies after the tragic events of 9/11. The American policies in Iraq and Afghanistan have taken a very heavy toll of goodwill for the West in general and US in particular. A general impression exists that the Western pursuits are, in many ways, in congruence with the notion of clash of civilization and collectively a systematic vilification campaign is mounted against most Muslim countries. There is no doubt that for the last few years anti-western feelings have been on the increase and such feelings rapidly intensified in the tribal areas during the last ten months. 

As far as the allegation of secluded training areas of terrorists is concerned, there hardly exists any proof. It has been repeatedly asserted by the Pakistanis authorities to provide intelligence information in order to enable them to strike. Many ask the question that while the West has mastered the snoopy technology yet it is unable to pin down areas of training. All they allege is that certain area is being used for training. 

Despite being fully cognizant of  tribesmen feelings and acutely conscious of its role as a coalition partner in the international coalition against terrorism, the government is actively playing its parts despite the fact that  its limitations and sensitivities are totally ignored by the important and powerful partners of the coalition. To effectively monitor the movements in this difficult area, Pakistan needs sensitive monitoring technologies. Are the partners that have such technologies willing to supply and support Pakistan in this regards? So far the responses are either evasive or negative in essence. Other considerations appear to be effectively preventing the supply of full technological support to Pakistan. 

Similarly the allegation that Pakistan is giving rise to the spread of terrorism in Afghanistan from its tribal area has in fact no solid basis and appeared to be the product of a conjectures and diversionary strategy. It is commonly assumed by many outsiders that since Pakhtoons live on both side of the Durand Line, they are actively supporting the activities of the Talibans. The assumption seems to be based, perhaps correctly, on the ethnic bonds and dislike for American pursuits against the Islamic world in general and their Afghan policy in particular. However what is ludicrous is the linkage with the government of Pakistan. 

Perhaps the most ludicrous aspect of the argument is that security services are not doing what they are supposed to do.  What the accusers need to realize or at least take into considerations is the actual policy pursuits of the government of Pakistan. Not only the current regime is the first one to send troops into Pakistan’s tribal areas after a passage of more than hundred years, but it has been continuously undertaking military operations when ever the intelligence reports indicate the presence of unwanted elements in the tribal areas. Most westerns have no idea about the wild nature of the tribal area. The closest example one can think of is that of Wild West of earlier period of the American history. Yes what one can buy is that there may be some sympathetic elements within the security services but to lump all is unacceptable. 

Even more ridiculous argument is that there exists a regular air service to the West. Almost all countries of the world maintain regular air linkage with the west. Here the underneath assumption seem to be that the radical elements from various parts of the world could easily gain access to Pakistan. Hence they come to Pakistan for training and once they get the necessary training, they go back to their respective countries and indulge in undesirable activities. Instead of looking inward into the operative policy pursuits that encourages the ghetto mentalities in their own countries, it is easier to shift the responsibility on some one else. 

It appears difficult to dismiss the notion that this article is product of efforts to divert attention of American failures in Iraq and Afghanistan and to pressurize Pakistan to pay heed to what they expect from Pakistan. It is interesting to note that the article once again make the reference to Pakistan’s nuclear assets stressing that they can fall into wrong hands despite the fact that it has been repeatedly proven that Pakistani weapons are in safe hands. To make unnecessary references to the existence of Pakistani nuclear assets merely reflects the dislike of accusers. 

Similarly it needs to be highlighted here that the article mentions that the Taliban smuggle weapons under the baggage of Afghan refugees on their way home but when Pakistan highlighted many problems associated with the presence of Afghan refugees, many in the west are not willing to pay attention to it and make the argument that the Afghan incumbent government is in no position to absorb these refugees. So in either case Pakistan is made target of accusations. 

While there is no doubt that Pakistan is passing through a difficult phase and experiencing many problems, it does not qualify to be rated as the most dangerous country in the world. One merely has read to what is happening in Iraq and Afghanistan to realize the real situation in the world. Over exaggeration tend to not only undermine the informative value of a magazine like Newsweek but also reflects its carefully camouflaged propaganda streaks.

The writer works for Islamabad Policy research Institute.