My friend and contemporary columnist Ayaz Amir said a few days ago that he is writing two columns a week, as there is too much happening in the country that inspires comment. Another friend Zahid Hussain who writes a column once in two weeks agreed. I am out of the country and could not contribute for the last two weeks or so. Two major government meetings and policy initiatives have been bothering me: one, the decision to give the Rangers a free hand to go for the target killers and criminals; and two, yet another meeting of political parties endorsing unconditional talks offers with all shades of terrorists. Let’s analyse these decisions briefly. One cannot quarrel with the decision about Karachi as the city has been bleeding for years now. So the action against the militants irrespective of their party affiliation was welcomed. Even the political parties that back these organised militant goons, who kill opponents on their orders and finance their groups through extortion money, accepted it. Such statements were, however, for public consumption. But as soon as the action started, they started crying foul and alleging that they were being singled out. As expected, the MQM, Karachi’s biggest party’s share in the alleged criminals arrested by the Rangers was larger than other parties. It is directly in proportion to their undisputed control over the city’s fate. However, my issue is that after the long deliberations that were chaired by the prime minister, what came out was a tactical move of giving the Rangers (read the military as all Rangers officers belong to it) more powers and the so-called ‘free hand’. In spite of the fact that the biggest metropolis of the country and the commercial hub has become one of the most dangerous cities to live in, the politicians have no strategy to solve the real problems of Karachi. All decisions are tactical to cure the symptoms and not the multiple chronic diseases that have multiplied over the years because of neglect. Like all commercial hubs Karachi pulls in people in search of employment from all over the country and beyond, particularly Bangladeshis and Afghans. Its population has been growing at a much faster rate than other cities. Most job seekers are from the working class. They need accommodation and the city has not launched a single housing scheme for the poor working classes for the last few decades. Who filled the vacuum? Obviously, the private sector land-grab mafia in cahoots with the bureaucracy. They need patronage, which is readily provided by the political parties, in return for big money and future votes if they get registered in Karachi. Similarly, the public transport system is inadequate. The people who commute back and forth to work perched dangerously on top of minibuses are angry enough to burn cars and buses on the slightest irritation. The growth in investment in civic amenities has never been more than two percent, while the population grows conservatively speaking at 3-3.5 percent a year. What else could happen with such a city but that it would burst at its seams? The biggest crime against the city was committed by the present and the immediate past provincial governments by not holding local government elections. They are averse to devolve powers to the city government because Karachi is a golden goose for the corrupt politicians and bureaucrats. The PPP and MQM have been haggling with each other unendingly at the cost of a suffering city. The PPP’s folly is that it does not want to give enough powers to the local governments of Karachi. The MQM’s greed is that they want absolute control over the city without sharing it with other ethnic communities who form over 50 percent of the population. Added to all this is the recent phenomenon of sectarian killings, which is also an extension of the Saudi-Iran conflict in Muslim countries. And, of course, the jihadi groups also find Karachi as a good money-churning source, as they are involved in extortion and kidnapping of people for heavy ransoms. They have pitched themselves mainly on the entrance point suburbs of the city and are equipped to bring the tribal areas’ war to Karachi. All these issues needed a grand strategy, not temporary tactical moves. The latter might bring down the number of per day killings and maybe less extortion threats, but Karachi cannot be healed unless its chronic diseases are treated. Now let’s take the issue of offering unconditional talks to the Taliban and other jihadi groups who are ruthlessly killing our people and soldiers. If this was just a move to win over Islamists who oppose military action and show them that the al Qaeda-inspired Taliban do not want peace, like it was done before the Swat operation, one could understand it. But the problem here is, as I have earlier written many times and other leading political analysts also maintain, that the PML-N and PTI, which are championing the cause ‘give peace a chance’, have little or no understanding of the complexities of the militant Islamist movement that has emerged in most of the Muslim polities. This movement has its own history and global ideology, which is in clash with the 21st century time and space. It is not a clash of religious civilisations, as Huntington had put it and Islamist leaders present it in support of their point of view. It is a clash between the progressive view that societies have to change and move on with the changing political, economic, technological and sociological environment and the retrogressive Islamists’ view, which wants society to live within the norms and values prescribed in the religious tradition and doctrines set in medieval times. Unfortunately, political quackery rules Pakistan. In spite of being a critic of military interference in political affairs, it seems that the outgoing COAS Pervez Kayani is clearer on how to respond to the terrorism threat than the PML-N and PTI. There is hardly a leader at the top who takes time out to read to find out the crucial question why Pakistan is suffering terrorism. Why are Muslim societies going through the internal turmoil? Why have Muslim societies failed to progress without any introspection? Benazir Bhutto’s last book Reconciliation showed that she had tried to tackle the issue of rising Islamism intellectually. Other leaders should engage the objective analysts and read the reports written by them. Otherwise they will not be able to understand the seriousness of the issue, which means the failure to have a realistic strategy for the country. Even if the rest of the world is conspiring against the Muslim countries, as Islamists want to believe, there has to be some inherent flaw that gives them the opportunity to successfully destabilise the Muslim countries and arrest their growth. The writer is the author of What’s wrong with Pakistan? He can be reached at ayazbabar@gmail.com