Daily Times

The reaction to the NATO raid on an army outpost near Kunar is widespread. There is little ‘new’ in the reaction except for the high intensity of it. There cannot be two opinions about the gravity of the ‘mistake’. It is the most serious tragedy to date. May God bless the souls of the martyrs and give fortitude to their families to bear the loss.

Other than the grief that this matter has brought to the nation, it has unleashed intense anger. The energy generated by the anger needs sombre analysis. There are several serious factors to be considered. The incident has made the armed forces take up a no-nonsense approach with the US. This includes a hardened attitude towards support facilities to NATO, including stoppage of supplies and vacating of at least the Shamsi airbase. In the background of the ‘Memogate’ scandal, the uncompromising approach by the armed forces is completely understandable. Their faith in the political establishment has been shaken and they have no option but to assert themselves. It is also right that the government is supportive.

But the decision that may need more thought is the withdrawal from the meeting in Bonn. It needs to be carefully weighed whether the advantage is in participating and protesting, or in being conspicuous by our absence.

Having recognised the necessity of a firm response, we also need to look at some very relevant factors that will help us reach a clear understanding of the whole phenomenon. These include the covert ‘permission’ to use bases, the exploitation of anger, the effort to estrange a world power, i.e. the US to an extent that helps the extremists and the planned strategy to isolate Pakistan.

There has been a series of denials about the use of Pakistan’s bases. However, the government has admitted to at least two bases being used by the US. There should be an investigation of the conditions of the ‘lease’. Most likely, the conditions were recorded in ‘non-paper’ form, if at all. It should be particularly investigated as to what reciprocal advantages were available and to whom. Incidentally, the big campaign in the case of Memogate, launched by Mian Nawaz Sharif, is self-contradictory. Was he not the person who flew to the US and personally requested a rebuff to the Pakistan Army in the case of Kargil? In the present case, the notorious ‘memo’, if true, is meant for a similar purpose. If the request is ugly now, it was ugly then too.

As for the exploitation of anger, the extremists provide the worst example. Let us look at one example: The Jamat-ud-Dawa (JuD) has once again been in the forefront. A well known newspaper has reported the following: students aged 10 to 15 from Jhumra Sandal Islamic School, Faisalabad and Tameer-i-Seerat Model School Sharaqpur, Sheikhupura, said they thought they were going to a science exhibition in Al-Mizan School in Faisalabad. This is what parents were told when they signed the field trip permission. Instead, the children were brought to Lahore and were made to join a protest in front of the press club and in Nasser Bagh, Lahore.

This is one example of exploitation intended to whip up anger against the US and to make sure that the pressure on extremists and so called ‘banned outfits’ gets reduced. Another question to be answered is as to what does a ‘ban’ by the government mean? If they can carry out all activities including political protests and rallies, does the government’s intention not become suspect? So, if the US and its allies lose confidence in the commitments of our government then what is strange about all this? Is this also a covert permission? Is it another form of ‘corruption’ of governmental actions? Or is it that the Punjab government follows its own policies with little consideration to the federation?

It is quite clear that the estrangement of a world power, which has been a ‘partner’ in the war against terror, may result in a decision to withdraw and abandon Pakistan as an unreliable partner. This is likely to help the agenda of the ‘extreme’ right and terrorists because it is easier for them to work with a more anti-US set up. It may be recalled that extremists have little love for our armed forces. They keep attacking them and have certainly killed more men in uniform than all US attacks combined. In no way does it justify the US attack but it does clearly expose the intentions of the extremists.

Finally, an even more serious matter: the army post near Kunar border was ruthlessly attacked, but who invited NATO forces on the pretext of the presence of terrorists in the area?

All factors must be considered before a final decision. This is a moment to redefine policies within the region and with the powers that be. We do not need an anti-Pakistan force to fill the vacuum. It is a time to respect emotions but also to respect logic and national interests.

The writer is a culture and media management specialist, a researcher, author, director and actor