Daily Times

The storm over the memo drama had hardly died down when the US attack in Mohmand Agency, killing 26 military personnel, created yet another crisis of titanic dimensions. While the circumstances surrounding both these incidents are yet to be unravelled and ascertained, it is really painful to note that some armchair gladiators, pseudo-intellectuals, defence analysts, avowed enemies of the civilian set-up, political opponents of the government and a section of the media, continue with their bizarre discourses pointing accusing fingers at the government in the absence of any verifiable and credible evidence. In the former case, emphasis was on the assumption that the allegations made by Mansoor Ijaz were true and, in the latter episode, there are insinuations that US onslaughts on the ISI and the army have coincided with when the PPP coalition government was in danger of a meltdown; the latest Salala blitzkrieg may also have been designed to bail out Zardari because of the Haqqani memo and NRO. The proposition seems absurd and preposterous in view of our internal power dynamics

Who does not know that, in Pakistan, the khakis have arrogated to themselves the role of defining national interest and national security, and have also assumed the responsibility of choreographing security policies and strategies based on their own intricate and befuddled conceptions They have also encroached upon civilian turf, which has been the main stumbling block in strengthening democracy, rule of law, across the board accountability and security of the citizens. The world knows where the real power lies and that is why they have been dealing with the military leadership directly. They would be fools to resort to such dangerous indiscretions — as suggested by the detractors of the government — only to prop up or bail out the civilian government and jeopardise their war effort in Afghanistan.

The memo scam and the US attack are no doubt very serious issues and need to be handled with utmost pragmatism, and in the best national interest in recognition of ground realities. Trying to use such issues to denigrate or discredit the government, accusing it of acts of treason or trying to settle political scores while remaining impervious to the likely repercussions for the country, itself constitutes an act of treason. The calls for accountability of only the civilian leadership and their indictment in acts of unproved treason, closing eyes to the established acts of sedition by military adventurers and the fact that it was the military leadership that pushed us into the war on terror by bartering away our sovereignty, adequately demonstrates the unshakable grip of the khakis on our national demeanour as well as the hypocrisy of the media and civil society in seeking accountability. It is a witch-hunt in which everybody seems complicit in burning witches with relish. It would have done a lot of good to Pakistan if the proponents of this selective accountability had advocated the ascendancy of the civilian elected government over the military establishment with the same zeal and commitment with which they have been targeting the elected government and trying to sabotage the democratic process in the country.

Now, coming to the Salala incident and the reaction that it has triggered among the masses. The intensity of rage and fury over the incident is more than justified in view of the fact that the US executed this attack against an ally who has suffered the most for being in partnership with it and, as a consequence, is faced with an existential threat. The government has done well by responding to the public anger and the mood by deciding to immediately suspend NATO’s supply through Pakistan, demanding the vacation of Shamsi airbase within 15 days, to revisit cooperation with the US, NATO and ISAF and to boycott the Bonn Conference.

Having the Shamsi base vacated by the US does not seem to be a complicated demand. The US commander in Afghanistan has already expressed willingness to comply with the demand. As regards suspending NATO’s supplies through Pakistan, it does not seem a sustainable option in view of its importance and the stake the US has in its uninterrupted flow to support the war effort in Afghanistan. It is likely to exert all the pressure that it can muster to have the decision rescinded as has happened previously. Those who are advocating a complete break with the US do not understand the intricacies of international relations. In international politics, continued engagement and flexibility is the name of the game. We must not forget that we are dealing with the mightiest power in the world and therefore need to tread cautiously, and use our cards very prudently.

The US has regretted the incident but it is not going to apologise formally as is being demanded because it is not the way of the mighty. The uproar against the incident has certainly strengthened the hands of the government in dealing with the US. Pakistan does have some trump cards including its indispensability in any settlement in Afghanistan, as a conduit for NATO supplies and the intelligence that it can share and provide to the NATO forces in facilitating their fight against the terrorists. This is the time to use them and make the US realise that, while pursuing its objectives in the war on terror, it must also recognise the importance of the strategic interests of its ally and try to accommodate them in any post-US arrangement in Afghanistan while also respecting its sovereignty. Pakistan may also be able to extract some concession in the form of transit fees for NATO containers and the pledge by the US to ensure that such incidents do not recur in the future.

As far as revisiting cooperation with the US, it is long overdue. Pakistan and the US have conflicting strategic interests and perhaps this is the right moment to recognise our interests with the US. The decision to boycott the Bonn Conference ostensibly has created the desired effect and the US and other European countries, particularly Germany, have appealed to the government of Pakistan to review the decision. In my opinion, Pakistan must oblige as this will generate a lot of goodwill for the country. The Bonn Conference will be deliberating on the arrangements to be put in place to ensure stability in Afghanistan in the post-US era in which Pakistan has very high stakes. By boycotting the conference Pakistan would lose the opportunity to contribute to the outcome and protect its strategic interests.

The writer is a freelance columnist