Daily Times

Regular readers will have noticed the absence of this column for the last three weeks. What happened?

Was I (a) in mourning at the death of OBL, or (b) as the secret ISI operative charged with protecting Osama, keeping a low profile out of deep embarrassment at my failure, or (c) as head of CIA covert operations in Pakistan, was in Washington to bank my reward cheque and advise Obama on what the US should be doing next, or (d) having much too good a time on holiday in Morocco to bother about such trivial matters as writing a column?

My guess is most of you would plump for option (c), and right you would be. Why? Why not pick one of the other possibilities? Is my absence from Pakistan — and silence –- precisely at the time of the ‘get bin Laden’ operation, not highly suspicious?

The principle subconsciously at work is ‘lex parsimoniae’ (the law of parsimony), also known as ‘Occam’s razor’ after the 14th century logician and Franciscan friar, William of Occam (sometimes spelt ‘Ockham’). He said the simplest and obvious answer — that which requires the least number of assumptions — should always be preferred unless there is compelling evidence otherwise. Our conspiracy theorists, who thrive on making mountains out of the molehills of lacunae and inconsistencies that will usually exist in any narrative, do not seem to understand this fundamental requirement that places the burden of incontrovertible proof firmly where it belongs: on the shoulders of the sceptics and purveyors of the non-obvious.

If truth be told, my reaction to the killing of OBL was somewhat subdued and ambivalent. He had it coming, of course, and it was probably inevitable the Americans would get him one day. And, certainly, he was the evil inspiration for the thinking that has resulted in the death of thousands of innocents. And yet, there was in me a complete absence of the sort of muted joy, celebration, and satisfaction that was forthcoming in much of the world. Instead, there was only a certain resigned sadness, a feeling I am fairly sure I share to some degree or the other with the vast majority of Pakistanis and most Muslims the world over. For, that invisible but powerful bond of empathy between Muslims is alive and kicking in us all, even though I firmly reject religion-inspired politics.

OBL had by now (given the imperative to hide) become largely irrelevant for all practical purposes, and his killing of only symbolic importance. He had declared ‘war’ on his enemies, and in the modern world ‘war’ is viewed as total and without rules and boundaries except that of inflicting maximum pain and damage by whatever means. In pursuit of that end, ‘morality’ and the killing of innocents was meaningless (if not actually justified) to OBL. But can much the same not be said about GWB and the US war on Iraq?

But then this business of viewing ‘war’ through the spectacles of ‘morality’ is a futile pastime. As every scientist knows, even the best of theories break down at the extremities of their application. So, whenever the ultimate way of resolving conflict is resorted to, theories of morality become irrelevant. The only criterion, and justification, is success, and the victor earns the privilege of interpreting ‘morality’ and the writing of history.

Anyway, as always, what should be of greater concern to us is not what has happened but where do we go from here. And here, whichever way you slice it, the options before us are all highly unappetising, to put it mildly.

But in discussing this whole matter let us first get one thing straight, clear, and factored out of the equation: our nuclear assets and capability are not under threat by the Americans or anyone else, and this deliberate campaign to confuse the public by such emotional conjectures, mere nonsense. Sure, the world does not like us having nuclear weapons. But there is precious little they can do about it except to live with that reality. Yes, it is possible to contemplate a commando strike (say against the Kahuta facility) that can cause serious disruption temporarily to a part of the manufacturing cycle. But every dimwit should know that the nuclear weapons in stock are not just like other bombs. They consist of many parts that have to be carefully assembled, and these parts are securely and widely dispersed, making the logistics of any such contemplated coordinated surgical operation impossibly difficult.

So what should we do? Shoot down a drone or two (and the helicopters, if the Americans have the effrontery to mount another get Osama-like raid) to assert our sovereignty? Close the NATO supply lines? Tell the Americans to get lost and do without their aid?

Certainly, in theory there is nothing really stopping us — as a sovereign nation — doing some or all of those things, just as there is nothing to stop us from formally declaring forthwith jihad against an infidel world or unleashing a nuclear-armed missile or two in various directions. But those charged with the responsibility of making such decisions on our behalf know full well the consequences that would inevitably follow, and quite frankly, they are too horrible to contemplate for any rational person. The barest minimum of a realistic assessment tells our leaders we are in no position to vent our very natural feelings and emotions by thumbing our noses at a maddeningly irksome superpower and the rest of the world.

These days I also hear a lot of glib talk about how easily we can plug the black holes in our economy and shake off our dependence on foreign powers. Why, all we have to do is to stop the corruption in the FBR (700 billion), and the corruption and mismanagement in our state enterprises such as PEPCO, Steel Mill, PIA, Railways (another 600 billion+). Throw in recovering written-off loans and taxing the rich and hey, presto! You are looking at nearly two trillion! And this is before even considering what China and the Arab sheikhs may give us out of their love, affection and deep respect for us (do we have any other friends in this wide world?)

If that totality is not living in a fool’s paradise, I do not know what that phrase means. Sure, that possibility exists. But is it probable we will be able to achieve that, especially in the next year or two? And what do we do until then? Is this some miraculous new knowledge we have acquired? Is it not the case that we have known and not been able to do anything about these simple matters for decades?

Yes, I too agree the joke we have made of this country has gone on long enough and we desperately need to chart a fresh course. But let us plan to do whatever we have to do in a clear-headed and rational fashion and not by persisting with trying to translate our emotional daydreams into an unrealisable reality.

The writer is a businessman. A selection of his columns is now available in book form.
Visit munirattaullah.com