Daily Times

Had courage been defined as the ability of some politicians and self-proclaimed defence analysts to raise voice against corruption, they would have been declared as the contemporary Salahuddin Ayubi. Had it been defined as their ability to deride parliament or mock democratic institutions, the group would have been nominated for the Nobel Prize for gallantry. Had it been defined as the ability to impress the audience with their acting skills, they would have all won the Academy Award for their performance, leaving behind the likes of Robert De Niro and Al Pacino. Had it been defined as their ability to portray an honest self image, they would have hoisted themselves up next to angels, even when they knew their hands were dirty, their past tainted, sources of income murky.

However, if courage was defined by asking real questions to real authorities — questions like what Mullah Akhtar Mansour was doing in Quetta and what our preparedness is when it comes to protecting our borders from a foreign attack — same politicians and defence analysts would hide deep, the same way the Taliban fled on motorcycles after the US invasion of Afghanistan, tails tucked behind, their turbans flying off their heads.

From an international perspective, the killing of Mullah Mansour — the supreme leader of the Afghan Taliban — in Pakistan puts us in far worse position than the Panama leaks. Why? Because the Panama leaks is more or less about actions of private citizens who have allegedly made money in an unsavoury manner, and hidden it away from Pakistan. Everyone understands the institutional weaknesses of countries like ours, and sympathise with us against these elements. The killing of Mullah Mansour, on the other hand, gives the impression that the state itself is hiding international terrorists in its territory, providing them security and support to carry out their terror activities outside Pakistan. In other words, it means that the state is sponsoring terrorism. In this situation there is no sympathy, but only anger and disappointment, compelling the international community to ignore our complaints and not care much about our protests, no matter how genuine they may be.

Furthermore, the Panama leaks are a complex legal problem involving numerous companies belonging to hundreds of people stretching across the world, their sources of wealth unclear, their purpose to stash the money dizzying. Even with the best of intentions, each case could take up to years to solve, requiring a panel of experts, and perhaps some amendments in the international law. On the contrary, the Taliban issue consists of precise goals, its targets identified, locations marked. There exist no grey areas. Every country including Pakistan is therefore evaluated through the same lens, its policies against global war on terrorism gauged, its role in finding (or hiding) the top leadership examined. Based on that, what the world sees in us is not a friend but a foe. Why? It is because of our not-so-hidden support of the Afghan Taliban.

To Afghans, the Afghan Taliban are what the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) is to Pakistanis — not different. Both groups target their fellow countrymen — innocent people living their lives, trying to make the two ends meet — and both of them paint their nefarious acts with an Islamic brush. But to many of us the Afghan Taliban are freedom fighters, the undefeated warriors who are determined to fight the foreign invasion and take back Kabul, and the only legitimate rulers of the country. If we support them, whether we realise it or not, we condone killings of thousands of innocent Afghan civilians by the Taliban. Do you not agree? Imagine for a moment how you would feel if you saw Mullah Fazlullah having a casual dinner with the Afghan army. That is how Afghans feel when they find Mullah Mansour travelling freely within Pakistan, and a Pakistani identity card in his pocket. And that is exactly how Americans felt when they found Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad.

Coming back to the Panama leaks again, in a country where you cannot get a single application approved without bribing the authorities, can the news of corruption be in fact considered news? There was nothing in the papers that could be regarded as revelation, a game changer, something that we did not know before. Everyone has watched documentaries run by an international channel on the Pakistan People’s Party, Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz, and Muttahida Qaumi Movement. Even so, we demand investigations, resignations, interrogations, committees, judicial inquiries, international probes etc. as if the sky had fallen. True, we cannot give a free pass to plunder, wealth of the nation needs to preserved. But look at the response in comparison, of our hyper-patriotic politicians and analysts when something actually from the sky in Noshki — pin drop silence, twitter accounts quiet, social media updates absent, television shows silent.

Do you see the irony? It is the presence of Mullah Mansour in Pakistan, and not the legality of the drone attack that demands true leadership to speak up, and speak with clarity. It is an issue on which we should have asked for resignations of the highest authorities who failed to perform their duties, as it was an opportunity to investigate and get to the bottom of the problem, and to reassure the world that we would do everything to eradicate terrorism not only in Pakistan but also across the globe. Instead how did we respond? Days later, when our senses returned to normal we began to beat the same old beat of our sovereignty being trampled over by the US like a broken record that keeps on repeating the same line.

To put it another way, when the world asks us for an explanation about the presence of Mullah Mansour in Pakistan, and his association with the ‘deep state’, what do we in response? We accuse the world of finding out his location, his new identity, his car and his travel itinerary.

The writer is a US-based freelance columnist. He tweets at @KaamranHashmi and can be reached at skamranhashmi@gmail.com