Daily Times

Enthusiastic, we began the journey to become a key ally in the global war on terror. From among the two great choices that we were so generously offered by our great friend — the US — we bravely chose to fight the war within the Pakistani borders head on. Spreading over a protracted era of 11 years, the post-9/11 war narrative largely builds upon innumerable mini-narratives of horror, violence, sufferings, betrayals, exploitation and fabrications gelled together to present a grand war narrative.

According to theorists, every story that develops, irrespective of the theme it follows, is governed by a set of unwritten rules that are acquired by the audience in a similar fashion and thus allows interpretation in a most formulaic manner. The same has been the case with the post-9/11 narrative that has intricately been woven around the global audience and is being interpreted internationally in an almost similar way.

It all started when the American equilibrium was disturbed by the twin attack upon the World Trade Centre in 2001, after which all hell broke loose and terror was unleashed upon the globe. This attack served as a casus belli for this war that apparently has no end. One thing, however, is certain that all throughout the story the centre will always be none other than the Americans. Therefore, this long war saga is not the story of Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Taliban, the allied forces and so on, but the story of how the Americans were hurt and how they succeeded to make the enemy (all across the globe) suffer for their audacity. Whether they succeed or not will be immaterial for it is the way the narrative unfolds that will make interpretation possible.

The response towards this colossal atrocity was not in harmony with the event in the sense that the attackers were from neither Afghanistan nor Pakistan nor anywhere in South Asia, yet it was decided that Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan would serve as a war theatre and key allies were nominated and given special tasks. The utter lawlessness and lack of competent governing bodies in these regions also buttressed the American objectives of maintaining a physical presence in the region. This is precisely when the passionate love affair between Pakistan and the US was set in motion. It surely was not love at first sight or any fairytale beginning but more of a renewal of old associations, the kind where necessity defines relations. So, the US fell, head over heels, in ‘interest’ with Pakistan, where it made all sorts of promises of having a fulfilling and lasting relationship, vowing to remain faithful till the end. But like most love stories, this too ended in betrayal where Pakistan was released from the American embrace with charges and allegations of exhibiting disloyalty and immoral behaviour. Thus, Pakistan suffered for her gullibility, naiveté, lack of maturity and wisdom, and above all, for not keeping her own interest superior. While talking about events, Barthes elaborates that not all story events are of equal importance. One can easily determine the hierarchy between the events that contribute towards the progression of a story. From the war discourse one can easily decipher the fact that since the main storyline followed revolves around the Americans, therefore, the threat faced by the US too took precedence over the issue of origin of the terrorists.

Complication, as an important ingredient, was added to the story when the once ‘moral equivalents’ of the founding fathers of the American nation, the Taliban per se, were ostracised to be termed as terrorists and militants. The US redefined all previous relationships and forged new ones by discarding those that were of little or no worth. Thus, new friendships were built, allies came to the fore. The combat mission of the NATO-led ISAF was established in 2001for the purpose of training the Afghan National Army and engage in war with insurgents that later on intensified its operations inside Afghanistan to fight militancy. Organisations such as the UN lost operational influence to become powerless. Had this not been the case, it would have been impossible for the US to form new alliances and carry out the gross destruction and violence that it did, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan, as it would be a stark violation of the UN charter and international laws.

A narrative, it must be realized, can be split into two main parts, namely, the actual story and how the story is told. Reality may only be explained by those involved and may vary from one nation to another, while the story being narrated is what becomes the collective reality of the global audience. Since wars are fought, in most cases, for the sake of interests, therefore, the US interest perpetually crops up to become the epicentre of our security concerns here. The western war experts have been very articulate in explaining the American security concerns, the objectives for the war had been provided right at the onset and the counterinsurgency doctrines devised to perfection to achieve desired outcomes. All this was a requirement as the terrorists were an irrational force that had the extended reach to attack US soil. Thus, the situation of heightened fear had called for heightened security. The US and her allies had declared war against one of the most dangerous religiously motivated militant organisations — the infamous al Qaeda headed by Osama bin Laden — which was waging war against the innocent Americans. The western experts provided justifications for every move the US government and military made in Afghanistan. Military surges were introduced that played havoc with the lives of the poor devastated Afghan people. Their homes raided for no reason, men, women and children maimed and droned into lifelessness. Yet peace was nowhere near being achieved. Militants were killed, but militancy did not end. Military surges came and went, but the lawlessness in Afghanistan remained.

Further, ambiguity adds to the suspense and increases the unpredictability of the story as it progresses. Also, it becomes significant in proliferating the storyline to the desired timeline, which happens to be 2014 in this particular case. The continued lack of a clearly defined war policy for Afghanistan, changes in US security strategies, employing one after the other and all doomed to the same fate. The absolute failure of the NATO/ISAF forces to maintain law and order, the inability to clear out the safe havens inside Afghanistan while bashing Pakistan for those existing in its borders. A love-hate relationship with Pakistan, which at one instance is termed as a vital nation for peace in the region and ostracised the next. Talking and fighting at the same time again makes little sense considering that all these confusing moves allow more space and resistance to the militants. Embarking upon the path of peaceful reconciliation with the Taliban yet reprimanding others who do the same and terming the Taliban as the enemy at one point and repudiating their original claim by the US moves to consider them a major stakeholder in the future Afghan political setup is mindboggling. It has been 11 years of obscurity in significant areas along with repetition and reiteration of facts that have now become reality for us. All this shows that the subtle and undercover techniques of narrative as art seduces people into letting their guard down and allows them to develop opinions. Thus, a beautiful web is woven around us and we become slaves to a mechanical thought process.

All this game playing has made a mockery of the war and ruined international relations. The withdrawal of combat forces by most ISAF members is indicative of the fact that this war has lost its popular support among friends and everyone back home. Also, the US has been unable to win hearts and minds in either Afghanistan or Pakistan; in fact, it is quite the contrary. The enthusiasm has vanished and the fight now is nothing but a battle between the US military alone against the people of Afghanistan that have succeeded in resisting a foreign aggressor while upholding their traditions.

The writer is a lecturer in the Linguistics department of Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad, and presently working on her PhD thesis in discourse analysis. She can be reached at lubena22@gmail.com