Nobember
11, 2006
Bajaur:
Action against Religious Seminary Raises Questions
There is a virtual
unanimity in the reaction of Pakistan press to the
air strikes on a religious seminary (Madressa) in
Bajaur agency on Oct. 30/06. The attack could and
should have been avoided, it is generally felt,
particularly as an agreement, on the pattern of
the North Waziristan accord, with the elders of
Bajaur area had also been almost finalized. The
question of the abuse of the facility of the school
for the recruitment and training of potential terrorists
could have, therefore, been allowed to be tackled
by the elders, who according to the age-old traditions
of the region were in a much better position to
take care of such matters. Also, they would have
been liable to pay a fine of up to Rs. 5 million
in case of their inability to uphold any provision.
The very first clause of the agreement reads as
follows: “ We, the tribes of Mamond in Bajaur
agency, undertake in writing that we would neither
give refuge to any Pakistani or foreign terrorist
or criminal, nor establish contacts with them. We
undertake to cooperate with the government of Pakistan
and the political administration of Bajaur in taking
action against local or foreign militants in case
information becomes available about presence of
suspects in the area”.
Bajaur is a major corridor for Taliban militants
to enter Afghanistan. Gen. Musharraf, it is said,
was given wrong information about the presence of
Ayman al Zawahiri, the deputy to Osama bin Laden,
in the seminary to seek his agreement for its bombing.
The air strikes, it is argued, were calculated to
sabotage the peace agreement that was to be signed
within hours. It is a well-known fact that the U.S.
is opposed to any agreement likely to reduce the
antagonism towards the militants. NATO officials
in Afghanistan had been expressing fears that such
deals would convert the tribal territory of Pakistan
into the winter headquarters of Al-Qaeda and of
Taliban.
One wonders if the death of 82 inmates of the seminary
has taken Pakistan and Afghanistan a step closer
to the pacification of the potential militants?
There is not a singe voice in that area which has
upheld the air strikes. A Minister of the Frontier
Province, Maulvi Sirajul Haq, and a member of federal
parliament, Sahibzada Haroonur Rashid, have on the
other hand resigned in protest from their elected
offices.
The concept of “shock and awe” holds
little validity for a people who have since the
Soviet invasion of their country in 1979 experienced
nothing but all sorts of shocks, and the awe of
deprivation, death and destruction. If anything,
the massacre might have added to the attraction
of a life of Jehad for the semi-literate, jobless
youth.
Sahibzada Haroon, MNA from Bajaur, has declared
that the seminary was bombed by US drones that had
been hovering over the area for the past few days.
Pakistan has owned up the air strikes to cover up
the incident and avoid embarrassment. “I have
no doubt about that in my mind”, he assured
the media.
Locals of the area uphold the same view and emphatically
point out that the attacks were made by the missiles
of the drones some 15 minutes before Pakistan’s
helicopter gunships appeared on the scene.
The White House Press Secretary, Tony Snow, and
the spokesman of Pakistan military, Maj-Gen. Shaukat
Sultan, have both vehemently denied the insinuations.
President Musharraf has assured the nation that
those killed in the action were all militants. Claims
to the contrary were all lies. The miscreants were
given sufficient warning that their establishment
was under watch and that they should wind it up
or face the consequences. The government, he maintained,
would not tolerate militancy and challenge to its
writ. This is a very strong statement, coming as
it does from a leader who advocates “enlightened
moderation”.
It may be recalled that in mid-January this year,
a similar attack on a couple of house in Damadola
village in the same area by an American ‘Predator’
drone had caused the death of 18 civilians. The
aircraft was operated by the CIA and the attack
was meant to kill Ayman al-Zawahiri, who was not
in that place as he was not in the seminary in the
latest attack. Evidently, the CIA was fed wrong
information both times.
The January attack sent a backlash throughout Pakistan
and the country lodged a strong protest with the
US government. But, this time Pakistan authorities
have accepted the responsibility for the air strikes.
It is thus open to speculation whether the countrywide
chagrin over the incident would keep on snowballing
and turn into a national agitation demanding drastic
leadership changes?
Indications available so far do not present the
possibility of such a scenario. The agitation is
being led mainly by Jamaat-i- Islami, a religio-political
party, a component of MMA suspected of being hand-in-glove
with Gen. Musharraf’s government whose track
record is much better in several respects than that
of many preceding regimes. The alternative of a
civilian government led by Benazir or Nawaz Sharif
or by a coalition of both, does not hold out a prospect
much welcome to the people at large.
The Bajaur incident places in sharp focus the basic
question as to whether the measures being taken
by the US, NATO and other coalition forces in Afghanistan
would be able to eradicate al-Qaeda and pacify Taliban
through the use of force.
For centuries Afghanistan has been a poverty-stricken,
backward country. But, the Afghans constitute a
proud, self-respecting nation. They do aspire to
have a place under the sun too, but not at the cost
of their self-respect. The mighty British Empire
and the Soviet ambitions in the region could hardly
subdue the Afghans. They are like the proverbial
horse that can be taken to the water but cannot
be made to drink. Replaying the saga of gun-boat
diplomacy in Afghanistan would hardly render the
desired result.
The billions of dollars budgeted for the rehabilitation
of Afghanistan by the US have hardly been utilized
in the country. The horse is being shown the carrots
but not allowed to eat them, while the stick is
being used on the slightest pretext. No wonder Karzai
government’s writ is confined to Kabul only.
No wonder also that the Taliban have regrouped and
re-emerged to replace the warlords who had staged
a come back.
It wouldn’t take much use of force to turn
a territory resembling a rubble into a real rubble,
but it takes utmost sympathy, understanding and
genuine efforts to win the minds and hearts of a
self-respecting people. That is what counts in the
long run. The elimination of Zarqawi has not stopped
the insurgency in Iraq. The removal of Osama and
Ayman from Afghanistan will not eliminate terrorism
: the root causes will have to be attended to in
all sincerity. The faces will otherwise change but
the mantels will be picked up and donned by other
entities.
arifhussaini@hotmail.com
