Share this story!            

Editorial: Predictable unfolding of PM’s visit

The joint statement at the end of the meeting between Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani and President George W Bush highlights the bilateral “agreement” on the objectives of the war against terrorism. Mr Gilani’s statement prior to leaving for the US reflected the common ground he recognised between the two countries on the issue of extremism and terrorism. While he did not buy the common opposition line in Pakistan that it was “not Pakistan’s war”, he however stressed to the American President the consensus in Pakistan that NATO-ISAF forces should not launch attacks inside Pakistani territory.

The joint statement, while affirming the strategic partnership between Pakistan and the US, contained the following formulation: “The President affirmed his support for Pakistan’s sovereignty, independence, unity, and territorial integrity”. But there persists “an operational ambiguity” on the ground that will still hound the bilateral equation. What should one make of the drones that fly over Pakistan territory? They are supposed to be a part of the “agreement” to share intelligence against the terrorists. Mr Gilani broke from the opposition stance when he stated much before his departure for the US that there were Uzbeks and Chechens in the Tribal Areas, thus admitting that Pakistani territory had already been violated.

The drone flights have operated for some years now and have established some kind of legal status because of their regular and repeated incidence. There have been reports that the Pakistan army helps them pinpoint their routes in order to gain intelligence, but there has never been any formal acceptance of the attacks made by the drones. Nonetheless the drone flights are now routine in the Tribal Areas and newspapers regularly report them and at times quote the local people as saying that these drones also fire missiles. Therefore one can say that drone flights have been accepted by Pakistan within the bilateral equation over terrorism.

The problem arises when the missile that lands on Pakistani territory is not traced to the drones. Missiles fired from across the border by NATO-ISAF forces have seriously marred military relations between the two countries in the recent past. A missile attack on the day Mr Gilani was talking to Mr Bush has created a slightly embarrassing situation. It landed in South Waziristan and has killed six foreign terrorists, including Egyptian militant Midhat Mursi al-Sayyid Umar, also known as Abu Khabab al-Masri, who had a $5 million bounty on his head and ran terrorist training camps in Afghanistan.

The Pakistan army spokesman was unsure about the method of the strike. It was not known if the missile was fired from a drone or it came from across the border. But as far as public opinion in Pakistan is concerned, it mostly disagrees with Prime Minister Gilani’s assertion that foreigners are lodged in the Tribal Areas. And a national daily on Tuesday editorialised that the Pakistan Air Force should fly out of its Peshawar base to bring the drones down! This measures the gap between the state that recognises its “partnership” with the US and NATO against terrorism — therefore perhaps justifying the drone flights — and the media which reflects how many people think.

Pragmatism appropriately informs the approach adopted by the prime minister in these days of economic stringency. The joint statement reflects this. The most significant part says: “The two leaders also committed to increased bilateral economic cooperation to include expanded trade, an improved investment climate, promoting cooperation in the public and private sectors, and agreed to work together to ensure food and energy security as well as facilitate investment in infrastructure and social sectors in Pakistan”.

Let’s face it. The PPP government will finally survive or fall on the point of economics. Already its coalition partners are writing letters of disagreement and protest on all the policy initiatives it has taken. Starting with the tough line taken on the terrorists and ending with raising the price of CNG, the gas Pakistan produces, no measure is acceptable to the opposition as well as the allies. But the fact is that it is not the restoration of the judges, nor desertion from the war against terrorism, but the rising price of bread that will endanger the Gilani government. *

Second Editorial: APDM’s back-off from protest movement

The All Parties Democratic Movement (APDM) leaders Mehmood Khan Achakzai, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Imran Khan and Liaquat Baloch failed on Monday to agree on the timeframe of a movement aimed at forcing the government to change policy on the “reinstatement of the deposed judges and improvement in the deteriorating law and order situation”. It is quite possible that the leaders could have taken into consideration the hot weather in most locations where the protest would be effective. Also, the advent of the month of fasting could have given pause to the leadership of Jama’at-e Islami. However, the Pakistan Tehreek-e Insaf (PTI) chief, Mr Imran Khan, made it clear that his party would hold a protest on August 14 in coordination with the lawyers’ movement.

The APDM is the voice, if not the strength, of the extreme postures adopted on the judges’ crisis. Its leaders have analysed the situation on the basis of their relative strength vis-à-vis the ruling coalition and the lawyers’ movement. There is no doubt that APDM’s main plank of strategy has been the persuasion exercised by it on the PMLN to abandon the coalition and join the movement against the PPP. But out of all the leaders, it is only Mr Imran Khan who has spoken out when disappointed with the lukewarm position taken by the PMLN. The other leaders may be more realistic in their approach. If the PMLN can’t deliver Punjab on the protest movement, chances of it succeeding remain pretty slim. Given this situation — with the PMLN repeating its intention of staying inside the coalition — Mr Khan may find 14th August a very lonely day. The lawyers’ movement itself is trying to give itself a second wind after its last dharna-less gathering at Islamabad led directly to internal bickering and weakening of external support. *

Home | Editorial

Share this story!