THE WikiLeaks’ damning half-truths pertain to the anti-war movement within the US.
This has caused embarrassment to the US war architects and stirred the military industrial complex and its cousin, the corporate and embedded media.
Similarly, what has been said about the role of Pakistan and its globally famed Inter Services Agency is not really a revelation and is more or less an open secret.
Three important questions need to be considered before Wikileaks can be taken seriously.
Do field reports from individual sources, especially disgruntled, anti-Pakistan Afghan nationals, constitute evidence? No. Is there sufficient evidence to substantiate the startling, sensational pieces of information? Perhaps not. Is the Pakistan-ISI role central in the Taliban insurgency within Afghanistan? No clear answer can be determined because of the complexity of the Taliban resistance and the involvement of multiple players.
The leaks identify that Pakistan, India and Iran are fully involved in the Afghan drama, and singling out the ISI is not the whole truth regardless of what the Western media says. Afghanistan is an occupied and fragmented country, far more layered than the simplified views from Washington, Islamabad or New Delhi suggest.
However, this does not mean that conspiracy theorists in Pakistan are right. It has been the Pakistani state’s determined policy to gain not-so-strategic depth and use the Taliban to rule Kabul by proxy. It was done under the nose of our most progressive politician in the 1990s. Another prime minister celebrated the Taliban’s quick dispensation of justice. Since then, there have been embedded analysts and opinion-makers in Pakistan who think that the Taliban is the righteous solution for Afghanistan. It was only when the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan started to threaten the Pakistani state that this truth was challenged and a war against the miscreants declared in April last year.
The revelations are mostly un-sourced and Pakistan’s foreign policy managers have denounced it as yet another conspiracy against Pakistan. But that is simply not enough. The question is whether these revelations will prompt Pakistanis to rethink where they stand. Unfortunately not. They are glued to their Taliban policy. Already, there are indications that the “good” Taliban will be given a share of post-NATO Afghanistan. While it may serve short-term purposes, it is inimical to the long-term stability of Pakistan.
The Afghan Taliban is linked to the TTP through kinship and ethnicity and neither is committed to nation-state borders. Their aim is to establish an Islamic caliphate and Pakistan cannot pretend that fighting one arm and supporting another will be beneficial. Pakistan, for the past three decades, has been a playground for sectarian, militant movements with considerable finances, outreach and media support. These organisations are working to impose their brand of statehood through violence. How many states will be accommodated, especially when the centre does not have great authority over its constituent units?
It would be unwise to dismiss these leaks. It is time to acknowledge that the world knows of Pakistan’s fantasies and strategies. Pakistanis are not interested in what the West likes or dislikes. They are concerned for their security, especially for the burgeoning youth of their country. It is time to deepen the corrective action within, rather than looking westwards for strategic victories.
It is hoped that the civil-military leadership realises this and that it takes corrective action against the extremists.
Be the first to comment