most of the action the state must take in order to stem the advancing threat of terrorism and extremism.
Yet, it defies history.
Over the last few weeks, I have tried to utilise the space provided to me in this newspaper to highlight how history is not on our side when it comes to the implementation of the NAP. From regulating and registering madressahs, to choking financing for terrorists and terrorist organisations, from ensuring the re-emergence of banned organisations to zero tolerance for militancy in Punjab, all this has come under the pen, so to speak. And I’d rather not repeat myself.
The fact is that these are all non-starters.
And this is just the tip of the iceberg. There are major shortcomings within our current system that will not allow any sort of tangible progress to take place even if there is political will, which is not the case.
What is actually required is multi-institutional overhaul, but to deflect our easily distracted minds the government has resorted to low impact, high visibility projects like the counterterrorism force (CTF). We must not fall for this ploy. As Abraham Lincoln once said, “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time.”
Somebody needs to call their bluff. And no better one to do it than us: civil society. We must press for action on the NAP and demand regular updates on all that has been achieved since the NAP came into existence.
Mobilising civil society comes with its own challenges, first and foremost being the formation and acceptance of a unified civil front. Without that, what you get is what we have right now – isolated groups of people putting together vigils and protests, not being able to gather the right amount of mouths needed for a collective voice to be heard. There is strength in numbers.
The key is to simplify the matter. If one gets into the nitty-gritty of why the government is failing against terrorism etc, that opens up a Pandora’s box of conflicting views and positions which takes us away from what we want done.
So, precisely what is it that we want to do? Do we want to end terrorism? Defeat extremism? Sure. But what needs to happen for ‘that’ to happen? Well, somebody needs to pull their socks up, don’t they? Therefore, ending terrorism and extremism is ‘the end’, and the means to that end, can possibly be, asking hard questions.
Change takes time. Permanent institutional change takes even longer. It will be naive of us to think that we, in our lifetime, will be able to bring about any substantial and concrete change. However, there are other generations on the way. And I, for one, shudder at the Pakistan they will have to deal with.
We can’t save Pakistan for ourselves, but we can try for them. Start small. Civil society must understand that by asking for too much they gain nothing. Right now, all we can do is ask questions. Uncomfortable questions. And demand answers. And like Andy Dufresne in The Shawshank Redemption keep asking and writing. Day in and day out. Maybe one day we’ll get a response.
In the past couple years, some companies and public agencies have begun to address systemic racism in the United...
For the obvious reason of a smoldering war on the eastern fringe of Europe, the just-concluded Nato summit in Madrid,...
Every year on July 4, to much fanfare and revelry, the United States marks its 1776 independence from Britain.The date...
The Haque model of inclusive cities advocated that cities should provide livelihood opportunities to all segments of...
In this new world order, the key for rapid socio-economic development lies in the ability of nations to manufacture...
At a time when Pakistan is going through some of the worst economic challenges in its chequered history, the federal...