Need for a Charter of Security
Is anyone else also at loss with the recent assertion of PM Gillani that a rise in US troops will lead to increased militancy in Pakistan as a result of influx of Taliban from Afghanistan? Is it not that a few weeks ago, when Waziristan operation was launched our security apparatus showed its displeasure at lack of American troops on the other side of the border and the fact that this leads to Taliban fleeing into Afghanistan? And is it not that it is Pakistan who since 2005 is asking Americans to do more? Then why this sudden change of heart? Where is the consistency in country's security doctrine? Or is there a security doctrine in the first place?
The fundamental problem with Pakistan's security doctrine is that the security establishment in the country thinks critical to their strategic interests the elements (read Taliban and other extremists) and tactics (read blatant intervention) that have become extremely unpopular with the people of Pakistan. To defend them the establishment is ducking behind one facade after another from raising hue and cry about Indian involvement to blaming US for doing less and doing more in the same breath.
Something that makes this fundamental problem aggravate is the fact that for most players in the country's security doctrine, the beliefs seem not be based on ground realities but cliches. I do not think it has been since ages (I think since the days when Mododites under Zia inculcated the Jihad doctrine as the cornerstone of security/foreign policy) that a candid review of the emerging realities in our region and the direction for foreign and security policy has been undertaken.
Just when it is a pathetic situation to be in as being world's 7th nuclear power, it offers an opportunity as well. For just 5 years back, the country had no internal doctrine as well just as it does not have an external doctrine. The political forces in the country, the biggest two, seized the moment and initiated a dialogue which led to the Charter of Democracy. Charter of Democracy provided a comprehensive consensus on the movement ahead on the internal issues and is fast turning into the first consensus document since 1973's constitution. Slowly but gradually, it is helping democracy take root in the country and address the balance of power between civilian institutions. And despite political opportunism (which must be taken as a ground reality), it has helped set the game plan and rules which act as a deterrence when the hostility goes overboard.
What the nation needs is a same effort on the lines of Charter of Democracy for its security and foreign policy doctrine. All political parties and political leadership has either been naive or cautious in not treading the courses on security doctrine which fall out of the realm of existing cliche. It is high time that country's leadership comprising all segments of a diverse Pakistani nation sit together and answer some fundamental questions like
Army must also realize the squeeze in which the nation is and must acknowledge that the old doctrine and methodologies need be changed. Army by its design and mandate is an executing authority and despite the brainy resource pool is incapable of security and foreign policy formulation because of the constraints in the very make of an executing institute. Even the security doctrine that Army followed for the last 4 decades was conceived by a civilian Z. A. Bhutto. Everything that stands at the center of our security doctrine (except the ideological fervor of Madodites) was Bhutto's mastermind be it nuclear weapons, intervention in Afghanistan, hostile posture towards India, pan-Islamism, opening up to China, removing Middle Eastern influence from Balochistan; it was all a civilian's brainchild which Army made cornerstone of its doctrine. However, having operations and not strategy focus, it failed to realize what were the objectives of these doctrines and when to get the best bargain for changing the policy.
A critical external element in this strategy will be to take US and China on board. I think of a number of international issues that they are trying to settle between them, a consensus policy on Pakistan should be a priority. US must realize that her decision to abandon Pakistan in 1990s has cost her influence here that turned out to be China's gain. As a fair bargainer, it should be willing to pay the price for her action while trying to consolidate what it could.
Army is a powerful institution but consensus among main political players of the country on foreign policy, safeguarding national and party interests, will be very hard for Army to go against. We have little time left and the challenge of devising a rational and coherent foreign and security policy and a corresponding monitoring/control framework awaits our political leadership. On it hinges survival of democracy and of Pakistan.
The fundamental problem with Pakistan's security doctrine is that the security establishment in the country thinks critical to their strategic interests the elements (read Taliban and other extremists) and tactics (read blatant intervention) that have become extremely unpopular with the people of Pakistan. To defend them the establishment is ducking behind one facade after another from raising hue and cry about Indian involvement to blaming US for doing less and doing more in the same breath.
Something that makes this fundamental problem aggravate is the fact that for most players in the country's security doctrine, the beliefs seem not be based on ground realities but cliches. I do not think it has been since ages (I think since the days when Mododites under Zia inculcated the Jihad doctrine as the cornerstone of security/foreign policy) that a candid review of the emerging realities in our region and the direction for foreign and security policy has been undertaken.
Just when it is a pathetic situation to be in as being world's 7th nuclear power, it offers an opportunity as well. For just 5 years back, the country had no internal doctrine as well just as it does not have an external doctrine. The political forces in the country, the biggest two, seized the moment and initiated a dialogue which led to the Charter of Democracy. Charter of Democracy provided a comprehensive consensus on the movement ahead on the internal issues and is fast turning into the first consensus document since 1973's constitution. Slowly but gradually, it is helping democracy take root in the country and address the balance of power between civilian institutions. And despite political opportunism (which must be taken as a ground reality), it has helped set the game plan and rules which act as a deterrence when the hostility goes overboard.
What the nation needs is a same effort on the lines of Charter of Democracy for its security and foreign policy doctrine. All political parties and political leadership has either been naive or cautious in not treading the courses on security doctrine which fall out of the realm of existing cliche. It is high time that country's leadership comprising all segments of a diverse Pakistani nation sit together and answer some fundamental questions like
- What should be the broader objectives of our foreign policy? And in line of these objectives what goals should we pursue across the globe in line with the existing ground realities to best serve Pakistan's interests?
- Where lies the ownership of the policy?
- Who will be responsible to implement what goals?
- To what degree should the intervention be part of our security doctrine?
- A candid analysis of how soft power can help further our security/foreign policy objectives?
- Do we want to be an expansionist state or not?
- Who would have the power to modify and monitor the objectives?
- What should be the role of 6 key external players (US, China, Saudi Arabia, UK, Iran and India) in Pakistan's international relations?
- How to devise a mechanism to review and change the foreign policy objectives in line with ever-changing world around us?
Army must also realize the squeeze in which the nation is and must acknowledge that the old doctrine and methodologies need be changed. Army by its design and mandate is an executing authority and despite the brainy resource pool is incapable of security and foreign policy formulation because of the constraints in the very make of an executing institute. Even the security doctrine that Army followed for the last 4 decades was conceived by a civilian Z. A. Bhutto. Everything that stands at the center of our security doctrine (except the ideological fervor of Madodites) was Bhutto's mastermind be it nuclear weapons, intervention in Afghanistan, hostile posture towards India, pan-Islamism, opening up to China, removing Middle Eastern influence from Balochistan; it was all a civilian's brainchild which Army made cornerstone of its doctrine. However, having operations and not strategy focus, it failed to realize what were the objectives of these doctrines and when to get the best bargain for changing the policy.
A critical external element in this strategy will be to take US and China on board. I think of a number of international issues that they are trying to settle between them, a consensus policy on Pakistan should be a priority. US must realize that her decision to abandon Pakistan in 1990s has cost her influence here that turned out to be China's gain. As a fair bargainer, it should be willing to pay the price for her action while trying to consolidate what it could.
Army is a powerful institution but consensus among main political players of the country on foreign policy, safeguarding national and party interests, will be very hard for Army to go against. We have little time left and the challenge of devising a rational and coherent foreign and security policy and a corresponding monitoring/control framework awaits our political leadership. On it hinges survival of democracy and of Pakistan.
Comments
Most importantly, though, this strategic partnership would send a strong and unmistakable signal to India and other nations that they cannot play taunting games or make attempts to infringe on our security and sovereignty.
http://realpaknationalists.com/2009/11/29/need-for-a-charter-of-security/