| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Success in Afghanistan requires democracy in Pakistan |
| 2006-05-10 |
| WSJ Op/Ed by Euro Chris Patten EFL Four and a half years after the fall of the Taliban, Afghanistan is still highly unstable. Yet while the international community has done an enormous amount to help the country recover from its failed-state condition, it has resisted tackling the problem at its very root -- Islamabad. Truth is, Afghanistan will never be stable unless Pakistan's military government is replaced with a democracy. Pakistan's primary export to Afghanistan today is instability. On the most basic level, attacks in Afghanistan, including suicide bombings, are often planned and prepared at Taliban training camps across the border. Islamabad claims to be doing all it can to stop this infiltration. But President Pervez Musharraf's protests ring hollow when he has done so little to address the concerns raised by his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai, that Taliban leaders are operating out of sanctuaries in Pakistan. One needs only to look at the military's close relations with religious radicals to understand how unreliable a partner it is in stabilizing Afghanistan. Militant Islamist groups that Mr. Musharraf banned under the international spotlight following 9/11 and the 7/7 London bombings still operate freely. Jihadi organizations have been allowed to dominate relief efforts in the aftermath of the October 2005 earthquake. The military has repeatedly rigged elections, including the 2002 polls, to benefit the religious parties over their moderate, democratic alternatives. In short, Pakistan is ruled by a military dictatorship in cahoots with violent Islamist extremists. The military has no interest in democracy at home, so why does the outside world expect it to help build democracy next door? That civilian government, when it comes, will also be moderate in character and far more inclined to tackle, in earnest, the scourge of Islamic radicalism. Even in the rigged 2002 election, the religious parties polled only 11% of the vote. A fully free and fair race will squeeze out radical forces that have thrived under military rule and which play havoc with Pakistan's weak neighbor to the northwest. In addition, unlike the military, which always thrives in a hostile environment, a civilian government will have a stronger interest in peace with India. And who wouldn't sleep safer knowing that Pakistan's nuclear bomb was in democratic hands? Democratic governance would also bring a much-needed opportunity to overhaul the country's education system. As the state system has consistently failed young people for decades, madrassas have taken up the slack, with the most extreme religious schools helping to radicalize tens of thousands of Pakistanis -- and Afghans -- filling heads with intolerant visions of Islam, far from the mainstream of South Asian Muslim society. The country needs a properly funded, state-run, secular education system. Bringing all this about is an enormous task, but demilitarizing and deradicalizing Pakistan is truly the key to bringing about stability in Afghanistan and the wider region. Governments now working so hard to support Afghanistan will only be spinning their wheels until they make Pakistan a top priority and apply maximum pressure on Islamabad to ensure the 2007 elections are actually free and fair, by applying clearly defined benchmarks and insisting on competent international observers. As long as the military and the madrassas rule just across the border, Afghanistan will never find peace. |
| Posted by:Nimble Spemble |
| #6 When critics assailed his islamization programme, the then Pak ruler, General Zia Ul Haq retorted with "why else was Pakistan created?" "If you want a secular state, why not migrate to India?" This pretty much silenced most of the criticism. Pakistan was the world's first "Islamic State of ..". The state serves the army and the feudal elites whose sons comprise the officer core of the army and who benefit from the military control over the economy (google for Fauji foundation to see how much of the Pak economy is in military hands.. it will shock you). To maintain legitimacy and control, islamization is needed. Therefore the islamists cannot be hobbled. |
| Posted by: john 2006-05-10 21:05 |
| #5 According to our Indo-Pak expert john, the official motto of the Pakistan Army is iman-taqwa-jihad fi sabilillah (Faith, Fear, Jihad in the way of Allah). Comforting, yes? |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2006-05-10 14:45 |
| #4 Anonymous you don't understand. Islamism is the condition of Pakistan's survival so conting on the Army for destroying it is like counting on your dog to keep a watch on sausages. |
| Posted by: JFM 2006-05-10 14:01 |
| #3 I disagree about dismemberment. I would suggest that, for a long time now, we have been strengthening the Pak military, with the idea that over time, Perv will subdue the Waziristans and Pakistani Baluchistan. Once there is a real, unified Pakistan, with the army in charge of it all, we will want Perv to really start to lean on the innumerble Islamists in positions of power in the country. This is because Perv really is the only force that can (not necessarily will), make positive change in that country. Splitting up the monster just makes several little monsters. Clearly, the Islamists have the democratic-political upper hand in Pakistan. For now, democracy without Perv would just result in another theocracy. However, if Perv spends years and years undermining them, negating their power, making them superfluous, then and only then might Pakistan have a chance for real democracy. And Perv does want to modernize--the dreaded enemy of everything the Islamists stand for. That, more than any good intentions on his part, will finally resolve much of the problem. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2006-05-10 09:59 |
| #2 Why I do believe Mr. Patten is volunteering the Eurocorps for a punitive expedition. /then I woke up. |
| Posted by: ed 2006-05-10 09:31 |
| #1 Success in Afghanistan requires the dismemeberment of Pakistan. Pakistan, the land of the Pures has only one thing cementing it: Islam and the more radical, the less its minorities will question its existence. Besides Pakistan has two other reasons for creating difficulties in Afghanistan: the fear that a successful Afghanistan will become attractive to its Pashtoun minority (1) thus starting the implosion of Pakistan and the search of strategic depth in its perpetual war against India (where Kashmir is only a pretext and the complete conquest of India the real goal like evidenced by electoral propaganda of its Islamist parties) (1) Specially if Pashtuns began dreaming of democracy and education instead of tribalism and being docile soldiers for Islam. |
| Posted by: JFM 2006-05-10 09:20 |