| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Underhand tactics |
| 2014-04-05 |
| MUCH as the focus may be on what transpires at the negotiating table in the TTP-government dialogue process, what is taking place away from the negotiating table is equally, if not more, important. With the month-long ceasefire announced by the TTP having officially expired at the start of the month, the outlawed group has cleverly tried to put the government under renewed pressure by officially remaining undecided about continuing the ceasefire while having hard-line chapters of the TTP publicly muse about their intention to end their participation in the ceasefire. What that craftiness adds up to is two things: one, it puts pressure on the government to make further concessions to the TTP or else risk renewed violence in the country; two, it signals to the public that the TTP leadership is committed to talks, but is under great pressure internally to not talk — meaning, the public should be grateful for the TTP’s restraint and its willingness to keep in line the more agitated of its component groups. Yet, the government too seems involved in subterfuge. The Prime Minister’s Office has tried to downplay reports of low-level prisoner releases and denied that the unusual move is a part of the dialogue process with the TTP, but it does appear that the government is simultaneously trying to dangle a carrot in front of the TTP while maintaining deniability. As the identities of the released figures becomes clear as does the meaning behind what is undoubtedly not simply a routine move, more will be known on whether the government is seeking to buy more time for dialogue or if a truly decisive stage in the negotiations is at hand. Either way, the hard choices for the government will eventually have to be faced. Before that, however, is the issue of resisting the TTP’s thinly veiled blackmailing tactics. Rather than allowing the TTP to shape the issue of whether the ceasefire should be officially extended or not, the government should itself come out and demand an extension — and also a commitment that it will continue so long as the dialogue process goes on. That way the TTP would be denied the leverage of reconsidering its ceasefire every few days. For all that the government can and should do to stand firm and ensure the dialogue process does not drift into the realm of the unconstitutional and unacceptable, there is also a need to keep a check on the government’s own agenda. On the political side, other than the prime minister and the interior minister, there are few who are privy to the government’s strategy and approach. The PTI may have an idea owing to its representative on the government negotiating committee, but neither has parliament been taken into confidence nor have the provincial governments. Surely, the PML-N’s word alone is not enough in this critical process. |
| Posted by:Fred |