Cover Story
overcoMing tHe prisoner’s dileMMa After all what greater service can a state do to its people than providing them security, freedom and economic opportunities
Yasser latif HaMdani The writer is a lawyer and writer based in Lahore, Pakistan. He has authored the book “Jinnah: Myth and Reality”.
p
risoner’s dilemma is a classic game theory scenario where two prisoners – coconspirators – are kept in solitary confinement, each being offered a deal to turn on the other. If the prisoners stay silent they end up getting a smaller sentence but invariably both prisoners turn on each other leading to a higher sentence being imposed on both of them. This theoretical scenario has great relevance to Pakistan’s approach to war on terror. First of all, let us be clear: Terrorism is not an insurmountable challenge. The issue in Pakistan is not of the challenge but the will to overcome it. Terrorism is tolerated because it helps the powers that be in maintaining status quo. Indeed it is a case of prisoner’s dilemma between PML-N at the centre and PTI in KPK. Consider: For the KPK provincial government, terrorism may be a headache but it is also a mobilising slogan against the federal government. After all foreign policy and defence are federal subjects and therefore a convenient stick to beat the government at the centre with. The federal government on the other hand is vested in ensuring that the provincial KPK government fails at all costs. Meanwhile the military arm of the federal government is happy to sit by and let PTI and PML-N wage a fratricidal political battle. Meanwhile the Taliban are in the driving seat. What we need now is a series of several bold decisions which parties
caught up in a prisoner’s dilemma are unlikely to take. First and foremost, the PML-N government should invite PTI and PPP to form a national unity government, modeled after Churchill’s government during the Second World War. The war cabinet should decide how to go about the war against Taliban. It is clear that neither negotiations nor all out war are solutions to this quagmire. Indeed any negotiation with the Taliban can – given the constitutional bar of Article 256 – has to be limited to the terms of surrender and for such a negotiation, the necessary threat of force is essential.
them. Every such leader who is captured should then be tried in special tribunals for crimes against Pakistan and its people. This however is not the end of the terrorism entanglement. It is important to rebuild the basic structure of the tribal society in Waziristan. Political autonomy with a political agent is a system that worked before this war began. Political autonomy for the tribes should however be coupled with genuine reform and application of the fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitution. Pakistan
What we need now is a series of several bold decisions which parties caught up in a prisoner’s dilemma are unlikely to take. First and foremost, the PML-N government should invite PTI and PPP to form a national unity government, modeled after Churchill’s government during the Second World War
A key element in this is to replace the Frontier Crime Regulation (FCR) with a constitutive document subservient to the Constitution of Pakistan whereby people of FATA can elect representatives not just to the National Assembly but have a grand FATA assembly of their own as well with a Chief Minister and a Governor
Here recourse to Islamic History may not be entirely out of place. The final campaign of Muslims against the Quraysh of Mecca is an excellent example to follow. The Holy Prophet (PBUH) amassed his forces outside Mecca forcing the Meccans to come out and negotiate. What is needed now is a massive show of force – not use of force but amassing of force which may be used – followed by a general amnesty for all those mid-tier Taliban leaders and foot soldiers who lay down their arm and surrender. Next having isolated the ideological leadership from their support base, targeted operations should be carried out with the purpose of arresting
needs to build schools, hospitals and roads in Waziristan. Ultimately you have to give the people a stake in Pakistan for them to be loyal to it. This is a multi-pronged approach based on respect for local traditions, rule of law and development that will ultimately win back the hearts and minds of those who have been poisoned against us by rabid fanatics and ideologues. A key element in this is to replace the Frontier Crime Regulation (FCR) with a constitutive document subservient to the Constitution of Pakistan whereby people of FATA can elect representatives not just to the National Assembly but have a
Mian abrar The writer is a Islamabad based journalist. He can be reached at hussainmian@gmail.com.
W
ith the reluctance shown by the new leadership of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) to hold talks with the government, it is somewhat surprising to note that the leading experts and politicians aboard the pro-dialogue bandwagon of PTI and PML-N, are also losing hope of peace, and some even want the government to decide either for talks or launch an army operation to flush out the militants from across country. However, it’s only the politicians with political base in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa who are still calling for talks, including Imran Khan, Maulana Fazlur
10 www.pakistantoday.com.pk
grand FATA assembly of their own as well with a Chief Minister and a Governor. Ultimately FATA should become a province of its own – an autonomous tribal province nonetheless subject to fundamental rights and minimum standards legislation of the federation. Once this model is successful in Waziristan, the same can be replicated in Balochistan. All of these will provide symptomatic relief to a deeper problem. The state itself has to modernise its laws in terms of dealing with diversity in Pakistan. On a longer timeline the state has to come to terms with this diversity and allow accommodation and co-existence under the federal umbrella between various classes, groups and minorities in Pakistan. A workable constitution with peaceful transition of power every five years will create the stability required for an economic turnaround. Besides a house divided is likely to fall but a house united will always stand – peace and stability along our western border will ensure a massive energy and transport corridor linking the Middle East to Western China. The geography which has at times proved to be a bane may well be a boon. The dividend that peace in our region will ensure what a US state department official had written as early as 1950: If Pakistan can develop without any major disruptions, it may well
become the strongest economic power between from Turkey and India. To do this Pakistan has to be pragmatic, especially about its decision making. The interests of the state are temporal and therefore the state cannot be held hostage to the other-worldly concerns. Every step that needs to be taken to further the interests of the country should be undertaken. After all what greater service can a state do to its people than providing them security, freedom and economic opportunities. All this requires of course that our politicians, those clothed in authority, should overcome the prisoner’s dilemma and work together to put forth a united front against the very surmountable challenges before us. g
to talk or not to talk Rehman and some others.
POLITICIANS’ VIEWS Imran Khan: Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) chairman Imran Khan told Pakistan Today that the rationale for talks with TTP was explained in the APC where the federal government was mandated by all political parties for dialogue and the same was supported by the military. “After years of military operations, terrorism has merely increased so the All Parties Conference (APC) called for giving peace a chance. If the government now feels dialogue is not possible then it needs to convene another APC and build a new national consensus,” he added. Khan said that so far the government had created a dangerous vacuum by having no clear policy on dialogue now has it shown any movement forward. Responding to a question on seriousness of the
government for talks, Khan said that the government not only seemed devoid of seriousness but also confused as to how to proceed forward which, as stated earlier, had created a policy vacuum. Asked whether the government should insist on talks with militants from the position of strength by first squeezing the TTP or it should keep begging for talks, Khan said that the government should do neither. “The government always holds dialogues with the power of the state behind it. That is a given. It’s up to the government to ensure that that perception is carried to other side,” he added. Shaikh Rashid Ahmed: Shaikh Rashid Ahmed, a right-wing politician who leads his own faction of Muslim League, looked hopeless about the prospect of talks between the banned militant outfit TTP and the federal government, stating that the militants looked determined to attack the security forces and the people at large. “Let me tell you that I am hopeless. Though I had
called for holding talks and bring back peace but let me tell you that the government appears to have no action plan and the rulers look clueless about the way forward.” He said that in his view more bloodshed was awaiting Pakistan and its people as the militants had penetrated deep in state apparatus and in urban areas. He also expressed his hopelessness about the role of religious parties and groups. “I think the role of religious parties, scholars and political fronts like DPC has reduced and TTP elements have rejected any facilitation process. I think no group or individual can help start peace process,” he added. He added that in his view the militants were determined to attack Pakistan, its forces and the people and that they were resorting to target killings, moving past the practice of using IED. He said that the government needed to take practical steps either by holding talks or going for