Southwest Asia

Security Measures in Southwest Asia

As foreign forces plan their exit from Afghanistan, one can question whether they achieved what they had set out to do and if not, as is the case, how will the world cope with unresolved mode of political governance and bilateral conflicts, migration and energy security as well as the concerns of nuclear weapons’ proliferation? The challenges involve linking the diverse nations economically and geo-politically, collective and collaborative action being crucial to enhancing security.

The present Afghan leadership is not capable of sustaining the present western model of democracy and governance; this has been imposed by the west in the mistaken belief that this is suited to a society which remains basically tribal and feudal despite technological advances. Former US Green Beret Captain Amerine who, alongwith his team of 10 Green Berets, was ordered in 2001 to protect Hamid Karzai when the original choice for topmost leader Maulvi Abdul Haq was captured and executed by the Taliban, recently disclosed to journalist Christina Lamb that his HQs had ordered him not to enter Afghanistan unless Karzai could guarantee 300 men on the ground. When they ultimately went in, Karzai, the future president of Afghanistan, could only gather 30 people together!

Europe is awash with constitutional monarchies; one must seriously consider the option of restoring the monarchy in Afghanistan while having a powerful PM, as it used to be before Sardar Daud deposed his cousin Zahir Shah, to ensure unity among the diverse ethnic groups.

The Afghan war has cost Pakistan heavily in human terms. While enhancing our defence and security budget we had to increase allocations for diplomatic efforts, and pay exorbitant economic and social cost estimated to be about US$65 billion. How can one begin to assess the cost to the image of Pakistan as a responsible entity in the comity of nations?

The US has incurred huge cost, some estimate Iraq and Afghanistan at US$4 trillion. Can they continue to do in the current economic climate and a rapidly diminishing appetite, with the EU members not willing to share the cost? What rankles is that there is little or no mention made to the direct cost incurred by Pakistan, as well as the virtual destruction of its socio-political and economic infra-structure. Long after the US and EU have abandoned the present leaders of Afghanistan to their fate, Pakistan will continue to pay a very heavy human cost, quite difficult to quantify the additional cost in socio-political and economic terms.

The 8th Worldwide Security Conference in Brussels organised by the EastWest Institute (EWI), one of the world’s leading think tanks, in cooperation with the World Customs Organisation (WCO) and the Financial Times centred around: (1) sharpening appreciation of the existing security dynamics in Southwest Asia (SWA), (2) analysing new means of promoting collective security in the region, (3) and develop consensus for enhancing security.

In the climate of uncertainty and high risk, the western world must prepare themselves to manage more complex emergencies. Notwithstanding the broad consensus about a durable security policy, the western nations are not geared to address some of the challenges that exist and/or are anticipated in the future described is the present situation in a relevant paper as “a sense of disarray and retreat rather than a commitment to continual reassessment and policy innovation”.

The negative factors influencing the situation include (1) weak commitment among the states in the region to cooperate, to prevent, reduce and/or contain imminent violent conflict, (2) economic growth not consistent with required standard of living, (3) governance remaining weak with power shifting to local actors, ie warlords in the sub-regions, (4) with outside commitment weakening, political leaders facing domestic pressures are reluctant to stake their political future on cooperation. Several risk factors are (1) conflicting requirements of modernisation and tradition (especially religious fundamentalism), (2) likelihood of regional and internal conflicts with a potential for nuclear confrontation and (3) increasing dependence of Europe, Japan and China for energy on this region.

With the exit of the coalition forces, (1) power will shift from governments to both previously weak local actors and anti-state actors, (2) strong demand for democracy, respect of individual rights, adequately compensated employment, education and upward social mobility will impact the legitimacy of governments in the region and (3) military expenditures will increase. The policy recommendations include viz (1) increased coordination between the states of this region, (2) increased regional economic integration, (3) mobilisation of private sector investment in trans-border economic projects and (4) promotion of justice and rule of law for improving governance.

Facts about Pakistan’s sacrifices are generally glossed over, viz (1) the direct and indirect cost to Pakistan as well as collateral damage in both terms of blood and money as well as the lasting damage to its socio-political factors need to be quantified, (2) what about the cost of hosting three million plus Afghans in Pakistan for over two decades? and (3) the cost of Pakistan allowing transit trade without fees and (4) the effect of smuggling on Pakistan’s economy and (5) unrelenting hostile propaganda by the coalition-supported government in Afghanistan affecting public opinion in Pakistan.

What is unfortunate is that no mechanism exists for a dialogue to offset and deal with misperceptions and misrepresentations of facts. Accusations and allegations against Pakistan are based on unsubstantiated facts, using two recent examples, viz (1) Adm Mike Mullen’s unfortunate statement, just before retiring, that Pakistan’s ISI was complicit in the recent attacks on the US Embassy in Kabul alongwith the Haqqani network and (2) consequently Karzai accusing Pakistan of assassinating Burhanuddin Rabbani and using that as a convenient excuse to call off the Tripartite Conference.

The White House has distanced itself from Mullen’s assertion while at the same time encouraging Pakistan to “do more” about the Haqqani network. Given the slogans at Rabbani’s funeral accusing him for Rabbani’s death Hamid Karzai’s accusations were right on cue and understandable. Why indeed did Karzai call him back to attend that particular meeting where he was killed? How better to deflect the allegations in the wake of Mullen’s statement to the world’s favourite bugbear of recent times, the ISI?

While we certainly need to address our counter-terrorism efforts within the Pakistani heartland far better, Pakistan has fought insurgents in its border areas to a standstill at great human cost, taking ten times more casualties than all the coalition countries put together. No one wants to mention the three million plus Afghan refugees spread throughout our soil. Most of Al-Qaeda leaders have been killed by our security forces and 80 percent of Al-Qaeda suspects in Guantanamo Bay were captured by Pakistan.

The evolving consensus is to readjust the role of the Economic Cooperation Organisation (ECO) to help the nations find indigenous solutions and encourage countries having credibility in the region, like Turkey, to take a greater role, particularly in enhancing means of livelihood by innovative out-of-the-box thinking.

(Extract from speech given on Oct 3, 2011 at the 8th Worldwide Security Conference organised by the EWI in collaboration with the World Customs Organisation (WCO), Brussels and Financial Times on “Shaping collective security in Southwest Asia, are breakthrough measures possible?”)

 

 

Joint Peace Endeavours to Benefit all Stakeholders

In an interview with the BBC in Urdu, EWI Senior Fellow Najam Abbas discusses the instability of the Afghan-Pakistani border. Whenever international troops exit from Afghanistan, he says, the need for peace and stability will never be more important. 
 
 
Abbas believes that a stable relationship between India and Pakistan – one that up till now has been governed by fear and insecurity – is the key to stabilizing Pakistan’s western border and managing the crisis in Afghanistan. If peaceful, the relationship between India and Pakistan has the ability to greatly bolster regional security.

 

 

In order to reduce threat levels, Abbas believes that India should announce a plan to implement confidence building measures along its eastern border with Pakistan. The possible success of such measures might then encourage Pakistan to improve security along its western border with Afghanistan. 
 
Since India’s economy is one of the fastest growing in the world, that country needs to make a genuine investment in regional stability. Eventually, Pakistan will be able to open the doors to regional trade with Afghanistan and Central Asia, as well as help India meet its growing energy needs with exports from Iran and Turkmenistan, but this change must start with India.  
 

To achieve peace in this region, Abbas maintains, Afghanistan’s neighbors must transform themselves  from belligerent enemies to benevolent partners. The result, he concludes, would be a win-win situation for everyone.

 
Source

Reform - not Revolt - in Iran

Hooman Majd, author of the New York Times bestseller The Ayatollah Begs to Differ, visited  EWI to discuss his latest book, The Ayatollah’s Democracy, and share insights about the wave of uprisings sweeping the Middle East.

Majd is both an insider and outsider to the intricate political world of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The son of an Iranian diplomat under the Shah and grandson of a powerful ayatollah, Majd grew up mainly in the United States. Although he was openly linked with the reformists and translated for former Iranian President Mohammed Khatami (a relative by marriage), Majd also translated Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's infamous 2006 United Nations speech, an experience he wrote about for the New York Observer.

In The Ayatollah’s Democracy, Majd presents a nuanced view of the contested 2009 elections in Iran, arguing that despite the resulting violence, a group of influential ayatollahs—including a liberal opposition—still believe in the ideals of the Iranian Republic. For them, Majd writes, “green represents not a revolution but a civil rights movement, pushing the country toward democracy, albeit its own particular brand of ‘Islamic democracy.’”

Looking at the recent protests in Iran, Majd told EWI that the wave of uprisings in the Middle East has affected Iran, but not to the extent that some Western commentators believe.

Unlike the governments of Tunisia and Egypt, the Islamic Republic still enjoys wide support from its citizens. Why? According to Majd, Iran’s political system is not as dictatorial as some imagine; rather, it grants its citizens some basic freedoms and has no pervasive secret police. For another, the government is a significant benefactor, employing the biggest chunk of working Iranians and providing targeted subsidies to the needy. Majd added that Iranians are the most nationalistic people in the world.

“The idea of overturning the system is anathema to many,” said Majd.

He pointed out that the leaders of the Iranian reform movement are survivors of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, and hence a part of the system. In 2009, they protested against the widespread alleged fraud surrounding the presidential elections – not to overthrow the regime. Now, their biggest concern is to make future elections fair and continue the fight for civil rights.

When asked about the role of the United States in Iran, Majd compared the State Department’s Twitter feed encouraging protests in Iran to its Arabic Twitter feed urging restraint in Egypt.
He said that the best way for the U.S.to help the Iranian opposition would be to engage with the Islamic Republic. Majd argued that normal relations between the U.S. and Iran would help remove the Islamic Republic’s leadership suspicions that the reformist movement is part of a U.S. drive to destabilize the Islamic Republic.

As Majd sees it, when the Islamic Republic’s leadership does not feel under threat, it will allow more space for reform.

A Network of Support for Afghan Women MPs

On December 7, 2010 at the European Parliament, EWI and the Parliamentarians Network for Conflict Prevention brought together Afghan women parliamentarians with women MPs from Pakistan, Tunisia and Bangladesh. It was a rare chance for the Afghan MPs, who are isolated from their counterparts even in countries as close by as Pakistan, to speak frankly about the challenges of making policy – and to get advice from their peers in the Muslim world.

“There are common problems that we need to face,” said Dr. Attiya Inayatullah, Former Minister of Women’s Development, Social Welfare and Special Education of Pakistan, identifying the need to challenge extremism for women to take a truly active role in government.

 
 
 
Underlying the day’s talks was the prospect of reconciliation with the Taliban, which could threaten women’s right to rule (currently, a constitutionally-mandated quota insures women seats in Parliament). Women MPs urged Afghan women to take part in any talks with the Taliban, and push for broader societal change.
  
Saida Agrebi, an MP from Tunisia, emphasized the importance of teaching Muslim traditions in a way that emphasizes women’s rights. Other MPs discussed the importance of educating women, to empower them financially and politically, and using the media to challenge harmful female stereotypes.
 

 
One of the strongest recommendations to emerge from the conference was the idea of creating a standing regional group to connect Afghan women with women from other Muslim countries.
 
“We’re a little more familiar with the culture and context of what the Afghan women are facing and we have similar backgrounds, so we’d be able to help them enact the kind of changes that we’ve had in our countries towards women’s empowerment,” said Donya Aziz, an MP from Pakistan.
 

Inayatullah suggested that the network could take the shape of a regional institute for peace-building, training and employing women in conflict prevention.
 
For Afghan women politicians, help from western advocates is valuable, but support closer to home – indispensible.
 

 

Help for Afghan Women Politicians

On December 7, the EastWest Institute and the Parliamentarians Network for Conflict Prevention convened female parliamentarians from Afghanistan and neighboring countries, as well as western advocates, to help Afghan women legislate more effectively and work towards peace. 

 “The international communities are helping,” said Dr. Husn Banu Ghazanfar, Minister of Women Affairs, Afghanistan, who delivered the keynote address. “But I request help from the international community for the education and capacity-building.” Ghazanfar also emphasized the need for western help rebuilding infrastructure, like roads, schools and hospitals, damaged in the war.

 
In particular, the conference explored how women politicians from more experienced democracies in the west can support women politicians in Afghanistan. Many participants said that the conference itself was a good first step.
 

 
“The voice of Afghan women MPs is something we don’t hear very often, and it’s really good to get their impressions of challenges they face,” said Meg Munn, a British MP.
 
Munn added that, as it’s all too easy for western governments to concentrate on solely on security issues in Afghanistan, western parliamentarians can play a crucial role in redirecting political attention to Afghan women’s well-being.
 
Margareta Cederfelt, an MP from Sweden, said that she and her counterparts can offer knowledge and help rebuilding civil society, but that perhaps the most immediate help they can offer is an e-mail address. She explained, “It’s hard to be a politician without a network.”
 

 
For Munn, the e-mail addresses exchanged offer a means of daily support and communication between western and Afghan parliamentarians. “I honestly feel that some of their challenges they face can be better understood by women in the other regional parliaments,” said Munn. “But that doesn’t mean we won’t offer help where we can”

The Three Biggest Misconceptions about Pakistan

On December 13th, Ikram Sehgal a member of EWI’s board of directors and the chairman of Wackenhut Pakistan (Private) Ltd., one of Pakistan’s leading security companies, gave a talk at the institute on the “Three Biggest Misconceptions about Pakistan.”

First, Sehgal addressed the common fear that Pakistan’s nuclear capabilities are vulnerable to terrorists. “I know for a fact that Pakistan’s nuclear assets are safe,” said Sehgal, pointing out that there’s no evidence that the command structure guarding Pakistan’s nuclear assets includes Taliban sympathizers.  Sehgal added that Arab countries say they feel threatened by Iran, but not by Pakistan: “Countries apart from India do not feel threatened.” 

 

 

Second, Sehgal sought to refute the notion of Pakistan as an exporter of terror.  Sehgal believes that this misconception is exacerbated by western leader’s pandering remarks to India: “Both Cameron and Merkel clearly were wooing the Indian leaders and public for crass commercial purposes,” said Sehgal.

Sehgal pointed out that many people wrongly associate Pakistan with Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, particularly given that no of the high ranking leaders of Al Qaeda are Pakistani. In Waziristan, said Sehgal, for every coalition soldier lost, Pakistan lost 11, including high ranking officers: “There is certainly terror in Pakistan, but it is not state sponsored.” 

Third, Sehgal addressed the misconception of Pakistan as a failed state, underscoring the tendency of Western media to lump the entire nation into an Islamo-fascist entity.   “Nothing could be further from the truth,” said Sehgal. “In this diverse nation of more than 170 million, Pakistan contains the entire spectrum of Islamic practice.” 

Sehgal argued that the Western media enforces false stereotypes of government corruption and cooperation with the Taliban and Al Qaeda.   And, conversely, fuels Pakistani conspiracy theories that the West is out to get them.

In a question-and-answer period following the talk, one participant asked Sehgal to address the fact that Pakistanis overseas have been involved in terrorist attacks.
“Within Pakistan, with educated young people, you won’t find the same virulent anti-western hatred that you find in the United Kingdom,” said Sehgal. “If you go to East London, you will find a lot of venom there.”

Just one more misconception about Pakistan that needed correction.

Click here to read coverage by the World Policy Institute

Click here to read Sehgal's piece in The News.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Southwest Asia