A Negotiated Settlement with the Taliban – Can it Be Achieved?

It won’t be wrong to state that today Pakistan’s society is extremely polarized, divided and confused over what is going to happen between the state and the terrorists – The Pakistani Taliban.

Looking at the print, electronic and social media, one finds that Pakistanis have been visibly divided into two camps on the potential relationship between the state and Taliban. One camp suggests that negotiated settlement is the only way out to bring peace and stability to Pakistan. And the other camp is of the view that peace negotiations with Taliban have been tried and tested before and its time when the state needs to take action against them. They argue that the Taliban have been attacking the innocent civilians in Pakistan and have killed more than 40,000 Pakistanis; hence they are ‘unforgivable enemies’. This is a very strong argument and any concerned Pakistani would agree with the fact that Taliban have almost changed the social fabric of Pakistani society because of their terrorist activities in Pakistan.

The ‘pro-peace talks’ camp, however, contends that it is important to look back and fix the root causes of the terrorism in Pakistan rather than treating the symptoms. They argue that the present chaotic situation in Pakistan is because of the disastrous domestic and international policies in region that started during the Afghan Jihad time and deteriorated after 9/11. Pakistan was dragged into the war against terrorism, the Pakistan Army started an operation in Waziristan and Taliban, who never posed a direct threat to Pakistan, called for a ‘Jihad’ against the state of Pakistan. Increased Army operations by Pakistan’s security forces coupled with the notorious US drone strikes in the tribal areas of Pakistan escalated the situation and eventually Pakistani people had to pay the price of this ‘Forced Marriage’ between US and Pakistan and a ‘Forced Divorce’ between Pakistan and Taliban. This is their narrative

Both sides have some truths and I think I will be one of those few people who will agree with both. However, I need a solution as well. I want to look beyond the ‘point-scoring’ debate because I know that winning any debate will not bring a workable solution to the problems faced by my country. To find a solution, we must find answers to the following questions:

• Are we aware of the realistic connection between Pakistani Taliban and Afghani Taliban?

• Is it sensible to talk about ‘good’ and ‘bad’ Taliban? Do we have to move on from stagnant positions to ones which bear risk though which can yield rewards?

• Can we institute confidence-building measures for a workable negotiated settlement?

The first and foremost element for strategizing a practical road map of peace negotiation with Pakistani Taliban is to understand the complex relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan based Taliban. Any negotiated settlement with Pakistani Taliban cannot be advanced in a vacuum – without taking the reconciliation process with Taliban in Afghanistan into context in which the Afghan Government, US, ISAF and especially Pakistan are the stakeholders. According to a recent report by Danish Institute of International Studies (DIIS), in the ‘Peace Process Roadmap 2015’ ( A strategy paper by the Afghan Government), Pakistan is considered as a key facilitator of direct contact between the Afghan Government and Taliban leaders.

The popular narrative about Taliban is that the state of Pakistan gets along with the Afghani Taliban but take Pakistani Taliban as public enemy number one. Apparently, the founder of the Tahreek e Taliban Pakistan (TTP), Baitullah Mehsud, was dismissed by Afghan Taliban leader, Mullah Omar because of his continued attacks on Pakistan. However, Baitullah Mehsud always took Mullah Omar as his leader. It is interesting to see that often the talks with Pakistani Taliban are viewed by many analysts as a completely separate subject without realizing the ideological bond they have with Afghani Taliban. Members of both the groups cross the Durand line on a daily basis and are hosted and protected by each other. One must not forget that the narrative of Pakistani Taliban only varies from Afghani Taliban in their stance against the state of Pakistan. Undermining any negotiated settlement with Pakistani Taliban will have an impact on the global efforts for reconciliation with Afghani Taliban.

Perhaps, the most ridiculed idea in Pakistan is considered to be a discourse around the ‘Good and Bad Taliban’. In principle, I also agree that there are no good Taliban because those who justify violence and kill people to popularize their ideology can’t be ‘good’. However, our sense of history tells us that this idea can actually work to isolate more radical members of the extremist groups from those who are interested in a dialogue to end the conflict. The peace deal between the IRA and the British government is a perfect example by which to understand it when the more extreme elements within the radical republican wing were isolated from the IRA. Pakistani Taliban has no structured organization. Various media and research reports suggest that Pakistani Taliban are splintered into dozens of smaller factions. Even the TTP (Tahreek e Taliban Pakistan) does not represent all of those groups. This situation has pros and cons but a major opportunity in it for Pakistan is that the state can devise a strategy to start getting on board all those groups who envisage that peace process is worth negotiating.

Lastly, can the stakeholders sustain the peace process by developing the right confidence building measures? There is another common narrative in Pakistan that no negotiation with Taliban can be successful because all such previous efforts were failed. Indeed there were serious efforts made for negotiation in 2004, 2005 and 2008 but it must be noted that there has never been a formal peace agreement or a structured dialogue between the government of Pakistan and the Pakistani Taliban. A strong anti-drone policy with some sort of agreement from the US government is central to build confidence for a successful negotiated settlement with Taliban. However, what is the realistic likelihood of this when US foreign policy in Pakistan relies heavily on the use of drone technology.

In the wake of the recent killing of TTP leader, Hakimullah Mehsud by a US drone strike, once again the negotiation process is in danger. Although Pakistan has officially condemned and denounced the attack, the situation over the coming days will unfold if the Pakistani Taliban are still interested to settle down the conflict through a dialogue or they will prefer continuing their violent movement. I hope the coming days will bring the message of a real peace to Pakistan but that entirely depends on devising a right strategy to end the conflict with Pakistani Taliban and then sustain the peace process without compromising our national interest and our core democratic values. Peace is required but not at a price that throttles the future of Pakistan. 

These views are the personal views of Rehman Anwer and are not necessarily reflective of positions taken by Faith Matters.

The Attack on All Saints Church is an attack on Pakistan

Christian and Muslim communities have been living in Pakistan since independence. The Christian community is around 2% of the total population of Pakistan and, like other members of minority faiths, they also experience prejudice at various levels in their everyday lives. This faith-based prejudice is both casual and institutionalised. The majority of Christians in Pakistan are extremely poor and do menial jobs across the country.  The contribution of the members of the Christian community towards the protection and development of Pakistan is totally missed in the school text books.

Although there have been various incidents of Christian-Muslim conflict in the recent past, the incident on Sunday 22nd September turned out to be the deadliest attack to ever be committed against the Christian community in Pakistan. Two suicide attackers blew themselves up near the All Saints Church in Peshawar at a time when hundreds of Christians were returning home after the Sunday Church service. So far, 81 people have reported to be killed and over 100 terribly injured in the incident. According to the Interior Ministry of Pakistan, there were 7 children and 34 women amongst the victims who lost their lives.

A splinter group of Pakistani Taliban known as TTP-Jandullah has taken responsibility for the attack, saying that such attacks will continue against the non-Muslims until the US ends drone strikes in the tribal areas of Pakistan – a demand that makes little sense.

The persecution of minorities in Pakistan is not new; but the recent incident in Peshawar has an interesting element to look at. The present Pakistani government has recently decided to initiate a peace process with the Taliban and is actively discussing the modalities of peace talks. There is a perception in Pakistan that there are certain elements in the country who do not want the peace process to go ahead and they are trying to sabotage the negotiation strategy of peace with the Taliban.

However, given the state of minorities in Pakistan since its independence, there requires a comprehensive strategy to ensure the protection of the minority communities. The response from the civil society and wider public is similar to that which they exhibited in the past. The majority of the people are showing solidarity with the victims’ families, but it certainly requires more than a timely support. We should not allow this vicious cycle, in which we condemn the ruthless mass murder of our minority communities and then no concrete actions are taken against the perpetrators, to continue. It is time to learn from the past. What did we learn from Shanti Nagar, Sangla Hill, Gojra and Badami Bagh incidents? Did we develop a counter-terrorism strategy? Did we increase the security of religious places? Did we train our police to deal with the terrorists? Did we start monitoring the hate-based narratives against minorities? Did we think of legislating against hate crime against religious minorities? Did the government start supporting the interfaith organizations operating within Pakistan to promote a dialogue between members of the faith communities to foster better relationships among them?

The answer to all the above questions is one word – NO

The government has announced ‘Three-Day’ mourning in the country after the barbaric attacks against the Christian communities in Peshawar but would this mourning ensure the protection of minorities from future attacks?

This government of Pakistan must think beyond sheer condemnation and timely solidarity with the victims and their families. Pakistan certainly needs serious and consistent efforts to tackle the challenges of terrorism and extremism. It is the time to prove that the ‘Attack on the All Saints Church is an Attack on Pakistan.’

Rehman Anwer

Badam Zari – A Symbol of Local Resistance against the Taliban in FATA

Pakistan has been through a lot lately – civil violence, political disputes, religious and sectarian conflicts, and terrorism to name but a few of the issues. But despite all the controversies and governance issues that have plagued it in the last five years, there remains a ray of hope for the establishment of stability in Pakistan - the continuation of the democratic process in the country. The beauty of popular democracy is that it raises political awareness amongst ordinary citizens, and urges them to stand up for their own rights and the rights of those around them. That’s how societies grow, develop, and move onward to become safer, more tolerant, and more just. In a country like Pakistan, where the democratic process has repeatedly been distorted and subverted by a number of military interventions, the completion of a full electoral term by an elected government is certainly encouraging. The caretaker government has announced the general elections are to be held on 11 May 2013, and right now, electoral fear and anxiety is at its peak in the country.

Pakistan has always been an unpredictable country, in political terms. The country is normally considered to be a male dominated society, with huge support to for conservative, elderly extremists. Nonetheless in 1988, the world observed that the people of Pakistan elected Benazir Bhutto, a centre-left 35-year old as the first female (and, so far, only) Prime Minister of the country, when she returned back from exile in 1980s; today, there is a small but very much present female presence in government and the 2002 election returned 17% women MPs (the UK House of Commons currently has 22% women, while the US Congress has 18%). Similarly, whenever given a chance to elect their leaders, a vast majority of Pakistanis stood up against the ultraconservative political parties and they have never been able to form the government in Pakistan.

This isn’t to say that the political power of these ultraconservative groups has been broken though – or, at least, not everywhere. In the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, the political landscape has been somewhat different, with the being heavily influenced by the views and ideology of militant Taliban affiliated movements; these groups consider that the democracy is in contradiction to the Islamic principles of governance. They have targeted various political party workers and leaders, and threatened to unleash a further wave of violence for the coming elections in May, declaring that that they will attack anyone taking part in the general elections in their region. Again, though, we can see the green shoots of change even in this traditionally conservative tribal area – for the first time in the history of Pakistan, a FATA tribal woman, named Badam Zari, has announced that she will run in the general elections. She will contest her area as an independent candidate, against 27 men from all of the major political parties.

This news is astonishing for anyone who knows the socio-political dynamics of the tribal areas of Pakistan. Casting a vote can lead to one’s death (according the the New Statesman, pamphlets have been handed out warning that women who vote will face bombing or ‘severe punishment’) so the fact that a woman is contesting for a national assembly seat is particularly striking. Bajur Agency, the seat that Zari is contesting, is a small town in FATA connecting the region to the Kunar province of Afghanistan, and hence holds significant strategic importance. There have been numerous clashes between the militant Taliban and Pakistan Army in Bajur in the recent past, and the locals have suffered enormously because of this on-going conflict – it is a heavily contested area.

Whether or not Badam Zari is able to win the elections, her courage to participate in the democratic process is a symbol of local resistance against the tyranny of both the Taliban and broader repressive social norms, and a sign of the growing support for change that Pakistanis want to bring to their society at large, and the strengthening of norms of democracy and equality in Pakistan.

Rehman Anwer