One
of the most difficult initiatives for individuals
as much as states is to change their policy framework
in the face of unpalatable facts. Yet in a moment
of crisis, survival sometimes depends on reformulating
policy. Such a moment is at hand for Pakistan. During
US Senate hearings on 22nd September, the US Secretary
of Defense, Leon Panetta and Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, made crystal
clear the situation that Pakistan is now faced with,
in the sphere of national security: There should be
no surprise if the US takes military action against
the Haqqani network. The way the government of Pakistan
together with the military establishment responds
to this situation will shape Pakistan's future economic,
political and security architecture. Let us briefly
examine the context in which hard choices will now
have to be made.
Pakistan of course has promptly issued a denial that
any link exists between the military and the Haqqani
network. However US actions are likely to flow from
their perceptions and not those of the Pakistan government.
Three key elements of the US view of the matter emerged
during the Senate hearings. The US is convinced that:
(i) The Haqqani network is a ''veritable arm of Pakistan's
Inter Services Intelligence…'' as Admiral Mullen was
reported to have said. (ii) The Haqqani network with
ISI support planned and successfully executed the
September 13 attack on the US embassy in Kabul and
ISAF headquarters. (iii) The US regards the Haqqani
network based in Waziristan as the ''foremost threat
to US and Coalition forces in Afghanistan'' as Senator
Carl Levin is reported to have observed.
The US military strategy holds that they reserve the
right to take action against non-state terrorist organizations
located in any country, if such organizations pose
a threat to US security. In view of this military
doctrine and the conception that the Haqqani network
constitutes a ''foremost threat'', US military action
in North Waziristan is a distinct possibility.
Equally important, given the stated US position that
the Haqqani terrorist group is linked to Pakistan's
military apparatus, the US could well mount a graduated
set of pressures on Pakistan across the whole spectrum:
economic, political and military. It may therefore
be helpful to consider the economic and political
consequences of what many believe is Pakistan's policy
of strategic ambiguity, in its war against terrorism:
running with the hare and hunting with the hounds.
Pakistan's economy is in the grip of stagflation with
a protracted recession combined with double digit
inflation. Over one-third of the population is living
below the poverty line and the majority is deprived
of basic services. The situation has been worsened
with the floods in Sindh. Yet the fiscal space of
the government is so tight that it is unable to take
initiatives to ameliorate the situation with public
expenditures on the necessary scale.
If Pakistan chooses the path of confrontation with
the US it could mean stoppage of aid from the Western
world in general as it closes ranks to pressurize
Pakistan. This could mean a loss of about US$ 4.78
billion annually in foreign assistance, with distress
repatriation of capital abroad. This could bring Pakistan's
reserves position (currently at US$ 17.6 billion)
to a crisis situation whereby inflation could feed
off exchange rate depreciation, quickly bringing three
digit inflation rates to an already distressed population.
The balance of payments crisis could paralyze the
economy with critical shortages of key commodities
such as fuel, cooking oil, fertilizer and hence food.
Pakistan is already under stress due to widespread
violence by various Taliban groups and ethnic violence
in the key port of Karachi. The economic collapse
that could result from conflict with the West may
intensify this stress to a critical level. The sovereignty
of the State within its geographic domain could be
seriously eroded resulting from large scale disorder.
It is time to change the paradigm of security policy
and recognize that selective support for the Taliban
is not only counter-productive for Pakistan's internal
security but could bring the country into a catastrophic
conflict with the Western world.
* The author is Distinguished
Professor of Economics, Beaconhouse National University.
This article was published in the Express Tribune,
Monday, 26 September 2011.
September
28, 2011.
|