Asif Zaheer Gondal
The debate over the imposition of Governor’s Rule and an emergency in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa is being framed primarily as a political issue, but the reality is quite different. The reasons behind these meas-ures are less political and more emotional. Political problems existed before and continued to exist. They were being tolerated. But the situation had now reached a point where Pakistan’s entire effort against terrorism was at stake.
The state had no other option. Any state would have made the same decision. In fact, another state might have taken this step much earlier. Pakistan has made enormous sacrifices in the war against terrorism. Its security forces and police personnel have suffered immense losses, while the country has paid a heavy financial price. These were no ordinary sacrifices. Pakistan brought terrorism under control at an enormous cost. Pakistan has been at the forefront of the global fight against terrorism, a role that has exacted an enormous price.
No other state has sacrificed more than 90,000 lives or suffered economic losses exceeding $100 billion in this struggle. According to estimates by the United Nations and independent assessments, more than 6,000 TTP terrorists are operating from Afghan territory, while the total estimated number of terror-ists present there exceeds 20,000. Although terrorist attacks continue, the country has largely contained the threat. The terrorists are now on the run, and the Pakistani state is pursuing them. Pakistan has stood with the international community in the fight against terrorism. It has remained on the front line of this war. Pakistan is a sovereign and dignified country. At a time when terrorists themselves have put its very existence at risk, how can it afford to step back? As a responsible state, Pakistan is fighting these terrorists as well as the proxies of its enemies.
Pakistan’s commitment can be gauged from the fact that it is targeting terrorist hideouts inside Afghani-stan, from where militants cross into Pakistan to carry out attacks. The figures are deeply disturbing. The human losses Pakistan has suffered in this war are greater than the combined losses suffered by many other states. In these circumstances, if the KP government was pursuing policies that threatened to squander all these sacrifices, what else could the federal government have done? Should it have sat back and watched while the KP government contin-ued to cooperate with terrorists and, deliberately or otherwise, promoted their narrative.
The terrorists are advancing a particular narrative, and the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf, consciously or unconsciously, knowingly or otherwise, was pro-moting the same narrative. Repeated attempts were made to explain this to the party, but it failed to understand. Why did the recent negotiations fail? They failed for precisely this reason. When the state asked the KP government to support the federation on the issue of terrorism, the provincial government backed away. What was wrong with that demand? The National Action Plan itself was formulated during Imran Khan’s tenure. If the federal govern-ment asks the government of a province afflicted by terrorism to support its operations against terrorists, what is unreasonable about that the course adopted by the PTI government in KP amounted to a repu-diation of Pakistan’s state policy.
It was a path that led towards cooperation with ter-rorists. The provincial government has never con-demned a terrorist attack. Whenever it does issue a condemnation, it is the Pakistani state that comes under attack. Look at the chief minister’s speeches at public gatherings, where he has attempted to ridi-cule the Pakistani state’s narrative. Look at the party’s social media wing, its ministers and even its chief minister. Their narrative, in general, served to reinforce the very narrative propagated by terrorists.
The federal government exercised considerable patience and restraint. It tried every available op-tion. But Pakistan must move forward alongside the international community. It cannot allow itself to be dragged back into the abyss. Nor is Pakistan a state that can afford to patronise terrorists. It is a state committed to rejecting terrorism in all its forms. Whether the terrorists themselves, a foreign state sponsoring them, or a provincial government within Pakistan begins to be perceived as advancing the ideological narrative of terrorists, such a situation is unacceptable to Pakistan under any circumstances. The decision to impose an emergency is therefore entirely justified. This is no longer merely a political decision. It has become a requirement of Pakistan’s national security.