Pakistan, Afghanistan and the war on terror.

When one engages on a discussion on terrorism in the context of Afghanistan, the position of Pakistan, the United States and Afghanistan becomes the fulcrum of frustration upon which the diametrically opposing views rest. The web of relationships and the interactions lend more to realm of spy thrillers and the reality of both the complexity of the issue and the divergent motives of each of the parties. There is no denying the issues becomes important to Washington only because of their war on terror and the 17 year war they have been engaged in. For Afghanistan the issue of terror and war is historically steeped into the history of the struggle against Russian occupation and the residual politics after the defeat of the Russians.

Till the war on terror encompassed Afghanistan, there was a consensus within the divided and waring factions of Afghan society that after the defeat of the Russians United States abandoned their attention on how to rebuild the country. With as many as seven groups involved in a civil war and the absence of a credible central government Afghanistan became a free for all which attracted foreign players into fighting a war of proxy. The emergence of the Taliban, initially supported by both the US, Pakistan and some Arab countries was seen as the only force that could end the civil war, which in a limited sense it did. However, it opened up a wider wound in Afghan society as the Persian speaking section and the Hazara ethnic group were wary of the Pushtu speaking Taliban.

It was during the lingering war between Ahmed Shah Masood United Islamic Front and the Taliban that the events of 9/11 happened. The US bombed both the Taliban and the Arab fighters who had sheltered in Afghanistan with their leader Osama bin Laden. For Pakistan the fulcrum had shifted as now the Taliban-US-Pakistan common platform suddenly changed with the Taliban becoming the enemy of the US. The shift also brought to political prominence the very groups who blamed Pakistan for the success of the Taliban, (who were careful not to mention US support for Taliban), and because they unreservedly supported the US change towards the Taliban and Pakistan was slow to see the shift on the landscape it was natural that Pakistan's role was seen as conflicted.

Stepping away from this complex history we stand today at a juncture where both the US and Afghanistan have blamed Pakistan, and specifically its military for harboring the militant groups that have been attacking both US and Afghan forces. Such charges are not new, the importance today is that Pakistan gets a new Prime Minister who is has promised a new Pakistan and this raises the issue of Afghanistan and the war on terror to the forefront mainly because Imran Khan, the new PM, has a rather different approach to this issue. He is ardent about Pakistan's sovereignty being respected, a dialogue between all sides and even speaking to the militant groups to end terrorism.

Admittedly some of Imran's policy statements may sound as cliches and Afghan and US media, with of course the Indian media attacking Imran on his expertise and approach. Pakistan is blamed for harboring the Haqanni group, the principal group attacking Afghan and US forces. In response Pakistan has accused Afghanistan of sheltering the Pakistan Taliban, who attacked the school in Pakistan killing close to 250 children. Let us first deal with the issue of harboring terrorists.

By Afghan and US admission even after 17 years of the war in Afghanistan they only control around 40% of country. Large swathes of rural Afghanistan are either lawless or under the control of local war lords. In contrast barring the South Waziristan area of the tribal belt of Pakistan, most of the tribal belt is under the control of Pakistan government forces. Imran Khan would like to merge the tribal belt into the KP province of Pakistan thereby bringing more control over the area, a move which would make it more difficult for local tribal chiefs to shelter any of the militant groups. In contrast Kabul's control over its own rural areas is diminishing.

I would argue that the terrorist groups operating against Afghanistan do not need to bother to be based across the porous border in Pakistan when there is 60% of Afghanistan's area available for them to be based. It is exactly the same area where Pakistan claim the Pakistan Taliban are based and it is the eastern part of Afghanistan, given its rugged mountain range, which is least under Kabul's control. Logic does lose its importance when propaganda takes over the narrative and Pakistan needs to get all the stakeholders to focus on the intricate elements of this issue. Indeed it also needs to change its own wishy washy position on fighting terrorism, where the Army, after the school attack, has been be strongly against the militant groups within Pakistan, but also the political front has to be created that militancy is not good for any of the parties, least of all for Pakistan itself.

For its part the US has to stop blaming others for its failed war in Afghanistan and for once come clean that much like its policy post occupation of Iraq, the situation is Afghanistan cannot be solved my force alone. It needs to rewrite the narrative and not believe that Pakistan is causing instability with its neighbor. It has to redraw the way it works with Pakistan and encourage a clean up of its administration from any elements who may be sympathetic to the terror groups. I would imagine a new political force under Imran and the more progressive outlook from the military in Pakistan make this an ideal moment to achieve this. But this cannot be done by talking down to Pakistan and its leadership, and a major rethink within Washington should be done. Whether they have the strength to admit that they have had 17 years of failure of their policy is another matter.

The Afghan leadership needs to step up and accept they administer only a few cities and towns within Afghanistan and while they, and even the US have started to speak directly to the Taliban, they should not accuse others who speak to them as harboring terrorists. This is a battle for the minds and hearts of the people of both Afghanistan and Pakistan and such battles are not won through drone strikes and thoughtless military action. It does not also imply appeasement but a balance of approach is possible and to achieve this the rhetoric needs to be toned down on all sides. We have a chance of peace and a fresh approach and this must be given a chance.