Opinion - News Analysis   

Backing away from the badlands?

Nirupama Subramanian

The Pakistan Government has signed a deal with the tribals of North Waziristan that can be seen as a retreat.

ON SEPTEMBER 9, militants in North Waziristan on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border killed a 70-year-old man. Pinned to the dead man's chest was a piece of paper that said "confessed to spying for Americans during interrogations and anyone doing such a thing will meet the same fate."

The killing was the first violation of an agreement the Government signed just four days earlier with tribal militants in North Waziristan, and raised new questions for the Musharraf regime that said the deal would end a bloody confrontation between the security forces and the tribals ever since Pakistan was co-opted into the "war on terror" in Afghanistan, and restore peace in the area.

North Waziristan is part of the region on Pakistan's side of the Durand Line designated the Federally Administered Tribal Area. It is administered by the North-West Frontier Province Governor through political agents in each of the seven "agencies" of FATA.

Those who have visited the area say it is impossible to distinguish the region, its terrain, the people, and their customs from those across the border in Afghanistan. It is one of those places in the world where the cliché about the artificiality of international borders could not be truer.

From 2004, Pakistan carried out military operations in the area to flush out the Taliban and members of Al-Qaeda believed to be hiding in the mountainous region and using it as a staging post for attacks in Afghanistan. But the military got bogged down fighting the local supporters of these groups — known variously as "local Taliban" militants, and referred to by the government as "miscreants" — among the tribal population. In the process, the military lost 700 soldiers.

The Government began chalking out an exit strategy in April this year that culminated in the September 5 agreement with the militants. Under the agreement, brokered by a 45-member loya jirga, the Government has undertaken to dismantle check-posts, release prisoners, drop charges, return weapons, and compensate those who suffered human and material losses in the military operations.

Problematic part

For their part, the tribals promised to stop attacking security forces and government infrastructure, and end all targeted killings. They also promised to accept the writ of the Government in the area, and to ensure that nobody would be allowed to make cross-border incursions into Afghanistan to take part in the Taliban operations there.

The important part of the agreement is that the tribals have promised they will not allow any foreigners to live in the area, but this is also one that is potentially the most problematic, because it allows those who cannot leave to continue staying on, provided they live peaceably and respect the laws of the region as well as the terms of the agreement.

The agreement has been viewed as the only course of action open to the government after military action failed to bring under control the tribal insurgents, accused by the international community and Kabul of helping the Taliban stage attacks across the border in Afghanistan, and giving them and the members of Al-Qaeda a safe haven in the region.

"They were attacking the security forces with rockets every night. The political agent in North Waziristan could not travel by road to Peshawar, each time he had to go by air. It was getting unbearable for the government. The only way was to talk to the militants, and wisely, the government decided it should," said Rahimullah Yusufzai, Peshawar-based executive editor of The News, and a specialist on the Taliban.

The agreement certainly takes some pressure off President Musharraf, who is besieged by numerous political problems at home. With anti-Americanism running high in Pakistan, Islamic religio-political groups had long demanded that the Government end military operations in the area. Others too were critical of President Musharraf for using military force against his own people. Within the military, which once nurtured the Taliban, there was unease about the operations. The Pakistan Government has said the agreement would pave the way for a "political solution" to the conflict in the region. But observers are also asking if in its anxiety to close the deal, the Musharraf regime has not gone too far the other way. Even those who were for ending military operations believe the agreement has ended up strengthening the militants, and that the region would become a no-go area for the government and a safe haven for jihadis and other extremists from all over the world.

"Whatever the militants demanded has been given — everything. The militants have only made promises, while the government has given everything in concrete terms — releasing prisoners, giving back weapons, paying compensation, etc.," said Mr. Yusufzai. "It shows that the government was desperate. Such agreements are meant to buy time, to overcome problems temporarily," he said.

In fact, the Government really made it obvious that it was coming to the agreement from a position of weakness by meeting several of the militants' demands including the release of over a hundred militants who were arrested during operations, days before the actual signing.

"Like a pendulum, the government policy has swung from one extreme to another, from the use of brute military force to what appears to be total capitulation to militants. Never did the government try to intelligently combine the use of force with pursuit of dialogue," said Ismail Khan, writing in The Dawn.

According to Mr. Khan, the clause in the agreement that allows militants to live in the region provided they abide by the laws of the land, is a "major concession" by the government, which had earlier insisted on registration of militants. He predicted that foreigners would neither leave the area nor end their jihad.

Significantly, only the representatives of the militants and the political agent of North Waziristan reportedly put their signatures to the agreement. The top leadership of the militants did not sign it, and were not even present on the occasion. Nor does the agreement bear the signatures of any of the tribal elders of the Utmanzai tribe, which makes up 98 per cent of the area's population. Although the NWFP Governor is the top administrator for FATA, he too has not signed this document. Strangely too, for a deal that the government has touted as "path-breaking," it is yet to release an official text, with whatever details are available coming only through newspaper reports.

Another matter that has caused some concern is that the deal was reportedly facilitated by Maulana Fazlur Rehman, leader of the Jamaat-e-Ulema Islami, known to have close links with the Taliban, giving the agreement a definite pro-Taliban colour.

The implementation of the deal is now dependent on how much weight a 10-member committee, comprising officials of the North Waziristan administration, tribal elders and religious scholars, and tasked with monitoring the agreement and ensuring its implementation, can pull with the militants in the region. Going by the killing of the 70-year-old Rahim Jan last week, the committee has its task cut out.

For its part, the Government has put up a stout defence of the agreement. The Foreign Office spokeswoman denied reports in the press that the Government had signed a deal with the Taliban.

She said that it was a deal between the NWFP government and the "tribal elders" of North Waziristan.

"It is in line with our policy that military operations alone do not provide a solution to extremism," she said, pointing to the failure of the five-year-old "war on terror" to eliminate terrorism in the world. "We need a comprehensive strategy that apart from military action must address the political reasons for terrorism, the grievances of people and other socio-political issues."

The government has also denied reports it was withdrawing troops from the area, and said it had pulled back only 350 soldiers manning the checkpoints it was dismantling.

Cautious U.S. reaction

The United States has reacted cautiously, with the White House saying the deal "did not provide great concern." President George W. Bush said "we are watching this very carefully, obviously," and that while he did not know the details, his understanding was that it would not give a safe haven to terrorists. The British Government has been the only effusive one, with the visiting Deputy Foreign Minister, Kim Howells, calling it a "great step forward" and saying it could be replicated in Afghanistan. But privately, Western diplomats are uneasy about the implications of the deal.

In Afghanistan, which is directly affected by the agreement in North Waziristan, the disquiet is more apparent, with one analyst quoted by AFP as saying it was "absolutely no good for Afghanistan."

In a joint statement by Afghanistan and Pakistan during President Musharraf's visit to Kabul last week, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said he welcomed President Musharraf's strong commitment to help Afghanistan fight terrorism, and "appreciated the recent agreement by the Government of Pakistan in North Waziristan, which forbids, among other things, the cross-border infiltration of Taliban into Afghanistan." But asked for his reaction to the deal at a joint media briefing, President Karzai said "we will wait and see."

In Pakistan, the North Waziristan deal has raised another important question: if the Government can seal an agreement with one group of militants in North Waziristan that are Islamist, why could it not do the same with the secular nationalists in Balochistan? Why did Akbar Khan Bugti have to die in the manner that he did?

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Mr. Bush's delusional world
Pay more attention to mine safety
Ensuring security in the age of global terror
The U.S. and its fading alliance in East Asia
Corrections and clarifications
Wounds that have yet to heal
Backing away from the badlands?
On 9/11 & Gandhi
Malegaon blasts
Congratulations

Copyright © 2006, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu