Interview of Lt General Moin Uddin
Haider, October 2015
There has been a decline in terrorist
attacks since Operation Zarb-e-Azb began in June 2014. However, terrorists
still manage to pull off a major strike every now and then, the Badaber attack
being the latest example. What does it signify?
It signifies that the cancer of terrorism has spread far and wide over
the last 30-35 years. FATA has been identified as an epicentre of terrorism. Militants have
been defeated in Swat. And after South Waziristan, an operation is underway in
North Waziristan. Terrorists are on the run. Their operational areas and
sanctuaries – used for training, manufacturing improvised explosive devices
(IEDs) and planning terrorist activities – have been taken away from them. They
have melted into the cities and areas near the Pak-Afghan border. However,
their sleeper cells continue to exist, and they can still play havoc. It will
take time to fully eradicate them. The key [to this problem] is the army’s
presence in FATA and continued pressure on militants, including operations
against them in the cities.
While one aspect of this fight is being taken care of by the army, the
challenge of defeating the extremist mindset is there. Extremists claim that
they are fighting for a noble cause and exploiting the sacred name of Islam.
But their aim is to destabilise Pakistan and for personal gains, which must be
exposed. To defeat the extremist mindset, we need to reform the education
system, improve governance and ensure quick and cheap justice. If people are
disillusioned, they become easy prey to extremist ideologies.
Which areas need urgent attention in
the war on terror?
Firstly, internally displaced persons IDPs call for our urgent
attention. They need to be made stakeholders in the peace process. There’s a
need to reconstruct their destroyed homes and infrastructure.
Secondly, the mistakes of the Swat operation should not be repeated. The
provincial administration, the police and the judges failed to fill the vacuum
after the military ousted the militants from Swat. This should not be repeated
in FATA. The government must deploy the best human resources there and move
fast to integrate FATA into Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.
Thirdly, we need to restore the sanctity of the Pak-Afghan border, which
was destroyed after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Before the Soviet
invasion, there was a system of passes, but for the last 30-35 years there have
hardly been any checks. The Afghan side does not agree to fencing the border
because they believe it will make the Durand Line permanent. No Afghan
government has recognised the Durand Line as an international border. But such
measures must be taken. How can you defeat terrorism without border
surveillance and control? Even the Badaber attackers sneaked into Pakistan from
Afghanistan.
How do you view the military
strategy?
The army is learning from experience, and from its shortcomings and
mistakes. It has improved since the South Waziristan days, when the
casualty rate was high. But now all battalions sent to the tribal areas are
trained in mountain and guerrilla warfare. As a result, the casualty rate is
down and they are proving to be more effective.
Intelligence gathering is another challenge. If you are not forewarned,
you can not be forearmed. Therefore, informers need to be infiltrated into
terror groups. Sometimes intelligence is timely, at other times not. But
occasionally despite information, the 24/7 security is relaxed. We still need
to learn lessons from incidents like Badaber.
Certain quarters allege that the army
operation is not across the board. For instance, Indians accuse Pakistan of not
targeting groups like the Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (LeT).
In my experience the LeT does not break any Pakistani law. It’s a
Kashmir-centric group, which is occasionally accused of carrying on activities
beyond the disputed territory – that is inside India. It is a serious matter as
it can bring two nuclear-armed countries to war. But for us the question is,
why open another front when the group is not threatening us?
After the UN Security Council resolutions in 2002, the LeT transformed
itself into Jamaat-ud-Dawaa (JUD), which focuses on social work. But the Mumbai
attack created complications. We do not think Hafiz Saeed was involved in the
attack. However, sooner or later, Pakistan needs to ban all private armies. But
right now, the focus should be only on those challenging the writ of the state
and attacking our armed forces.
Is there a fear of an extremist
mindset prevailing within certain sections of the armed forces?
Such people can exist at various levels. For example, Javed Nasir, who
was appointed as ISI chief by Nawaz Sharif, had an extremist mindset. We hear
that he sent militants even to a friendly country. But during the Musharraf
era, such elements were removed. However, even before Musharraf, the army as an
institution kept an eye on such elements. It’s not possible for anyone to
deviate from the army’s stated policy. Several officials were court-martialled
for extremist tendencies. The army always takes action against such elements,
regardless of sect or school of thought.
How do you view the role of the
civilian side in this war?
After [the formulation of the] National Action Plan, coordination among
the law enforcement agencies has improved. The provincial
counter-terrorism departments are functioning. However, the central secretariat
has not been established yet, because of lack of resources, but that isn’t the
only issue. Politicians give the impression that the operation is only the
army’s concern and not their responsibility. They are interested mostly in
money-making ventures. They are least bothered about reforms in the police
force, which suffers on account of political interference and corruption. There
is nepotism even in its recruitment. In Sindh, many policemen have been
arrested for their involvement in crime and extortion. A list of 3,400
policemen involved in crime has been made public.
Also, no one is willing to take ideological ownership of the war against
extremism. The problem of a multi-tier education system, which is dividing
society, is not on the radar of the political parties and neither are judicial
reforms on their agenda.
As a consequence of the high fees of lawyers and a slow judicial
process, cases keep dragging on. Also, politicians do not want local bodies – a
must for solving the day-to-day problems of citizens and providing them basic
amenities.
Many term Musharraf’s decision to join
the US-led war on terror an unwise one. Why?
At that time, there was a military government in place and one man could
take a decision. However, even if there was a democratic government, a similar
decision would have been taken as the United States was in a rage. It had
pulled out a sword to salvage its honour after the 9/11 attacks. “Are you with
us or with terrorism?” was the kind of question being asked. It was a difficult
situation. Americans had no problem dropping bombs this or that side of the Durand
Line. For them it was an emotional time, but it also served the objectives of
the neo-cons – that of bringing boots on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Not just Musharraf, any other leader would have made a similar decision.
Are you hopeful that Pakistan will
prevail in this war?
Frankly speaking, a few years ago it seemed that the militants could
knock and enter any door. We were on the defensive. But now the initiative is
with the armed forces. And it is the militants who are on the run. They can
still resort to a fleeting attack as they did on Badaber, but we are on the
right course. The focus of this operation now is also on corruption money,
which is being used in terrorism. Whether the politicians like it or not, the
crackdown on corruption enjoys overwhelming public support.
This interview was
originally published in Newsline’s October 2015 issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment