Pakistan: PM’s in charge here?

There’s been many a contradiction on the path to these negotiations. The four-member-committee initiative to start with; an anti-climax of sorts after week-long sabre rattling by the ruling party, including the prime minister. Then its membership; strictly right-wing Taliban sympathisers, with no mention of minorities that have suffered and lost the most. And then the government’s commitment to talking, not fighting, it out, even as incidents of violence increased as the negotiations progressed, then stumbled, and resumed. And now this ceasefire, and yet more symbolic militancy, this time groups other than the ones we’re talking to claiming responsibility. But the prize came Wednesday evening, when the PM hinted results were near, and invited both teams for discussions just as security officials warned of terrorist attacks on Islamabad’s most sensitive buildings.

But despite these ambiguities, and repeated clarifications from the interior minister, one thing is crystal clear. The government, not the military, is in lead and clearly calling the shots. And for all the pains the prime minister has taken to stress “same page” solidarity – a couple of times from as far away as Turkey – it is not as if there have not been clear signs of friction. Newspapers are no strangers to inside sources, and these pages, along with numerous other publications, have repeatedly reported about how angry the army high command is. They have been losing men and material all the time this debate about sharia and Taliban has riveted mainstream media, all because the government accorded legitimacy to an otherwise recognised enemy of state, responsible for tens of thousands of deaths, not to mention repeated beheadings of sectarian minorities and military personnel. But, to its credit, the army has not allowed any differences to come to the fore. Even in the most private exchanges, military personnel have stressed their subservience to the political democratic system. And even if most are not convinced of its leaning, there is not so much as mention of refusing to play Islamabad’s talks game.

But not crossing the line is one thing, and not losing sight of the prime objective is quite another. Nawaz’s sharia compliance, his conservative posture, and the desire for a peaceful outcome may be the epitome of sincerity (or not), but such ideals stop well short of spelling out clear policy objectives. Is cessation of hostilities the ideal N is aiming at, or is it establishing writ of state, and are both mutually exclusive in his understanding? And why doesn’t he address foreign hands, who have as little liking for sharia particulars as for Pakistan’s national interest? Also, at what stage will the government enlighten Pakistanis about what is to be done about those, from within the Taliban, who have innocent blood on their hands? Granted, the military has played the government’s game so far. But perhaps it’s best if the prime minister does not alienate the institution too much, to the point that willing partners have problems with who’s in charge here.