The recent tensions between Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban might prompt some critics to brand the fanatical outfit ruling Kabul as an ungrateful lot, but they should also serve as a reminder to those who believe in interfering in the internal affairs of other countries and love to bankroll proxies to achieve their diplomatic and political goals. It should teach them that such an approach is counterproductive and could turn out to be catastrophic for states and their territorial integrity.
The Afghan Taliban have indeed turned their back on their benefactors, hobnobbing with those who believe in hatching conspiracies against the Islamic Republic. It is also correct to say that Pakistan was among the three countries during the 1990s that recognised the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. It is also a reality that after the takeover of Kabul by the militant outfit, Islamabad sprang into action in an attempt to convince the world that the turban-wearing mullahs controlling large swathes of Afghan territory should be recognised as the legitimate rulers of the war-torn state.
One could argue that the regime in Kabul did not reciprocate these goodwill gestures. Rather, they threw their support behind the terrorists of the defunct Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, who unleashed a reign of terror in several parts of the Islamic Republic. At times, the theocratic government of Afghanistan pressured Pakistan into sitting with the extremists of TTP, who then tried to dictate their terms and conditions to the ruling elite of the Islamic Republic.
But reconciliatory efforts did not yield any results. On the contrary, Pakistan witnessed a phenomenal surge in terrorist attacks over the years, forcing Islamabad to carry out cross-border military strikes to target the hideouts of militants. No amount of persuasion could convince the Afghan Taliban to stop their soil from being used against their former patron. Delegations of scholars were sent to Kabul to persuade them, but it was clear that the theocratic rulers of the war-torn state were not ready to launch any crackdown against their ideological brothers.
This culminated in recent tensions that seemed to be pushing the two countries towards the brink of a full-fledged conflict, which has been avoided for now, but the propaganda war unleashed in the aftermath of the border skirmishes remains unabated. Meanwhile, a sense of deep mistrust is haunting millions of people living in the two countries who fear any miscalculation could escalate into a bloody conflict at any time in the future.
If Islamabad tries to settle scores through military might, the Afghan Taliban would throw more vigorous support behind the TTP, which would create chaos in the country, targeting not only law enforcers but ordinary people as well
Beyond the tensions and border skirmishes are the critics who are pondering over the consequences that a state has to face for interfering in the internal affairs of another country or bankrolling proxies in the name of religion, nation or ideology. These critics point out the flawed policy of the Pakistani state that has been followed over the decades. They accuse Z. A. Bhutto of orchestrating this policy and lambast dictator Zia for taking it to uncontrolled heights. These observers believe that the current problems of the Pakistani state stem from that policy, which destabilised Afghanistan during the 1970s and 1980s at the behest of Middle Eastern states and Western powers that abandoned the Land of the Pure after 1988, with the US slapping Islamabad with sanctions.
They assert that it is not only the Pakistani state that suffered for its interference in other states’ affairs, but other countries also had to pay a heavy price for bolstering proxies and non-state actors. For instance, Egypt suffered a humiliating defeat in Yemen after it decided to support one of the belligerent groups in that Arab country. Libya not only tried to destabilise Arab states by throwing support behind nationalists, but also spread its tentacles to parts of Africa. Today, it is a failed state, with several parts of the country witnessing the rule of gangsters and smugglers. Saddam Hussein’s Iraq did not escape this fate either, with his countrymen sending him to the gallows.
The same could be said about Syria, which not only collaborated with different groups in Arab states but also militarily intervened in Lebanon, leaving catastrophic impacts on its territorial integrity in the long run. Today, the country is in ruins, with more than 11 million people facing displacement. The Arab country also lost more than 150 billion dollars because of the destruction caused by the civil war. However, the seeds of this destruction had been sown in the flawed state policy of interference that Syria followed for decades.
Saudi Arabia also had to face the wrath of militant and extremist groups after throwing its support behind Kuwait during the first Gulf War. After 9/11, extremist groups attempted to harm the stability of the country, prompting the current rulers to revisit their policy of supporting conservative clerics all over the world. Sanity prevailed, and the ruling elite decided to modernise their society, coming up with an enlightened interpretation of religion that talks about coexistence, tolerance and universal brotherhood.
Does this all have any lessons for the Islamic Republic? Are we ready to learn anything from our past mistakes? Do we have a desire to contain retrogressive elements of our society? Is there any willingness on the part of the ruling class to revisit its disastrous policy that created these monsters in the first place? These are some of the questions we need to ponder over.
Conflicts, wars and skirmishes are no solution. If Islamabad tries to settle scores through military might, the Afghan Taliban would throw more vigorous support behind the TTP, which would create chaos in the country, targeting not only law enforcers but ordinary people as well. This would create an environment of fear, dealing a severe blow to the faltering economy that is already reeling under the effects of May’s conflict with India. Kabul could also collaborate with New Delhi to bleed Pakistan. Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the UAE, which have their own vested interests, may not be able to offer Pakistan much assistance in such a situation.
Therefore, Pakistan must work with the international community to hold fair and transparent elections in Afghanistan and the restoration of democratic freedoms. It should also convince countries like Russia and China that the conservative interpretation the Afghan Taliban believe in could influence disgruntled Muslim populations living in Russia and China. Central Asian states that took years to turn the tide against Muslim extremists, partly backed by the Taliban in the past, should also be approached to convince them that such a regime in the region could ignite extremist flames in the landlocked region. India would also be compelled to understand the rationality of supporting such a Pakistani approach.
The US, EU and international bodies should also be contacted for fair elections. The Afghan Taliban might boast about their popularity among the masses. Still, no Afghan would vote for these obscurantists who believe in confining women to four walls of the home, shutting down colleges and universities for them, depriving them of their livelihoods and discriminating against ethnic and religious minorities.
The Afghan diaspora would also back democratic freedoms and basic human rights, including transparent elections in their country. Only the demand for fair elections could help Pakistan, and any transparent polls in the war-torn country would ensure the speedy exit of the turban-wearing mullahs from the power corridors of Kabul. Therefore, instead of any conflict, Islamabad should seek democratic means to dislodge the monsters that it helped to create.