Instead of continuing with lamentable “blame game” using Pakistan as an easy “scapegoat” for their own failures in this war, the US and its allies must accept the reality that for Pakistan, Afghanistan is an area of fundamental strategic importance
THE Inundated PAKISTAN
Wednesday, September 01, 2010
Wednesday, September 01, 2010
Whatever their content or intent, the WikiLeaks on the US-led war in Afghanistan have indeed served a purpose. The massive “disclosure” of war-related documents comprising a vast array of material ranging from tactical reports from small unit operations to broader strategic analyses of politico-military situation in Afghanistan contains a clear indictment of how, and why, the US has been fighting this endless war.
At first glance, questions do arise on the very authenticity of these reports which have neither been verified independently nor disowned by the official circles in Washington. Those who had the time and spunk to browse through the entire data are left with the mystery of who could have access to such a vast and diverse range of intelligence with enough time and resources to collect, collate and transmit it to its unauthorized recipients without detection.
The image we have is of an unidentified individual or small group working to get a “shocking truth” out to the public. But there is no shocking truth in the leaked Afghan papers. They reveal no new reality. The shocking truth was known to the world all along in excruciating detail. Who would want to detail a truth that is already known, with access to all this documentation and the ability to transmit it unimpeded? Whoever it may be has just made the most powerful case yet for an early end to the inglorious Afghan war.
An Australian computer hacker, Julian Assange is the man behind these leaks. But this is not the first time a US intelligence blooper has come to light. The famous Pentagon Papers commissioned by the Defense Department during the twilight years of Nixon Administration to gather lessons from the Vietnam War were also leaked by a former US military analyst, Daniel Ellsberg to The New York Times and other newspapers is a similar case in point.
Many people worked on the Pentagon Papers, each of whom dealing with part of it with only few of them having access to all of it. Yet, Ellsberg whom Henry Kissinger later described as the most “dangerous man” managed to access and leak the full version of the final product of those top-secret papers. Most striking about the Pentagon Papers was not how much surprising material they contained, but how little.
In the case of the WikiLeaks, despite the enormous detail, what is revealed is also of little surprise and is not far from what most people already knew or believed about the continuing war in Afghanistan which no one, not even the US and its allied NATO governments and their military officials acknowledge has not been going well. The WikiLeaks portrayal of the Afghan war shows the US as badly caught in an unwinnable war.
At first glance, questions do arise on the very authenticity of these reports which have neither been verified independently nor disowned by the official circles in Washington. Those who had the time and spunk to browse through the entire data are left with the mystery of who could have access to such a vast and diverse range of intelligence with enough time and resources to collect, collate and transmit it to its unauthorized recipients without detection.
The image we have is of an unidentified individual or small group working to get a “shocking truth” out to the public. But there is no shocking truth in the leaked Afghan papers. They reveal no new reality. The shocking truth was known to the world all along in excruciating detail. Who would want to detail a truth that is already known, with access to all this documentation and the ability to transmit it unimpeded? Whoever it may be has just made the most powerful case yet for an early end to the inglorious Afghan war.
An Australian computer hacker, Julian Assange is the man behind these leaks. But this is not the first time a US intelligence blooper has come to light. The famous Pentagon Papers commissioned by the Defense Department during the twilight years of Nixon Administration to gather lessons from the Vietnam War were also leaked by a former US military analyst, Daniel Ellsberg to The New York Times and other newspapers is a similar case in point.
Many people worked on the Pentagon Papers, each of whom dealing with part of it with only few of them having access to all of it. Yet, Ellsberg whom Henry Kissinger later described as the most “dangerous man” managed to access and leak the full version of the final product of those top-secret papers. Most striking about the Pentagon Papers was not how much surprising material they contained, but how little.
In the case of the WikiLeaks, despite the enormous detail, what is revealed is also of little surprise and is not far from what most people already knew or believed about the continuing war in Afghanistan which no one, not even the US and its allied NATO governments and their military officials acknowledge has not been going well. The WikiLeaks portrayal of the Afghan war shows the US as badly caught in an unwinnable war.
This piece basically aims at addressing two burning issues of today.
First is the issue of attack on Hamid Mir, a renowned journalist and anchorperson. This attack, indubitably, is condemnable as freedom of speech is the right of every citizen of a state. But, the other side of the coin depicts a sad tale of blackmailing and maligning the state institutions. The content aired by Geo TV for almost eight hours on the day of attack is not, at all, up to the ethics of journalism. However, the unfolding of events has landed the said channel at the mercy of Pemra. To quell the apprehensions of curbs on media organizations, it must be duly ensured that the supremacy of law is maintained and no curbs on media are imposed on the pretext of this sad incident. Everyone should remember that no individual or institution is above the law.
The second issue is the always-moaned belatedness of FPSC.
Federal Public Service Commission (FPSC), the body assigned the task of recruiting new blood for country's bureaucracy, hardly comes out of hibernation. They seldom devise any robust policies to address, in time, the issues faced by those who aspire to join the country's bureaucratic fraternity. One instance of such ineptness is the announcement of Screening Test which was announced to be conducted for CSS-2014 in order to sift the most appropriate candidates for the written part. But, it was prorogued for CSS-2015 exam. But, till today, the matter is still in the doldrums as no official notification in this regard has been issued yet.
There is a widespread confusion among the aspirants regarding the actual status of the Test and, if conducted, the qualifications thereto. Even the method to calculate an aspirant's hasn't been announced till today. Will it be counted from the cutoff date of Screening Test or that of written exam. However, ground realities suggest that if the former will be the case, then thousands of talented and rightfully deserving candidates will be drained away due to laxity — or more truly indifference and apathy — of the FPSC. Moreover, syllabus and paper pattern of Screening Test — if it is to be conducted — is still unknown.
Aspirants have a number of such confusions which are to be addressed at the earliest to keep the cream of the country attracted towards the charm of joining the prestigious Civil Services of Pakistan.
There is no denying the fact that preparing for CSS exam is not a matter of days or weeks. One wonders that how on earth the FPSC can assume that a span of only a few days shall be sufficient to prepare for the exam. No one would disagree that months of meticulous study are inevitable to be able to take up the challenge. CSS results of the recent years provide ample proof that the monkey business on part of the Commission has caused this nation the loss of numerous fertile minds.
The FPSC should, at the least, be as vibrant and active as the Punjab Public Service Commission (PPSC) which keeps students informed and updated all the time.
So, it is prayed to the Prime Minister of Pakistan to please take immediate steps to 'resurrect' the FPSC and make it inanimate like all Public Service Commissions in the region. It is also the direst need of the hour that FPSC comes up with a new vision and prudent, executable policies if Pakistan is to compete globally in terms of brilliant minds. The traditional gimmicks won't work in this modern world of information technology.
It is often said that CSS is a test of one's intelligence, capabilities and talent as it helps brilliant minds in climbing up to the top rung of the success ladder. But, is it really so? This is the moot point, especially in the wake of CSS-2014 written part result, which has baffled numerous aspirants.
The CSS exam continues to be a hard nut to crack. Though the pass percentage has slightly improved, yet the quality of the recruits is still a matter of grave concern.
As per details as many as 24640 candidates registered for CSS-2014 exam but 13170 actually took it, and only 439 — merely 3.3 per cent — could get through. But, are all these 439 successful candidates blessed with the best qualities of head and heart? Given the overall quality of officers recruited in recent years, the answer is an unequivocal NO.
Then, what is the best way forward?
Through the pages of Jahangir's World Times, we have been incessantly urging the FPSC to take radical steps to improve the state of affairs. We also presented a prudential reform package aimed at ameliorating the whole exam process.
Every year thousands of aspirants with dreams of a brighter future in their eyes take the CSS exam. A glittering career, a promising future and the respect as well as authority the CSS offers, allures our educated youth to chance their arm. Given this, a large number of non-serious people also enter the arena. But, in CSS 2014, out of all the registered candidates, 11470 didn't bother to appear in the exam. This obligates the FPSC to put a full stop to this practice because hefty amounts are spent on making exam arrangements for such a huge number of candidates. All applicants would definitely take the exam if the submission of challan form is counted as one attempt.
Another effective step could be a test aimed at screening out the non-serious applicants — the FPSC had announced a Screening Test, yet the process is in the doldrums till this day. Such a test, on one hand, will bring only talented students to the fore, and on the other, the workload of examination staff will also be eased. It will also help in reducing paper-checking time and curbing expenses of circulating answer sheets and finalising results.
Another alarming fact is that despite the number of foreign-qualified students as well as those from Pakistan's most prestigious institutions at the rise, no substantial improvement in the quality of officers has been seen yet.
Candidly speaking, there are two basic reasons behind this crisis.
First, it is the exam system that 'exhorts' rote learning. Memorizing only a few questions and then reproducing them on paper is considered sufficient to pass the exam. This thinking must be discouraged. Owing to the diversity of knowledge required to get through it, the Screening Test would be the most effective tool in this regard as well.
Second — and probably more serious — is the issue with the Psychological Assessment of the candidates. There are reservations about those who are assigned the task to assess the personalities of the candidates. Unfortunately, their laxity and slackness have been responsible for sending many such officers to the civil service fraternity who wouldn't have otherwise qualified. For instance, police investigation into the death of Nabiha Chaudhry, a female under-training CSP officer, revealed that she committed suicide under extreme mental stress. Another PSP officer in Sargodha murdered a 23-year-old youth following a minor argument over parking. This makes inevitable the introduction of psychological assessment process as adopted by the ISSB to recruit officers for Pakistan Army.
No one can deny the fact that the Civil Service of Pakistan is in a downward spiral. Unless those at the helm show seriousness and sincerity, the melioration of the civil structure will remain a distant dream.
The CSS exam continues to be a hard nut to crack. Though the pass percentage has slightly improved, yet the quality of the recruits is still a matter of grave concern.
As per details as many as 24640 candidates registered for CSS-2014 exam but 13170 actually took it, and only 439 — merely 3.3 per cent — could get through. But, are all these 439 successful candidates blessed with the best qualities of head and heart? Given the overall quality of officers recruited in recent years, the answer is an unequivocal NO.
Then, what is the best way forward?
Through the pages of Jahangir's World Times, we have been incessantly urging the FPSC to take radical steps to improve the state of affairs. We also presented a prudential reform package aimed at ameliorating the whole exam process.
Every year thousands of aspirants with dreams of a brighter future in their eyes take the CSS exam. A glittering career, a promising future and the respect as well as authority the CSS offers, allures our educated youth to chance their arm. Given this, a large number of non-serious people also enter the arena. But, in CSS 2014, out of all the registered candidates, 11470 didn't bother to appear in the exam. This obligates the FPSC to put a full stop to this practice because hefty amounts are spent on making exam arrangements for such a huge number of candidates. All applicants would definitely take the exam if the submission of challan form is counted as one attempt.
Another effective step could be a test aimed at screening out the non-serious applicants — the FPSC had announced a Screening Test, yet the process is in the doldrums till this day. Such a test, on one hand, will bring only talented students to the fore, and on the other, the workload of examination staff will also be eased. It will also help in reducing paper-checking time and curbing expenses of circulating answer sheets and finalising results.
Another alarming fact is that despite the number of foreign-qualified students as well as those from Pakistan's most prestigious institutions at the rise, no substantial improvement in the quality of officers has been seen yet.
Candidly speaking, there are two basic reasons behind this crisis.
First, it is the exam system that 'exhorts' rote learning. Memorizing only a few questions and then reproducing them on paper is considered sufficient to pass the exam. This thinking must be discouraged. Owing to the diversity of knowledge required to get through it, the Screening Test would be the most effective tool in this regard as well.
Second — and probably more serious — is the issue with the Psychological Assessment of the candidates. There are reservations about those who are assigned the task to assess the personalities of the candidates. Unfortunately, their laxity and slackness have been responsible for sending many such officers to the civil service fraternity who wouldn't have otherwise qualified. For instance, police investigation into the death of Nabiha Chaudhry, a female under-training CSP officer, revealed that she committed suicide under extreme mental stress. Another PSP officer in Sargodha murdered a 23-year-old youth following a minor argument over parking. This makes inevitable the introduction of psychological assessment process as adopted by the ISSB to recruit officers for Pakistan Army.
No one can deny the fact that the Civil Service of Pakistan is in a downward spiral. Unless those at the helm show seriousness and sincerity, the melioration of the civil structure will remain a distant dream.
The leaked reports, mostly written by soldiers and petty intelligence officers make no new revelation, except that they provide graphic accounts of hundreds of unreported incidents involving indiscriminate and at times “accidental” killing of innocent civilians by the coalition forces in Afghanistan.
The reports also contain detailed descriptions of raids carried out by a secretive US “black” special operations unit called Task Force 373 against what US officials considered “high-value insurgent and terrorist” targets. Actual victims in these secret operations were invariably non-belligerent civilians including small children.
The sum total of this whole sordid narrative is a verdict on the very legality and morality of this war. It is presented as an immoral, wicked war based on lies and deceit. This assessment is not different from a clear perception already discernible all over the world that it was a “wrong” war to start. Waged as global “war on terror” it has only been a "semantic, strategic and legal perversion.” In the absence of a globally acceptable definition of terrorism, it is only a method of combat. One doesn’t wage a war against a “method” of combat without an identifiable enemy to fight against.
An increasing number of security experts, politicians, and policy organizations consider the war on terror a counterproductive military process which has not only alienated the US globally but is also fueling a pro-terrorist sentiment and helping terrorist recruitment. Even the American media now feels that this decision was a big mistake. From being a righteous war when it started, the US war on terror is no longer considered a righteous war. It is considered a “wrong war” that has not gone beyond retribution and retaliation. No wonder, the message from the WikiLeaks is that the Afghan war is a “wicked” problem that must come to an end sooner rather than later.
According to a study by a group of academics at the New York University last year, the idea of “wicked” problems, first articulated in the 1970s as a concept, is applicable to the Afghan conflict. This concept denotes problems characterised by social complexity, a large number and diversity of players, a high degree of fragmentation, and contested and multiple forms of causality. Different stakeholders in a conflict beset by wicked problems fail to arrive at a common definition of the problem at hand, often because they disagree on the cause of the problem.”
According to this study, the ongoing forms of conflict in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan are characterised by decades of failed US policy, and are classic examples of wicked problems.
The claim that fixing the security situation in South Asia is the primary need of this region to address its other pressing problems is questioned by those who believe that poverty and economic underdevelopment is the primary form of violence and deprivation that needs to be redressed for the wellbeing of this region.
In the context of South Asia, any US policies that create strategic imbalances in the region and fuel an arms race between the two nuclear-capable neighbours with an escalatory effect on their military budgets and arsenals are also no service to the peoples of the two countries. Wicked problems require holistic analyses that do not ignore the possible effects of changes to other elements in the system, rather than strictly linear forms of problem-solving.
Let’s step back and look at the Afghan conflict dispassionately.
The sum total of this whole sordid narrative is a verdict on the very legality and morality of this war. It is presented as an immoral, wicked war based on lies and deceit. This assessment is not different from a clear perception already discernible all over the world that it was a “wrong” war to start. Waged as global “war on terror” it has only been a "semantic, strategic and legal perversion.” In the absence of a globally acceptable definition of terrorism, it is only a method of combat. One doesn’t wage a war against a “method” of combat without an identifiable enemy to fight against.
An increasing number of security experts, politicians, and policy organizations consider the war on terror a counterproductive military process which has not only alienated the US globally but is also fueling a pro-terrorist sentiment and helping terrorist recruitment. Even the American media now feels that this decision was a big mistake. From being a righteous war when it started, the US war on terror is no longer considered a righteous war. It is considered a “wrong war” that has not gone beyond retribution and retaliation. No wonder, the message from the WikiLeaks is that the Afghan war is a “wicked” problem that must come to an end sooner rather than later.
According to a study by a group of academics at the New York University last year, the idea of “wicked” problems, first articulated in the 1970s as a concept, is applicable to the Afghan conflict. This concept denotes problems characterised by social complexity, a large number and diversity of players, a high degree of fragmentation, and contested and multiple forms of causality. Different stakeholders in a conflict beset by wicked problems fail to arrive at a common definition of the problem at hand, often because they disagree on the cause of the problem.”
According to this study, the ongoing forms of conflict in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan are characterised by decades of failed US policy, and are classic examples of wicked problems.
The claim that fixing the security situation in South Asia is the primary need of this region to address its other pressing problems is questioned by those who believe that poverty and economic underdevelopment is the primary form of violence and deprivation that needs to be redressed for the wellbeing of this region.
In the context of South Asia, any US policies that create strategic imbalances in the region and fuel an arms race between the two nuclear-capable neighbours with an escalatory effect on their military budgets and arsenals are also no service to the peoples of the two countries. Wicked problems require holistic analyses that do not ignore the possible effects of changes to other elements in the system, rather than strictly linear forms of problem-solving.
Let’s step back and look at the Afghan conflict dispassionately.
The US forced the Taliban from power. It never defeated the Taliban nor did it make a serious effort to do so, as that would require massive resources that it doesn’t have. It enlisted its NATO allies in an international coalition to fight this war which is in its tenth year and still remains far from being conclusive.
It has been one of the costliest wars that has lasted for too long, at least longer than the Second World War. No wonder, the people in the US and Europe, are already sick of this conflict, and would want their troops back without delay.
President Obama himself has been saying that the situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating. In response to a question last year in his interview to The New York Times, when asked if the US was winning the war in Afghanistan, he replied flatly, “No” also indicating that Washington might be opening the door for cooperation with moderate elements among the Taliban. White House officials are also now talking about seeking an "acceptable end state" in Afghanistan, rather than victory.
Ironically, despite his pr-election slogans of “America we are better than those last eight years” and promises of “making the difference in America’s policies and in the lives of Americans as well as those of the people of the world”, President Obama still remains snarled in the Bush legacy and instead of restoring what he considered the “lost sense of common purpose” has only been escalating the Afghanistan folly. As mid-term elections approach, the American people now have access, thanks to WikiLeaks, to the bleak realities of the Afghan war including unreported civilian casualties and costly incidents of allied troops firing on each other.
Whatever the preferred end-goals, durable peace in Afghanistan will remain elusive without heeding to Pakistan’s legitimate security concerns in the region. Pakistan has already staked everything in supporting this war and is constantly paying a heavy price in terms of protracted violence, massive displacement, trade and production slowdown, export stagnation, investor hesitation, and worsening law and order situation. In return, America’s unrelenting indifference to its legitimate interests and sensitivities is beyond comprehension.
It is important that Pakistan as a partner and an ally is treated with dignity and sovereign equality. A country cannot be treated both as a target and a partner while fighting a common enemy. Coercive and at times, accusatory and slanderous approach towards Pakistan and its armed forces and security agencies is both reprehensible and counterproductive.
Instead of continuing with lamentable “blame game” using Pakistan as an easy “scapegoat” for their own failures in this war, the US and its allies must accept the reality that for Pakistan, Afghanistan is an area of fundamental strategic importance. If Soviet presence in Cuba almost triggered a nuclear war in the 60s, India’s continued ascendancy in Afghanistan will remain a danger of no less gravity to the already volatile security environment of this ‘nuclearized’ region.
President Obama himself has been saying that the situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating. In response to a question last year in his interview to The New York Times, when asked if the US was winning the war in Afghanistan, he replied flatly, “No” also indicating that Washington might be opening the door for cooperation with moderate elements among the Taliban. White House officials are also now talking about seeking an "acceptable end state" in Afghanistan, rather than victory.
Ironically, despite his pr-election slogans of “America we are better than those last eight years” and promises of “making the difference in America’s policies and in the lives of Americans as well as those of the people of the world”, President Obama still remains snarled in the Bush legacy and instead of restoring what he considered the “lost sense of common purpose” has only been escalating the Afghanistan folly. As mid-term elections approach, the American people now have access, thanks to WikiLeaks, to the bleak realities of the Afghan war including unreported civilian casualties and costly incidents of allied troops firing on each other.
Whatever the preferred end-goals, durable peace in Afghanistan will remain elusive without heeding to Pakistan’s legitimate security concerns in the region. Pakistan has already staked everything in supporting this war and is constantly paying a heavy price in terms of protracted violence, massive displacement, trade and production slowdown, export stagnation, investor hesitation, and worsening law and order situation. In return, America’s unrelenting indifference to its legitimate interests and sensitivities is beyond comprehension.
It is important that Pakistan as a partner and an ally is treated with dignity and sovereign equality. A country cannot be treated both as a target and a partner while fighting a common enemy. Coercive and at times, accusatory and slanderous approach towards Pakistan and its armed forces and security agencies is both reprehensible and counterproductive.
Instead of continuing with lamentable “blame game” using Pakistan as an easy “scapegoat” for their own failures in this war, the US and its allies must accept the reality that for Pakistan, Afghanistan is an area of fundamental strategic importance. If Soviet presence in Cuba almost triggered a nuclear war in the 60s, India’s continued ascendancy in Afghanistan will remain a danger of no less gravity to the already volatile security environment of this ‘nuclearized’ region.
No comments:
Post a Comment