With the victory of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML) and the election of Nawaz Sharif for an unprecedented third term as prime minister in May 2013, it seemed as though Pakistan was about to usher in a new era. Sharif had been prime minister in the 1990s, but he was famously ousted in a 1999 coup d’etat, led by the military under General Musharraf, and exiled to Saudi Arabia.
At the time of the May elections, many people thought that Sharif might have learned from his past mistakes and would now be able to take Pakistan in a new direction. In the 1990s Sharif was strongly supportive of Western capitalism, pushing Pakistan through a series of rapid privatization and industrialization reforms. Negotiating an extensive series of trade agreements, he attempted to strengthen ties with the rest of the world. His 1998 nuclear test, however, dealt a heavy blow to Pakistan’s international relationships. Most were largely severed, and Pakistan’s economy faltered as the nation seemed poised on the brink of war with India.
After settling a bilateral agreement with India aimed at boosting good will and preventing a nuclear arms race, Sharif watched helplessly as Pakistan’s army destroyed his efforts in 1999 by instigating war with India in the Kargil district of Kashmir. Sharif's government later became one of three countries to recognize the Taliban government in Afghanistan, even as it worked to create a far-reaching anti-terrorism act.
The litmus test now for Pakistan’s new government is its response to the domestic terrorism which wracks the country. During the May elections, Sharif's PML rallies were conspicuously not targeted by extremist attacks, raising fears that Sharif might prove soft in dealing with Islamist militant organizations, whether the Taliban or the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi. Little progress seems to have been made at recent talks between Pakistan’s army chief, Asfaq Parvez Kayani, who advocates tough action against the Taliban, and the president-elect on dealing with militant Islamists bent on dismantling the state.
The Pakistani Taliban has failed repeatedly to engage in peace talks with the Pakistani government. Nevertheless Sharif insists that his government should remain open to negotiations, which can be viewed as nothing more than an appeasement for the right-wing support he has received from Punjab. Despite more than 60 deaths this month, the Pakistani government has been incredibly lax in protecting minority Shi’ite Muslims from terrorist attacks that target innocent bystanders. Sharif has declared his desire to end Pakistan’s involvement in the U.S.-led “war on terror” numerous times. While some thought he might eventually side with the army and continue to fight jihadists, this has not occurred. The Taliban and other terrorist groups remain a direct threat to the Pakistani state, and Sharif’s leniency endangers the progress of democracy in the region.
Sharif has also caused continuing strain in Indo-Pakistani relations. Since the 2008 Mumbai attacks, perpetrated by Pakistan-based militant groups, most Indians have grown highly critical of Pakistan’s lenient policies on terrorism. Sharif has done nothing to help improve public opinion in India. He has failed to curb the military’s inordinate influence and to take steps that would prevent it from instigating another conflict. The Express Tribune has reported that the military has “adopted a ‘new concept of war fighting’ aimed at preempting India’s ‘Cold Start Doctrine’.” By allowing the military to dictate who the state’s “enemy” is, Sharif is displaying a worrisome lack of control.
Pakistan is drifting further into volatile territory. Even though the United States claims that Pakistan has played a key role in facilitating its negotiations with the Afghan Taliban, Pakistan remains lackadaisical in its approach to the terrorist menace threatening to undo the nation. Many of those who voted for Sharif believed they were voting for a man whose political judgment had matured during exile. Instead, they find they have elected someone who is only perpetuating the problem.
Akshan De Alwis is a senior at Noble and Greenough School and teaches democracy and good governance practices to groups of young people in Burma.
Photo: Colin Cookman (cc).
a global affairs media network
Nawaz Sharif’s Inability to Control Pakistan’s Extremists
August 22, 2013
With the victory of the Pakistan Muslim League (PML) and the election of Nawaz Sharif for an unprecedented third term as prime minister in May 2013, it seemed as though Pakistan was about to usher in a new era. Sharif had been prime minister in the 1990s, but he was famously ousted in a 1999 coup d’etat, led by the military under General Musharraf, and exiled to Saudi Arabia.
At the time of the May elections, many people thought that Sharif might have learned from his past mistakes and would now be able to take Pakistan in a new direction. In the 1990s Sharif was strongly supportive of Western capitalism, pushing Pakistan through a series of rapid privatization and industrialization reforms. Negotiating an extensive series of trade agreements, he attempted to strengthen ties with the rest of the world. His 1998 nuclear test, however, dealt a heavy blow to Pakistan’s international relationships. Most were largely severed, and Pakistan’s economy faltered as the nation seemed poised on the brink of war with India.
After settling a bilateral agreement with India aimed at boosting good will and preventing a nuclear arms race, Sharif watched helplessly as Pakistan’s army destroyed his efforts in 1999 by instigating war with India in the Kargil district of Kashmir. Sharif's government later became one of three countries to recognize the Taliban government in Afghanistan, even as it worked to create a far-reaching anti-terrorism act.
The litmus test now for Pakistan’s new government is its response to the domestic terrorism which wracks the country. During the May elections, Sharif's PML rallies were conspicuously not targeted by extremist attacks, raising fears that Sharif might prove soft in dealing with Islamist militant organizations, whether the Taliban or the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi. Little progress seems to have been made at recent talks between Pakistan’s army chief, Asfaq Parvez Kayani, who advocates tough action against the Taliban, and the president-elect on dealing with militant Islamists bent on dismantling the state.
The Pakistani Taliban has failed repeatedly to engage in peace talks with the Pakistani government. Nevertheless Sharif insists that his government should remain open to negotiations, which can be viewed as nothing more than an appeasement for the right-wing support he has received from Punjab. Despite more than 60 deaths this month, the Pakistani government has been incredibly lax in protecting minority Shi’ite Muslims from terrorist attacks that target innocent bystanders. Sharif has declared his desire to end Pakistan’s involvement in the U.S.-led “war on terror” numerous times. While some thought he might eventually side with the army and continue to fight jihadists, this has not occurred. The Taliban and other terrorist groups remain a direct threat to the Pakistani state, and Sharif’s leniency endangers the progress of democracy in the region.
Sharif has also caused continuing strain in Indo-Pakistani relations. Since the 2008 Mumbai attacks, perpetrated by Pakistan-based militant groups, most Indians have grown highly critical of Pakistan’s lenient policies on terrorism. Sharif has done nothing to help improve public opinion in India. He has failed to curb the military’s inordinate influence and to take steps that would prevent it from instigating another conflict. The Express Tribune has reported that the military has “adopted a ‘new concept of war fighting’ aimed at preempting India’s ‘Cold Start Doctrine’.” By allowing the military to dictate who the state’s “enemy” is, Sharif is displaying a worrisome lack of control.
Pakistan is drifting further into volatile territory. Even though the United States claims that Pakistan has played a key role in facilitating its negotiations with the Afghan Taliban, Pakistan remains lackadaisical in its approach to the terrorist menace threatening to undo the nation. Many of those who voted for Sharif believed they were voting for a man whose political judgment had matured during exile. Instead, they find they have elected someone who is only perpetuating the problem.
Akshan De Alwis is a senior at Noble and Greenough School and teaches democracy and good governance practices to groups of young people in Burma.
Photo: Colin Cookman (cc).
