For years, Musharraf would send troops to fight in the FATA and elsewhere against Pakistani Taliban. It was always incredibly unpopular with the political leaders of the country.
Within about a year of the PPP government, however, Pakistan finds itself united on the need for military action against the Taliban. This doesn’t seem to have been a response to terrorist bombings and so on (they were going on for years under Musharraf too).
Instead, the tide seems to have turned with the breakdown of the peace treaty. Ambassador Haqqani, on the Daily Show last night, argued that the theory that this was deliberate. He claimed that Zardari chose to make a deal with the Taliban in order to prove that they would not adhere to it, and thus undermine the argument that there is a peaceful settlement possible with the Taliban.
If true, this would be a very smart move. On the other hand, there is precious little else the government can pull out as evidence that it had been ruling with other new, smart, innovative ideas.
So what do you think? Did Zardari make a calculated move to negotiate with the Taliban to prove to the Pakistani nation that the Taliban is not interested in peace?
Or is did his government accidentally stumble into a peace that failed to hold, and inadvertantly unite the political leaders across government and opposition on the need to fight the Taliban, rather that settle with them?
Re: Smart Thinking or Accidental Stumble - How did Pakistan unite against the Taliba
All along the last 2 years i had argued that when it comes to military action within the country, it must be done by an elected government. Musharraf was an unpopular leader and hence his moves were also unpopular.
ANP being in power in NWFP had a huge impact, which meant that truce was discussed and negotiated based upon the vision of local people and not by an unelected person. Once it broke down and ANP itslef became the target, it got the backing of people.
Re: Smart Thinking or Accidental Stumble - How did Pakistan unite against the Taliba
That all may be true, but I think some of you are making too big a deal of this "support" by political parties. The populace that matters - the poor and rural still have huge sympathies for the taliban.
For years, Musharraf would send troops to fight in the FATA and elsewhere against Pakistani Taliban. It was always incredibly unpopular with the political leaders of the country.
Within about a year of the PPP government, however, Pakistan finds itself united on the need for military action against the Taliban. This doesn't seem to have been a response to terrorist bombings and so on (they were going on for years under Musharraf too).
Instead, the tide seems to have turned with the breakdown of the peace treaty. Ambassador Haqqani, on the Daily Show last night, argued that the theory that this was deliberate. He claimed that Zardari chose to make a deal with the Taliban in order to prove that they would not adhere to it, and thus undermine the argument that there is a peaceful settlement possible with the Taliban.
If true, this would be a very smart move. On the other hand, there is precious little else the government can pull out as evidence that it had been ruling with other new, smart, innovative ideas.
So what do you think? Did Zardari make a calculated move to negotiate with the Taliban to prove to the Pakistani nation that the Taliban is not interested in peace?
Or is did his government accidentally stumble into a peace that failed to hold, and inadvertantly unite the political leaders across government and opposition on the need to fight the Taliban, rather that settle with them?
Giving peace a chance was the decent thing to do............of course knowing the Taliban's mind set must have been part of the equation.