If US State Department Deputy Spokesperson Marie Harf's assertion in a news briefing on Friday proves true -- "We welcome [the decision] to outlaw the Haqqani network, Jamaat-ud-Dawa
...the front organization of Lashkar-e-Taiba...
, and I think about 10 other organizations linked to violent extremism," Ms Harf is quoted as saying -- it would demonstrate that the bad old days of Pak leaders treating external powers as more relevant and important in matters of national security than, say, the Pak public or parliament have never really gone away.
Even more problematically, the latest move -- if, indeed, it is announced soon, as Ms Harf has claimed it will be -- would bolster the perception that Pakistain is fighting militancy at the behest of others, especially the US, and not because this is a war that this country must fight and win for its own survival.
There is no doubt that the Pak state needs to do more against a much wider spectrum of murderous Moslem and myrmidon groups operating its soil.
Focusing on simply the so-called anti-Pakistain murderous Moslem networks such as the TTP will only produce medium-term results, perhaps, but guarantees long-term failure in the fight against militancy. This is both because of the overlapping nature of murderous Moslem groups -- operational, strategic and ideological -- and because a long-term future where the state is in competition with militias for predominance inside Pakistain is not a future that ought to be acceptable to anyone in this country.
So yes, the Haqqani network needs to be banned as does the Jamaat-ud-Dawa and sundry more names that may come to light soon. But without a zero-tolerance policy against militancy, there will be no winning strategy.
Zero tolerance certainly does not mean simply military operations and heavy-handed counterterrorism measures in the urban areas; what it does suggest is a commitment to progressively disarm and dismantle murderous Moslem groups and the wider myrmidon network that enables those groups to survive and thrive.
Of course, simply banning more groups will not mean much unless the previous bans are implemented, the new bans cover all incarnations of a murderous Moslem group, and there are sustained efforts by the law-enforcement and intelligence apparatus to ensure banned
...the word
bannedseems to have a different meaning in Pakistain than it does in most other places. Or maybe it simply lacks any meaning at all...
organizations do not quietly regroup once the initial focus fades. That has never happened before.
And the present is even more complicated. What will a ban on the Haqqani network mean in practice given that the major sanctuary in North
Wazoo has already been disrupted by Operation Zarb-e-Azb..the Pak offensive against Qaeda in Pakistain and the Pak Taliban in North Wazoo. The name refers to the sword of the Prophet (PTUI!)...
? What will banning the JuD mean for the Falahi Insaniyat Foundation? Will the government offer answers -- to anything?