What is the most effective way of fighting irregular forces of terrorism and extremism or even reacting to calamities? Is it proactive mediation and reliance on the tools of soft power i.e., good and merit-based governance as a long-term strategy, or is it through the hard power of the state alone? Does the hard power provide lasting victory over unregulated evil? Can a state succeed against crime, calamity and terror if its governance structures are cluttered in a reactive mode? Also, can a country make the right decisions if most of the political discourse on national and international issues is usually dictated more by emotions and less by rationalty. The Pakistan government’s response to the Yemen crisis offers one example of a state that lacks proactive intuition and only reacts when surrounded by crisis or hit by calamity. Most countries — including the United States, the UK, Germany — acted well ahead of time and had their citizens evacuated from Yemen without allowing fear and panic to perpetuate. Sadly, some 2,500 Pakistani citizens, as of March 30, still await evacuation and this reflects either the willful oversight of an imminent crisis or wishful optimism of the Pakistani diplomatic mission in Sanaa. Did it issue any caution or advisory, at least to those citizens who were closer to the advancing Houthi militias? The trouble in Yemen had been brewing for several years and this simmering conflict turned into a regional conflict as Saudi Arabia initiated strikes on Houthi rebels. The government apparently lost no time in blindly committing military support to the Saudi Arabian monarch during the prime minister’s specially organised tour to the Kingdom in March. The evacuation of Pakistanis stranded in Yemen was probably an afterthought. Pakistani political parties, intelligensia and the civil society at large, on the other hand, have loudly begun opposing their country’s active participation in the Saudi-led war on Yemen. They want the government to...

Terrorists and criminal gangs have developed deep connections in various arms of government. Are Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and Chief of Army Staff Gen Raheel Sharif set to undo many of the unpleasant policies of their predecessors? Is the ostensible civil-military consensus behind the March 11 raid on MQM headquarters Nine Zero and their display of unity at the Pakistan Day parade on March 23 a sign of the dawn of a new era, or will it just be another phase of tactical realignment spearheaded by the General Headquarters in Pakistan’s chequered history? Unfortunately, the public views the GHQ as being more assertive and predominant in an extremely volatile situation arising out of political incompetence, insensitivity to public concern, and above all, patronage of rampant crime by political elites. Back in September 2013, these circumstances had prompted the Supreme Court to direct law-enforcement agencies to eliminate the militant wings of political parties operating in Karachi. The Rangers did launch a clean-up operation, but the political will it required to be effective was still missing. On the face of it, the apex committee formed early this year provided the much-needed political ownership to what eventually led to the raid on the MQM headquarters – the culmination of the operation launched in late 2013 indeed. Intelligence outfits had gradually and increasingly zeroed in on the MQM for its role in criminal activities in the Karachi. Considerable mapping preceded before the rangers eventually dared to break through 21 barriers around Nine Zero. The ensuing claims by the government, allegations by the PPP maverick Dr Zufliqar Mirza, and a statement by death-row convict Saulat Mirza, finally blew the lid off an unpleasant “open secret”; the direct or indirect role of major political parties in organized crime that had emerged as the single largest existential threat to Karachi. Security forces, including the corrupt police and the mighty Rangers, also...

The attacks on two churches in the Youhanabad area of Lahore, and the public lynching of two people the crowd deemed suspects highlights several alarming facts. These intersect, coalesce and amalgamate to create a highly volatile and unpredictable atmosphere which then self-perpetuates, relentlessly continuing the cycle. Step one in this cycle is the failure of the state and its institutions. If this was a singular failure, a tumor that could be treated or excised, it would be a different story. But this is a systemic problem, one that has permeated every aspect of state functions and institutions. First and foremost, the state is completely unable to protect its citizens. The most basic and fundamental tenant of the social contract is that citizens give up certain rights in exchange for certain freedoms, principal among them the right to live and work peacefully. Citizens of today’s Pakistan, especially minorities, are under siege from a faction of the extremist strain that pollutes our collective national ideology and washes our streets in the blood of the innocent. Since the enactment of the National Action plan (NAP), in the wake of the atrocious attack on schoolchildren in Peshawar, minorities have been especially vulnerable against attacks. The enemy is already well-aware that the state response will be meek at best, so minorities remain easy fodder for their quest for relevancy. The state’s response has been immediate condemnation, public avowing to avenge the fallen, and then quietly waiting for the next catastrophe, to repeat these tried and tested tactics. Our politicians, our law enforcement agencies, and even our judiciary, are unable to protect our citizens and provide speedy justice. This breeds distrust, and inculcates a sense of abandonment and helplessness. Step two of this cycle stems from the massive trust deficit in the citizens, once again, especially minorities. The public faith in state institutions, especially those that are responsible for...

The senseless lynching of two terror suspects in Lahore, manhandling of policemen, and the destruction of infrastructure that followed the twin suicide bomb attack on two nearby churches in Lahore reflects the pent-up frustration that most Pakistani citizens reel from. The only difference between these acts and similar acts by the Islamic State is that the latter executes and burns its captives in a premeditated manner. What happened in Lahore was a violent, headless reaction to the terrorist attacks. It was a shameful and outrageous episode nevertheless. All government institutions knew trouble was brewing, but we saw the rampage continue as if it had happened on the spur of the moment. The hair-raising two-day-long carnage led by the aggrieved Christians simply exposed the political inertia, absence of vision and deficient institutional capacity to preempt such incidents. At the same time, this delivers a stern warning to our rulers. Surrounded by unbearably large security escorts and huge walls, most of the VIPs feel protected and insulated from criminals and terrorists. This incident should be a wake-up call for the self-serving political leadership. Where were the people’s representatives – members of the provincial and the federal assemblies elected from those areas? Where was the civil administration? In the end, it was para-military forces who quelled the unrest. During a press conference on March 16, Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan said he had returned 35 Rangers troops who had been tasked to protect him, implying that they had been escorting his predecessor Rehman Malik too. His comments on the crucial files missing from the ministry, and the role of police and ministry officials in helping two convicts who had been extradited from the UK escape were equally stunning, and only underscored the decay and corruption that exists within our state institutions. Instead of bringing criminals to justice or preventing them from violating the law,...