New Media & On-line Journalism

An analysis of the editorials of Daily Dawn presented to worthy Ms Amna Zulfiqar by Shahid Iqbal in fulfillment of the requirement of Msc course in Media Studies.

National University of Modern Languages1

IslamabadEditorial Analysis

Haqqani Netwrok as Editorialized by the Daily Dawn in year 2011

Introduction and Back ground.

Haqqani Network is a hardcore insurgent group fighting against the occupying

American and NATO forces in Afghanistan. Concentrating primarily on Eastern

provinces of Afghanistan its area of activity spans on both sides of Durand Line.

Over the last few years this network has time and again proved itself a constant

thorn in imperialist America’s flesh! It is a resilient, resourceful and irreconcilable

group1 blamed for carrying out some of the most spectacular attacks 2on foreign

forces in Afghanistan. The origins of this network can be traced back to Soviet-

Afghan war when it was an apple of both American and Pakistani intelligence

agencies’ eyes! Now a sworn enemy of American invaders in Afghanistan,

Haqqani Network is accused after every major attack in the war torn country.

American fingers mechanically point towards Haqqanis whenever some massive

attack unnerves her inflated ego. In previous year (which has been studied in this

analysis) Haqqani Network remained under spotlight for many reasons. This

network was directly accused by the Americans for orchestrating attack on US

embassy in Kabul on 13th September and assassination of Burhanudin Rabani in

the same month. Pak-US relations went to the brink of collapse on many occasions

1 The Washington Post, 27th May 2011, Washington D.C., USA,http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia-pacific/haqqani-insurgent-group-proves-resilient-foe-in-afghan-war/2011/05/27/AG0wfKEH_story.html

2 BBC News, Story by Mark Urban, 16 April 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-17731774

2

as American insistence that Pakistani elements are providing Haqqanis a ‘safe

heaven’ never waned. American demand for Pakistan to ‘do more’ against

Haqanis and to launch a full fledge operation against them continued relentlessly.

In this analysis, 29 selected editorials published in 2011 touching the issue of

militancy have been studied with the aim to get a general perspective of the

editorial policy of the Daily Dawn. The purpose of the study is to know how

militancy in general and Haqqani network in particular has been portrayed by this

newspaper.

1. Players.

The militancy saga going on in tribal areas of Pakistan is a complex phenomenon

covering many countries and involving a number of organizations and individuals.

The following countries, organizations and individuals remained the major (or

minor) players in the narrative of Haqqani Network as described by the editorials

of Daily Dawn.

I. Countries:

United States of America, Pakistan, Afghanistan.

II. Organizations/Groups:

Haqqani Network, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, Lashkar-e-Jhangwi, Al-Qaeda,

Harkat-ul-jihad Al-Islami, NATO, ISAF, CIA, ISI

III. Individuals:

Sultan Ameer Tarar, aka Col Imam, Khalid Khawaja, Asad Qureshi, Mullah

Muhammad Umer, Robert Gates, Raymond Davis, Adm Mike Mullen, Gen

Petraeus, Leon Panetta, Michael Leiter, Richard Holbrooke, Dianne Feinstein,

Gen Kayani, Gen Pasha, Hillary Clinton, Yousaf Raza Gillani, Illyas Kashmiri,

3

Fazal Saeed, Gen James Mattis, Qazi Hussain Ahmed, Hamid Karzai, Burhan-

ud-Din Rabbani, Maulana Fazlullah, Maulvi Faqir Muhammad.

2. Lexical Structure

The ultra anti militancy stance of the newspaper is evident from its choice

of word phraseology in the editorials. Militancy that has eroded the writ of both

Afghan and Pakistani authorities in their respective countries is, according to the

newspaper, a ‘hydra-headed monster’3 which can not be killed at all as its

tentacles remain untraced even after a major cleansing operation. Hence, we must

keep in mind this ‘uncomfortable truth’ that once unleashed this ‘Frankenstein’s

monster’ proves ‘a terrible, endless nightmare.’4 On publication of US report on

Pakistani government’s perceived wrongdoings and frailties, paper hints that there

is an ‘inbuilt cynicism’5 inherent to citizens of Pakistan which prefixes their mind

to accept any accusation without any suspicion.

The most ‘addictive tool’ 6 in the hands of American forces is Drone that sadly is a

messenger of death and destruction for the beleaguered people of FATA.

The newspaper while lambasting the militants for their distorted vision of the

world also criticizes ‘the hawks’7 in our politics that always remain ready to

exploit any situation in order to fan the anti American sentiments. The newspaper

becomes more sarcastic and aggressive in word usage when discussing May 2 raid 3 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Crime and Terrorism), 15 Oct 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/10/15/crime-and-terrorism/

4 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Militants’ godfather), 25 Jan 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/01/25/militants-godfather/

5 Daily Dawn, Editorial (US Report), 08 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/04/08/us-report/ 6 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Possible Compromise), 15 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/15/possible-compromise/

7 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Army’s response), 25 Sep 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/09/25/armys-response/

4

on Osama Bin Laden’s compound by American Seals. ‘The shock in Pakistan over

the solo American action, the embarrassment caused to our security forces, which

were caught napping, and repeated American vows that Washington would

continue to mount more such raids have caused strained relations.’8 The word

‘napping’ for Pakistan’s slumbering security forces encompasses the whole tale of

incompetence and ineptness succinctly!

3. Style

The newspaper pictures a very violent image of Pakistani militancy. A very

critical often aggressive approach has been adopted by the writer in the editorials.

While discussing the killing of millitant’s ‘godfather’ colonel Imam, the release of

accompanying British journalist Asad Qureshi is met with suspicion by the paper

and it wonders : ‘Qureshi, the British journalist, was released, but why and how?

Will he reveal what he saw and heard while on his trip to North Waziristan? And

what really is going on in North Waziristan Agency, which appears to be growing

more inscrutable by the day?’9 The tone becomes more aggressive when PM’s

offer of ‘decommissioning’ to the militants angers the paper and it suggests warily

‘Its (TTPs) agenda is not different from that of Al Qaeda. Its intransigence,

therefore, has to be taken head on. If it continues to bomb mosques, religious

processions, markets and schools and shed the blood of innocent men, women and

children, there is no room for appeasement. Force must be met with force, and an

offer of talks must be coupled with a full application of the state`s coercive power,

as was done in Swat.’10 Keeping in view the warlike psyche of militants this

8 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Clinton’s response), 25 May 2011, Islamabad, Pakistanhttp://dawn.com/2011/05/25/clintons-response/

9 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Militants’ godfather), 25 Jan 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/01/25/militants-godfather/

10 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Decommissioning), 27 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/02/27/decommissioning/

5

suggestion of taking them ‘head on’ by ‘the coercive power’ of the state when

offering talks is very naïve on part of the editorial writer.

The paper treats America at times very aggressively which otherwise has been

painted in very favorable colors. America is reminded that it left its ally

unattended after soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan ‘Unlike its hurried

disengagement with Pakistan after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan,

America this time has repeatedly expressed its resolve to have a long-term

relationship with this country. More economic and military aid to Pakistan has

been pledged, and Obama administration officials continue to acknowledge from

time to time the role Pakistan has played in the war on terror. Yet it is equally

common to hear unpalatable remarks on `safe havens` and Pakistan`s purported

failure to `do more`.’11 America’s irrational demand to Pakistan of ‘doing more

than due’ irritates the paper also and it turns more critical: “Mr Panetta Said:

“They look at issues related to their national interest and take steps that

complicate the relationship.” What else does the CIA chief expect Pakistan to do

except to look at all issues from the point of view of its own interests? Surely

America too looks — as it must — at all international questions from its own

perspective. That`s why governments interact to decide whether or not there is a

commonality of interest to bring them together.”12 It also counts Pakistan’s

innumerable sacrifices in the war on terror in a bit harsh manner: “Consider this:

Pakistan`s armed forces have deployed close to 150,000 troops in the tribal areas

and a significant number of servicemen have died in the battlefield. What more

can this country do? The US-led alliance, which is now mulling over its Afghan

exit strategy, must respect the resilience shown on this side of the Durand Line.”13

11 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Excluding Pakistan), 25 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/02/25/excluding-pakistan/

12 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Complicated Ties), 19 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/02/19/complicated-ties/

13 Daily Dawn, Editorial (US Report), 08 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan

6

The over all aggressive style of the paper suggests that its primary concern is

‘Islamic militancy’ and when it observes with dismay the failure of both Pakistani

Security agencies and American war machine in Afghanistan succumbing to the

intricate tactics of militants it looses its temper and unleashes scathing criticism:

“if the security agencies are capable of destroying militants` hideouts, why wasn`t

such action taken earlier? Then there is the not so trifling matter of the public`s

waning confidence in the state`s capacity to gather intelligence and ensure

security.”14 Though the hard line tone lowers down noticeably when it comes to

treat American failures in the editorials yet a semblance of critical posture is

retained by the paper: “Cameron Munter stated in a Radio Pakistan interview that

“there is evidence linking the Haqqani network to the Pakistani government”.

Two things are interesting about this. First, the ambassador`s role is quite

different from that of the CIA chief, an American military commander, a

congressperson in Washington or even the secretary of state. Situated as he is in

Islamabad and tasked as he is with conducting diplomacy on a day-to-day basis,

the statement was a surprisingly aggressive one”15

A collective look at the subject matter in these editorials suggests that a very

aggressive, critical approach has been adopted by the writer for treating the issue

of militancy. It is ready to give more than due concessions to the invading foreign

forces but does not seem in a mood to spare any indigenous militancy!

4. Slant

http://dawn.com/2011/04/08/us-report/ 14 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Words and Deeds), 27 May 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/05/27/words-and-deeds/

15 Daily Dawn, Editorial (US Ambassador’s remarks), 20th Sep 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/09/20/us-ambassadors-remarks/

7

Being a traditional ultra liberal newspaper the editorials of the Dawn cover the

subject in a generally negative color. Harsh, at times scornful, criticism of

Pakistani government and LEAs over their alleged failure to nab the militancy

turns the over all image of the editorials as expressively negative. It paints

militants as monsters who are hell-bent on bombing “not only mosques and

shrines but also premises universally regarded as sacrosanct — hospitals and

schools.”16 When it comes to eulogizing the skills of our military to break the

backbone of militancy the paper taunts in an unusual manner: “(The) terrorists`

backbone has been broken,” Gen Kayani told the graduating cadets at the PMA —

the army chief has underlined what is really at stake. Whether the terrorists`

backbone has indeed been broken or not is unclear. Indeed, in the nebulous world

of insurgencies, the enemy may not even have a `backbone` that can be broken.”

The American government and its war efforts have also been sketched in a very

negative color. American failure to understand Pakistan’s sensitivities and

limitations that resulted in bitter relations between these two so called allies in war

on terror is matter of major concern to the paper: “Whatever hope there may have

been that Adm Mike Mullen`s visit to Pakistan would help reduce tensions between

Pakistan and the US evaporated when the admiral trotted out the Haqqani-ISI

links to criticise the security establishment here in unusually specific language for

public statements.”17 The Pakistani government’s failure to address its own issues

of deteriorating economy and worsening law and order situation has been

presented as evidence of the incompetence of Pakistani government: “The latest

biannual report submitted to Congress by the White House paints a bleak picture

of governance in Pakistan and points to the shortcomings of an administration

16 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Complicated Ties), 19th Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/02/19/complicated-ties/

17 Daily Dawn, Editorial (More Sparring), 22 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/22/more-sparring/

8

that is apparently so involved in political wrangling that it cannot address core

issues such as the economy.”18

In General the troika of Pakistan, America and Militants, fighting against one

another overtly or covertly, has been painted in a negative manner. Pakistan and

Militants have been shown in the most horrid hues while the picture of America

sometimes gets neutral or positive strokes!

5. Meanings.

The implicit allusions with the help of certain word phrases have been used

extensively by the writer to convey the specific ideas in the editorials under

discussion. Other then frequent phrases like ‘do more’ (an incessant demand of

America that Pakistan should do more to curb the militancy in its areas); and ‘safe

heavens’19 (a believe that Pakistan has allowed militants to live in and operate

from its areas to launch assaults against NATO and Afghan forces) some very

interesting word phrases has been used. The word ‘decommissioning’ as used by

the Pakistani PM as bait to persuade militants to lay down arms has been

explained by the editorial as “a recommitment to peace by upholding the

traditional code of conduct that has, since the colonial days, guided the political

and juridical relationships between the tribesmen and the federation’s political

agents.”20

On the all thorny drone issue the paper says “ `expanded cooperation` may be on

the cards while the US may share some information on its intelligence operations

18 Daily Dawn, Editorial (US Report), 08 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/04/08/us-report/

19 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Excluding Pakistan), 25 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/02/25/excluding-pakistan/

20 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Decommissioning), 27 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/02/27/decommissioning/

9

inside Pakistan. This would partially meet the security establishment’s desire to

limit the American `footprint` and the scale of its operations in the country while

allowing the Americans to continue covert programmes with enhanced Pakistani

assistance/knowledge.”21 All the three words ‘expanded co-operation’, ‘footprints’

and ‘programmes’ implies more than what meets the eye. Expanded cooperation

aims to get Pakistan and US on the same line in order to increase the effectiveness

of American massacre machine by eliminating resistance. American footprints on

Pakistani soil involves American intelligence sleuths and mercenaries roaming

freely and ‘covert programmes’ means merciless drone attacks in Pakistan’s tribal

areas.

As Americans are addicted to concessions from Pakistani side with out

reciprocating much since the Musharaf days therefore “one-window operation”22

suits to their taste and after the fall of mindless dictator they expect the same from

democratic government. One-man show of dictators is palatable to the twisted

taste of America because it gives them easy to access one-window to extract

whatever they want.

The editorials are full with words and phrases that hook the mind to an idea or

situation recurring in the melodrama of militancy in Pak-Afghan areas. ‘Hawks’ in

both Pakistani politicians and religious leader are always there to ferment anti

Americanism while also there is no dearth of such ‘hawks’ among American

policy makers!

6. Context21 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Possible Compromise ), 15 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/15/possible-compromise/

22 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Fresh Tensions ), 13 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistanhttp://dawn.com/2011/04/13/fresh-tensions-2/

10

The insurgency in tribal areas is a direct result of foreign invasion in Afghanistan.

Tribal areas of Pakistan share with Afghainstan’s eastern and north eastern

provinces ages old historic ties of blood, religion, culture and tradition. So it is

impossible to separate these two people. After 9/11 when Pakistan succumbed to

the fiery American pressure and jumped into the fray of war on terror and

mindlessly decided to play the rule of front line ally to America by giving her

shoulder to unleash the reign of terror and gore in Afghanistan it was evident that

Pakistan had committed a major mistake. Hostile Afghans reacted slowly but

steadily gaining pace against the occupied forces. Pakistani based Haqqani

network came into limelight when it started coordinating colossal, successive

attacks in Afghainstan.

Year 2011 witnessed an unprecedented increase in the hostile insurgent activity in

Afghanistan a major chunk of which was attributed to the Haqqanis of NWA.

Dawn commented in its editorials on the issue of increasing militancy at different

occasions including but not limited to US Embassy attack in Kabul, Assaisnation

of Burhanudin Rabbani, Raymond Davis incident, Abbotabad Operation and

Salala Check post Attack. Relations between America and Pakistan plummeted to

the lowest levels after attack on US Embassy in Kabul which America believed

was a handiwork of Haqqani Network.

7.Perspective.

i). On Militancy: The writer is a staunch supporter of war against terror

because he believes that ‘militancy is the main threat to the country’s security’23

and without curbing militancy a stable, prosperous future will remain a distant

dream. He opines: “militancy is the greatest threat to the security of Pakistan and

barring a multi-pronged strategy to fight it, the country will not be able to look

23 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Timely reminder) 25 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/25/timely-reminder/

11

forward to a stable and prosperous future.”24 Notwithstanding many hitches “war

on terror is Pakistan`s own war which it cannot afford to abandon”25 Writer

admits that Pakistani public is against this war and a huge majority considers it

some one’s else war that we are fighting: “there are deep suspicions among the

public about America`s role in Pakistan and many are convinced that we are

fighting someone else`s war. That is not entirely true; for this is our own battle as

well”26 The insistence on owning this alien war continues even as writer admits

that this war has caused us massive damages “The decade-old war has cost

Pakistan 40,000 lives, led to political discord and caused colossal economic

dislocation”27 In order to eradicate this menace of militancy from our tribal areas

editorial suggests that military operation in NWA, a hub of militant activities, is

inevitable “On NWA, there has long been a consensus that a military operation of

some kind is inevitable. US frustrations over the Haqqani network aside, Pakistani

analysts have consistently flagged the threats that radiate from NWA into Pakistan

proper. South Punjab militants, the TTP, the Gul Bahadur and Maulvi Nazir

networks , members of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and of course the

Haqqani network — NWA has become a stamping ground for militants of every

conceivable hue and affiliation” 28 Though consensus on operation was achieved

only in the imagination of the writer yet he portrays it as the collective voice of all

concerned. He lambastes Pakistan for protecting Haqqanis and relying on an

24 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Timely reminder) 25 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/25/timely-reminder/

25 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Clintons’s response) 25 May 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/05/25/clintons-response/

26 Daily Dawn, Editorial (US Report), 08 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/04/08/us-report/

27 Daily Dawn, Editorial (New Drone policy?), 06 Nov 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/11/06/new-drone-policy/

28 Daily Dawn, Editorial (North Waziristan Operation), 01 June 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/06/01/north-waziristan-operation/

12

obsolete defense strategy: “Pakistan continues to hedge its bets and shield the

Haqqanis in case their influence is needed if Afghanistan does implode and return

to the terrible days of the mid-1990s.”29 but “time has come for Pakistan to rethink

its approach to the Haqqani network. Quite aside from the demonstrated risks of a

defence strategy that involves harbouring handpicked militants, one of the last

things Pakistan can afford is to be proven a facilitator of attacks against

Americans in Afghanistan.”30

ii). On Drone Strikes: Dawn harbors a very controversial view on Drone

strikes. It admits that drones cause collateral damage, violate Pakistan’s air space

and increase militancy in Pakistan but in the same breadth it seems fond of the

effectiveness of drone technology! Authorizing Drone attacks in Pakistani areas

and other such murky deals were done under hand by Musharaf because “Gen

Musharraf was wearing the twin hats of army chief and president and because of

the army`s strict adherence to the chain of command, concessions considered not

in the state`s interests were made to the US without much internal debate”31 and in

those dictatorial times “cooperation between Pakistan and the US on security

issues was never spelled out with any specificity that either side could later refer

back to in the case of a disagreement. The reason presumably was that

ambivalence and vagueness suited both sides, allowing them to adjust their tactics

as the relationship between the two countries ebbed and flowed”32 this

ambivalence and vagueness that Musharaf kept under his hat to do all the nasty

dealings unnoticed resulted in a merciless drone campaign by CIA. After

29 Daily Dawn, Editorial (US-Pakistan ties), 18 Aug 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/08/18/us-pakistan-ties-2/

30 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Army’s response), 25 Sep 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/09/25/armys-response/

31 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Fresh Tensions), 13 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/13/fresh-tensions-2/

32 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Fresh Tensions), 13 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/13/fresh-tensions-2/

13

Musharaf era this policy of under hand dealings on drone issue continued and

some newspapers like Dawn adopted it whole heartedly notwithstanding the fact

that it was a sheer violation of an independent country’s sovereignty. Dawn

believes that drones have “limited counter-terrorism potential”33 and when

“lacking any good options, the drone strikes are a way of `doing something`”34 At

the assassination of Illyas Kashmiri in a drone attack a jubilant editorial of Dawn

says: “American drones have once again proved their efficacy in taking out

dangerous militants, resulting in at least some level of disruption in the terrorists`

ranks”35 it further expresses its ecstasy and suggests that both Pakistan and

America should work out some ‘transparent’ drone policy: “considering the

success of the strike on Ilyas Kashmiri and fellow militants, it would be

worthwhile for the two countries to work towards a more transparent and

coordinated drone policy, with the Americans realising how imperative it is to

carry out the strikes with Pakistan`s knowledge and approval”36 but in the same

year after witnessing public wrath over drones, editorials of Dawn tone down their

mirth and admit: “Apart from the question of legality of foreign planes entering a

sovereign country and taking hostile action, the drone strikes have killed hundreds

of innocent people — they have often missed their target or hit the wrong one”37

But despite admitting that ‘popular reaction in Pakistan has been one of intense

anger’ Dawn’s romance with drones continue brazenly: “Some drones have indeed

served their purpose, killing wanted terrorists; but many victims of the Hellfire

33 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Possible Compromise?), 15 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/04/15/possible-compromise/

34 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Possible Compromise?), 15 April 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/15/possible-compromise/

35 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Drone Attacks), 07 June 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/06/07/drone-attacks-4/

36 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Drone Attacks), 07 June 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/06/07/drone-attacks-4/

37 Daily Dawn, Editorial (New Drone Policy?), 06 Nov 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/11/06/new-drone-policy/

14

missiles fired by US drones were `suspected militants`, and, in many cases, turned

out to be civilian casualties”38

On Salala check post incident editorial of Dawn can not be discerned from that of

New York Times or Washington Post. One wonders whether presenting Pakistan’s

point of view is the primary objective of Dawn or defending American stance is

her responsibility! After ruthless massacre of 24 Pakistani soldiers guarding the

check post to stop incursion of militants on Afghan border, Dawn defends this

heartless misadventure of trigger-happy American marines as a ‘self defence’ act.

It says: “despite some reports that the Nato strike on Saturday that took the lives

of 24 Pakistani soldiers may have been in self-defence, the attack will continue to

smack of the arrogance of a superpower until a joint investigation is allowed to

establish the facts of the case” 39

From defending Drone attacks to inventing excuses for American invasion on

Pakistani soil Dawn’s point of view is amazingly absurd! No spokesperson of

American forces could have defended American mischievous attack as boldly as

this Pakistani newspaper did!

iii). On Pak-US Relations. The newspaper strongly supports a close,

friendly relationship between Pakistan and America and terms it a “difficult but

necessary relationship”40. Though both these so called allies remain unhappy with

one another but they can not get an early divorce as they depend on one another

for their fight against a common enemy: “Unhappy as the US administration and

the Pakistani establishment may be with one another, the relationship is ultimately

one of interdependence. And to a large extent there remains a common enemy: 38 Daily Dawn, Editorial (New Drone Policy?), 06 Nov 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/11/06/new-drone-policy/

39 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Deteriorating Ties), 29 Nov 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/11/29/deteriorating-ties/

40 Daily Dawn, Editorial (US-Pakistan Ties), 18 Aug 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/08/18/us-pakistan-ties-2/

15

militancy.”41 This common enemy is the only source between these two divergent

nations to work together and therefore the paper whenever senses some rupture in

the relations gives its healing advices. It believes that “on the Pakistani side it is

ultimately the military that runs the show when it comes to relations with

America”42 therefore it gives more weightage to the remarks of Gen Kayani than

any civilian leader. Military leader’s resolve that no terrorist would be left in the

tribal areas have soothing affect on Dawn and it takes a sigh of relief : “Gen

Kayani`s words also give hope that the security establishment, recognizing what is

at stake, will not allow matters to spiral out of control with the Americans. A

pragmatic understanding of the threat militants pose inside this country can be

matched with pragmatism on both the American and Pakistani sides about what

can be achieved in Afghanistan”. Paper wants to make it sure that “both sides are

aware that a permanent rupture is not possible”43

Dawn looks at America engaging in talks with Afghan Taliban as a kind of face

saving exercise on part of Americans though it considers this process as a positive

development: “The Afghan Taliban, unlike the TTP, have reportedly begun to talk

to Kabul. Islamists they may be, but the Taliban across the Durand Line are aware

of their Afghan identity and cherish it. Most Afghans are not internationalists.

They have mostly fought along tribal and ethnic lines, but have often closed ranks

against foreign forces in the past.”44 Surprisingly the Paper doesn’t seem ready to

give the same concessions to Pakistani militants as it believes that only coercive

power can resolve the issue in Pakistan! When America moves ahead ignoring

41 Daily Dawn, Editorial (More Sparring), 22 Apr 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/22/more-sparring/

42 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Army’s response), 25 Sep 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/09/25/armys-response/

43 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Timely reminder), 25 Apr 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/25/timely-reminder/

44 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Decommissioning), 27 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/02/27/decommissioning/

16

Pakistan on Afghan issue the paper criticizes this policy and says: “Talks on

Afghanistan without Pakistan are like playing Hamlet without the Prince of

Denmark. No instigation to anti-Americanism is intended, but there is a lot of

disorientation in Washington’s policy.”45 This disorientation is a direct result of

America’s obsession that Pakistan is not doing enough to stop militants and her

failure to look at her own blunders: “while America sees reluctance on

Islamabad’s part to `do more`, it has entered into a dialogue with militant groups

to cover its retreat.”46

8. Model

After going through the editorials of the daily Dawn the images constructed

in the minds of readers remain blurry and confused about the inscrutable militancy

saga in Pakistan. Dawn’s ultra leftist didacticism presents militancy as a specter

that can only be get rid of when whole nation will arm itself with an intense

abhorrence for these ‘monsters’. All the four major players of this war have been

portrayed in specifics hues and colours: America is a haughty superpower which is

struggling to save her skin after plunging into a bloody, endless war just to satiate

its ego; Pakistan is an unwilling ally which is striving to play the role of a hero and

a villain at the same time supporting the Savior and the Satan in the same breath;

Militants are weird warriors who are trying to implement their alien ideas and

ideals on otherwise enlightened people of Pakistan and Afghanistan and Afghan

government led by lamenting Karzai is a toothless authority! All the four players

of this struggle seem playing a double game: America claims that Pakistan is her

friend but doesn’t hesitate punching this ‘friend’ whenever it gets a chance;

Pakistan supports the war on terror ‘whole heartedly’ but also helps Haqqanis to

45 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Excluding Pakistan), 25 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/02/25/excluding-pakistan/

46 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Complicated Ties), 19 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/02/19/complicated-ties/

17

destabilize the Afghan and American forces; Militants are sworn enemies of

America but they can accept a dialogue offer from crusader Americans but at the

same time shun the idea of having a dialogue with their coreligionist Pakistani or

Afghan authorities; and Karzai government is a farcical puppet show which is

trying to pose as a genuine authority struggling for the welfare of Afghan people!

The paper pictures Pakistani civilian government as a powerless regime which has

no say in shaping the foreign policy of the country. The military is all powerful as

for as taking decisions on war on terror are concerned. It takes all its decisions

independently and its spy agency harbors a soft corner for militants of Haqqani

network.

The over all scenario presented by the paper is very grim and unpredictable. The

remedies discussed by the paper are just whimsical notions fancied under a preset

mind and ideology and hence these remedies remain unfeasible as they do not

cover the ground realities!

9. Explanation

The discourse on militancy explains extensively the causes and reasons that

shaped the state of affairs to the present level. In a multifaceted war no single

explanation of any occurrence is enough and a comprehensive look into the issue

is needed to unfurl different factors involved in the conflict. Dawn believes that

the situation worsened because Pakistan’s civilian rulers have little or no say in the

affairs of foreign policy: “civilians have little control of the country’s security

18

policy, with consequences that are plain to see”47 and that “it is ultimately the

military that runs the show when it comes to relations with America.”48

Pakistan’s ambivalence on the issue of curbing militancy is owing to its intimate

relations with the militant groups that it once cherished as its strategic assets: “The

establishment’s cherished strategic depth strategy, and the related support for

selected militant groups, had already proven to be tragically damaging for

Pakistan`s internal security” 49 Pakistan’s affiliation with ‘militant islam’ dates

back to Soviet Afghan war when it supported Mujahideen in their fight against

Communist USSR which was a threat to Pakistan’s security also: “Since the

1980s, when the Mujahideen in a US-led effort were supported in their resistance

against the Soviets in Afghanistan, Pakistan has legitimized the idea of militant

Islam. Its `security paradigm` has included using Islamic militants when

convenient, with crackdowns occurring mainly after 9/11 when external pressures

became too great to withstand”50 this external covert threat forced Pakistan to

change its policy and stop romancing with militants. Now whenever Pakistan is

blamed for conniving with Haqqanis in their assaults on American forces these

allegations are unfounded as “Pakistan should not want to and simply cannot

afford to have its territory used for attacks in this manner; the price in global and

regional isolation that this country will have to pay is simply not worth it” 51

47 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Mismanagement of Ties), 02 Oct 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/10/02/mismanagement-of-ties/ 48 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Army’s response), 25 Sep 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/09/25/armys-response/

49 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Civilian response), 27 Sep 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/09/27/civilian-response/ 50 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Security Paradigm), 05 Dec 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/12/05/security-paradigm/ 51 Daily Dawn, Editorial (US allegation), 24 Sep 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/09/24/us-allegations/

19

After Ramond Davis case when relations between Pakistan and America started

straining and America went to the extent of directly blaming Pakistani spy agency

for having links with Haqqani Network through as high ranking an official as

Admiral Mike Mullen, Dawn explained very precisely the possible causes of this

American ferocity. It says: “In the murky intelligence world, particularly looking

in from the outside, nothing can be said with certainty. But it would appear that as

the ISI has pushed fiercely following the Raymond Davis incident to limit the

American presence and the sphere of activity inside Pakistan further, the

American national security establishment is seeking to push back against the ISI in

order to preserve, to the extent possible, US activities inside Pakistan”52

When America pushes Pakistan beyond reasonable limits for launching operation

in NWA, Dawn explains Pakistan’s reluctance in these words: “its military

resources are overstretched, and it cannot undertake more Swat-like operations

without endangering its wider security concerns which have both internal and

external dimensions. More importantly, religious extremism is a philosophy which

cannot be combated by military means alone.” 53 It is one of the few moments

when pragmatism overwhelms Dawn’s ultra leftist views and it prefers rational

explanations over whimsical ideas!

In the last quarter of 2011 when street crimes in Karachi started soaring it was

suspected that militants were involved Dawn opines on this issue: “insurgents are

raising funds for their activities through bank heists, kidnappings for ransom and

extortion”54 it further delves into the problem and comes with the explanation

which can not be brushed aside: “US and Pakistani military offensives have killed 52 Daily Dawn, Editorial (More sparring), 22 Apr 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/04/22/more-sparring/ 53 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Clinton’s response), 25 May 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/05/25/clintons-response/

54 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Crime and Terrorism), 15 Oct 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/10/15/crime-and-terrorism/

20

or sidelined many mid-level and senior commanders who were, in a number of

cases, men with links to international funding networks. Meanwhile, greater

scrutiny of money transfers has made it harder to send funds around the world”55

hence leaving for militants such ‘local fund raising’ tactics as robberies and bank

heists only! Fantastic as the explanation may look but it is the queer way Dawn

looks at such intricate issues as militancy!

10. Evaluation

Dawn evaluates militancy from two perspectives: global and local. On one

hand it looks sympathetically at the limitations that a small country like Pakistan

may face while fighting a resilient, faceless enemy like militants, while on the

other hand it also analyzes the domestic political compulsions of America which is

spear heading this war. At times Dawn fails to explore an event objectively

because of its hatred against ‘Islamic militancy.’ On different issues and incidents

related with the militancy the paper sees every event from its own prefixed

extreme leftist prism and analyze it accordingly.

When Leon Panetta, CIA chief and Michael Lieter, chairman counter-terrorism,

launch a tirade against Pakistan for its alleged failure to ‘do more’ against

militants, Dawn explains these remarks from American regime’s domestic

political interests, it opines: “the Obama administration’s Afghan policy has more

than America’s national interests dear to it. With voters having already handed

over the lower house to the Republicans in the mid-term election, the least the

Democratic Party can do for the 2012 presidential election is to minimize

casualties, regional states` interest being of less consequence.”56 Since rules of

cooperation were not defined clearly between Pakistan and America at the

55 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Crime and Terrorism), 15 Oct 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/10/15/crime-and-terrorism/ 56 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Complicated ties), 19 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/02/19/complicated-ties/

21

beginning of War on terror so ‘strategic tensions’ are inevitable at the critical

juncture of America exiting Afghanistan: “anything that helps clarify the

apparently flaccid rules of cooperation and poorly demarcated red lines is a good

thing going forward, particularly since the end game in Afghanistan is imminent

and strategic tensions are expected to flare up again.”57

On the issue of Drone strikes there has always been confusion in the minds of

Pakistani masses, a huge majority of which disbelieves government’s claim that

drones trespass Pakistani airspace without a go-ahead nod from Pakistani

government. Dawn raises some very valid questions on this complex issue and

behind the lines tells the whole untold story, it declares: “Pakistan is believed to

be demanding a scaling back of the drone-strike programme in Fata, limiting it

perhaps to parts of North Waziristan Agency. In the murky world of Pakistan-US

ties on security issues, little can be said for certain. For example, why was the

American footprint allowed to grow to an `undesirable` size in the first place? And

if it is an open secret that drones are allowed to operate with Pakistan`s

permission, then why the need to resort to public pressure to change the

programme`s parameters?”58 The problem being faced now by the weakling

Pakistani regime in stopping Drone strikes on its territory raised because

“cooperation between Pakistan and the US on security issues was never spelled

out with any specificity that either side could later refer back to in the case of a

disagreement. The reason presumably was that ambivalence and vagueness suited

both sides, allowing them to adjust their tactics as the relationship between the

two countries ebbed and flowed.”59

57 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Possible Compromise), 15 Apr 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/15/possible-compromise/

58 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Fresh Tensions), 13 Apr 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/04/13/fresh-tensions-2/ 59 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Fresh Tensions), 13 Apr 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/13/fresh-tensions-2/

22

Dawn considers taking militants head-on as the only viable option left to Pakistan.

After facing colossal embarrassment due to Mehran air base attack when Pakistani

government announces that a full fledge operation would be launched in militant

strong holds Dawn counts unwillingness on part of many political parties on this

core issue as a major problem. It says: “a national consensus is needed, as well as

a “comprehensive strategy”, and in these context key players representing all

spectrums of the political arena ought to make it clear where they stand in the

fight against the Taliban and the various militant groups operating under its

umbrella. Do they have a soft corner for the Taliban or consider them to be

enemies of Pakistan? No consensus can be achieved without coming clean on this

count.”60 The paper also blames Pakistani state’s strategic depth policy responsible

for creating or helping to create Taliban, it asserts: “equally if not more

significantly, the state too must re-evaluate its current position on the policy of the

1980s which saw Pakistan, along with the US and other allies, extending

wholehearted support to the Mujahideen in their conflict with Soviet forces in

Afghanistan. It was that policy that ultimately led to the creation of the Taliban

and the spurt in extremism and religious intolerance in Pakistan itself. Are we still

engaged in the folly of `strategic depth` and making a distinction between `good`

and `bad` Taliban?” 61But the problem raises its ugly head when a large number

of Pakistani public distances itself from the much trumpeted war on terror and

considers it American invaders’ war: “With Pakistani `ownership` of the war on

terror under so much question and the public at large unable or unwilling to

comprehend why the fight against militancy is something that is critical to the

well-being of the state it is astonishing that an American official (Adm Mike

60

? Daily Dawn, Editorial (Words and Deeds), 27 May 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/05/27/words-and-deeds/

61 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Words and Deeds), 27 May 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/05/27/words-and-deeds/

23

Mullen) sitting in the US would take it upon himself to announce to his domestic

audience plans for a Pakistani-run military operation in Fata”62

When a Khyber agency based militant commander Fazal Saeed renounces his

relation with TTP after ostensibly developing differences with the TTP’s policy of

attacking civilians and Pakistani state, Dawn looks at this development

suspiciously: “Though he has denied he is toeing the line of the Pakistani security

agencies, Saeed is known to have links with the Haqqani network which,

considered part of the `good Taliban`, is reportedly close to the security

establishment. There is some speculation that he may have been pressured by the

Haqqanis to make the statement”63 This in depth look into the complex fabric of

militancy and its deep rooted links with the Pakistani state agencies is enough to

explain the real story!

After attack on US embassy in Kabul America launched a hateful diatribe against

Haqqani-ISI nexus and resultantly Pakistani government called an all parties

conference to develop some consensus on what strategy should be adopted to

counter this lethal attack Dawn counts the risks in such hyped conference. It is of

the view that “a conference such as this runs the risk of degenerating into a

platform for all manner of hawkish, inflammatory statements whose primary

purpose would be to play to — or create — a gallery of affronted Pakistanis. And

the media`s hysteria has already demonstrated how easily and quickly this issue

can be exploited for ratings”64 though the paper admits that remarks such as the

one issued by top military commander of America are a serious issue “For the US

military’s top commander to issue a statement implying that Pakistani intelligence 62 Daily Dawn, Editorial (North Waziristan Operation), 01 June 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/06/01/north-waziristan-operation/

63 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Split in Taliban ranks),29 June 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/06/29/split-in-taliban-ranks/

64 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Civilian response), 27 Sep 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/09/27/civilian-response/

24

had plotted to attack Americans in Afghanistan is a serious issue, and his

administration’s subsequent back-pedalling implies either deliberate manipulation

or the mismanagement of its very delicate relationship with Pakistan — either

conclusion a worrying one.”65 The paper digs deep into these reckless remarks of

Mullen and comes out with a very strong possible reason behind this verbal attack

“Was Adm Mullen used to get Pakistan to focus on the Haqqanis because he was

days away from retirement? Is his continued defence of his language part of a

plan supported by strategic leaks to the media? Or was he speaking on his own,

and has the civilian administration stepped in for fear of upsetting a relationship

neither the US nor Pakistan want to live with but know they can’t do without?” 66

Dawn looks into the allegations of Pakistan supporting Haqqanis who attacked US

embassy and rejects these allegations from reason’s point of view: “even if

Pakistan does have serious influence with the Haqqani group, why would it urge

them to attack the US embassy compound.” 67

The paper believes that America’s strategy of coercing Pakistan to hunt down

Haqqani network will not work as Pakistan is indispensable in this war and

without Pakistan’s cooperation militants can’t be pushed back “In the context of

events at the time, this is effectively an indication that Pakistan will only launch an

operation against the Haqqanis if and when it wants to and not under US

pressure. How will this be squared with America`s recently expressed desire that

militants be “squeezed” even as talks are taking place? Can the Haqqani network

be brought to the table if Pakistan refuses to go after it?” 68

65 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Mismanagement of ties), 02 Oct 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/10/02/mismanagement-of-ties/

66 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Mismanagement of ties), 02 Oct 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/10/02/mismanagement-of-ties/

67 Daily Dawn, Editorial (US allegations), 24 Sep 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/09/24/us-allegations/

68 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Afghan Reconciliation ), 27 Oct 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/10/27/afghan-reconciliation/

25

As Dawn considers militancy a more lethal enemy of Pakistani state than any

foreign threat so it wants even after the massacre of Pakistani soldiers at a border

post by American marines in a night raid that Pakistani guns should remain

focused on militants: “Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on Saturday told the

Parliamentary Committee on National Security that the latest incursion and the

Abbottabad raid last May “compel us to revisit our national security paradigm”.

No doubt this is a welcome move — and one that should have been made more

than a decade ago. But any review of the country`s security paradigm, which has

several aspects, should start with the nature of the threat emanating from within

the country, i.e. Islamic militancy.”69 This obsession of the paper sometimes mars

its ability to analyze events more dispassionately.

11. Recommendations

The editorials of Dawn mirror crystal clear views on militancy and it gives ‘sound’

suggestions on how to tackle this ‘monster’. The remedy is simple according to the

paper: If militants attack Pakistani state and people they are monsters and hence

should be crushed ruthlessly; If American rouge marines attack Pakistani state and

people they might have done this in ‘self defense’ so they must be excused and we

should go for militants again because sacred cow of ‘cooperation’ must be saved

to ensure regional stability!

Though generally Dawn doesn’t give weightage to the idea of engaging militants

through talks yet it says that 3 dimensional strategy is viable “The 3D strategy —

deterrence, dialogue and development — Mr Gilani spoke of must be followed

with vigour and without apology, notwithstanding the murmur from pro-terrorism

69 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Security Paradigm ), 05 Dec 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/12/05/security-paradigm/

26

lobbies.”70 It is debatable whether putting deterrence prior to dialogue will work in

this case or not. The paper suggests the Taliban to accept the ‘decommissioning’

offer because it will give them the opportunity to join the political process,

“Unlike Afghanistan, Pakistan has a functional democracy, howsoever imperfect.

This gives the TTP leadership an opening without losing face, for it could join the

political process and end what is the agony not just of the pauperised Fata people

but of the entire country. Perhaps the government needs to make the TTP

understand what exactly the prime minister means by decommissioning.”71 The

advice may be very sound but again the crux of the problem is that militants

fighting Pakistan, America and multi national NATO forces simultaneously can

not be so naïve to fall into the trap of decommissioning (which is a softer way of

asking to ‘lay down arms’). Neither they might have any interest in politics of

Pakistan!

The paper advices Pakistan to re-evaluate its flawed policy of relying on militant

groups to tackle the threat of an unfriendly Afghanistan on western border and a

hostile India on eastern front: “Equally if not more significantly, the state too must

re-evaluate its current position on the policy of the 1980s which saw Pakistan,

along with the US and other allies, extending wholehearted support to the

Mujahideen in their conflict with Soviet forces in Afghanistan. It was that policy

that ultimately led to the creation of the Taliban and the spurt in extremism and

religious intolerance in Pakistan itself. Are we still engaged in the folly of

`strategic depth` and making a distinction between `good` and `bad` Taliban?”72

Dawn consider it a biggest blunder on part of Pakistani establishment that they

harbored militants for such a long time. Now the solution lies in taking out all the

70 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Decommissioning ), 27 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/02/27/decommissioning/

71 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Decommissioning ), 27 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/02/27/decommissioning/

72 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Words and Deeds), 27 May 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/05/27/words-and-deeds/

27

hostile elements from NWA by launching a full fledge, crippling attack on these

insurgents: “Denying sanctuary to militants there is therefore a necessary, though

not sufficient, condition for moving forward in the fight against militancy” 73

Dawn believes that strong Pak-US relations are beneficial for Pakistan therefore

whenever some irritants pose a threat to this bond the paper suggests remedies. It

suggests that in order “to sustain a long-term and mutually beneficial relationship,

both sides need to resolve if not ignore passing irritants instead of allowing them

to sour their relationship.”74 The ‘irritants’ may be too big to handle but America

being the bigger partner should shoulder bigger responsibility “If common

interests brought Pakistan and America together, let Washington ensure that the

long-term ties it has pledged do not fall victim to passing irritants as the Raymond

Davis affair or its view of the ISI`s purported walk on “both sides”. The hazards

of the future should serve to cement their relationship.”75 Pragmatism should

prevail all the tests of this precarious partnership as only “a pragmatic

understanding of the threat militants pose inside this country can be matched with

pragmatism on both the American and Pakistani sides about what can be achieved

in Afghanistan” 76

A principal irritant in Pak-US relations is unilateral Drone policy of United States.

The paper wants American policy makers to understand the sensitivities attached

with the unleashing of these death machines into Pakistani territories:

“Washington would also do well to remember that there is no shortage of anti-73

? Daily Dawn, Editorial (North Waziristan Operation), 01 June 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/06/01/north-waziristan-operation/

74 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Excluding Pakistan), 27 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/02/25/excluding-pakistan/

75 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Complicated ties), 19 Feb 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/02/19/complicated-ties/

76 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Timely reminder), 25 Apr 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/25/timely-reminder/

28

American sentiment in Pakistan and there are plenty of conservative and right-

wing politicians here who will jump at the chance to exploit any perceived slight.

As it is, there are deep suspicions among the public about America`s role in

Pakistan and many are convinced that we are fighting someone else`s war. That is

not entirely true, for this is our own battle as well, but inflammatory statements do

not help either side`s cause”.77 The dangers lying in continuation of this policy

would pose threats for both Pakistan and America therefore the process should be

made more ‘transparent’. The paper suggests “Some `sunlight` on the drone-

strikes programme would reduce the possibility of either side spinning and

dissembling on what has been agreed to and what hasn`t. The danger with trying

to `manage` tensions, as both sides seem to be doing, is that those tensions could

unintentionally spin out of control.”78 This ‘sunlight’ will ‘enlighten the foggy

minds of Pakistani Public and they would, according to the paper, start looking at

drone attacks more ‘sympathetically’: “To identify the common enemy and then

jointly work towards eliminating it would allay public perceptions of the strikes

being an intrusion; in other words both sides need to come clean on the drone

policy so that misgivings are kept at bay and the way is cleared for an unequivocal

joint stance”79

Even on outrageous Salala check post attack incident Dawn advises extreme

restraint, it says “While outrage needed to be conveyed to America, domestic

emotions need not be whipped up to the point where the alliance becomes

untenable. For the sake of regional stability, Pakistani troops will have to

77 Daily Dawn, Editorial (US report), 08 Apr 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/04/08/us-report/

78 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Fresh Tensions), 13 Apr 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/04/13/fresh-tensions-2/

79 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Drone attacks), 07 June 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/06/07/drone-attacks-4/

29

continue to cooperate with Isaf troops at the border.”80 It further goes to the extent

of suggesting ‘a realistic approach’: “there has been plenty of sound and fury

already and it is time for some realism and a toning down of aggressive rhetoric,

or at least an acknowledgment within the rhetoric that cooperation is the ultimate

goal.”81

Dawn considers porous Pak-Afghan border as major factor towards militants’

success in perpetuating their hostilities. It is of the view that “coordination along

the Pak-Afghan border and the denial of safe havens to militants are necessary for

ensuring the security of all three nations.”82 The paper looks approvingly at the

initiation of talks with Afghan Taliban and suggests “Afghan reconciliation.

Attempts to bring Taliban insurgents into the political process are necessary if

there is to be any chance of avoiding a repeat of what followed the withdrawal of

the Soviets in 1989.”83

The major suggestions of the paper can be summarized as: Pakistan should go

whole heartedly against militants in its tribal areas, America should respect

Pakistan’s sovereignty and stop accusing this fatigued ally, talks should be held

with Afghan Taliban. Contradictions in Dawn’s recommendations are too obvious

to be explained!

12. Theme

80 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Military Positions), 03 Dec 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/12/03/military-positions/ 81 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Military Positions), 03 Dec 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan h ttp://dawn.com/2011/12/03/military-positions/ 82

? Daily Dawn, Editorial (Deteriorating ties), 29 Nov 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/11/29/deteriorating-ties/

83 Daily Dawn, Editorial (Deteriorating ties), 29 Nov 2011, Islamabad, Pakistan http://dawn.com/2011/11/29/deteriorating-ties/

30

Being in a war torn region Pakistan and Afghanistan are passing through worst

turmoil of their history. On both sides of Durand line hardened militants are

fighting a deadly war against America and its allies. Of the two countries being

direct affectees of war on terror Pakistan is badly wounded for it has borne

colossal damages. Pakistan’s survival lies in untying its relations with militants

and fighting this menace whole heartedly. This country can not afford global

isolation by continuing its policy of playing on both sides. An arrogant America

has started learning some very important lessons after fighting a decade long

fruitless war in Afghanistan. In order to find an honorable exit from ‘the graveyard

of empires’ America has been left with no option but to talk with the same Taliban

that it detests so strongly! The end game is near all the players are reprioritizing

their positions!

Editorial on Haqqani Network

An unpleasant choice!

Our establishment’s myopic vision has again thrown us into a quagmire where we

have been miserably left with two very unpleasant options: devil or the deep blue

sea! After harboring militancy for almost two decades partly at the behest of

communist-phobic United States and partly at the hands of her own ‘strategic

depth’ syndrome, Pakistan is now being pressurized to hunt the same Haqqanis

that are now sworn enemies of America but surely have some soft, cosy corner for

Pakistan. The U-turn in foreign policy taken by Musharaf after nine-eleven might

have been an unavoidable compulsion at the heat of hour but the aftermath of this

31

decision has turned everything upside down in this volatile land and the gore and

destruction that ensued is a grim proof that this was a mindless decision.

Every time militants in Afghanistan squeeze the occupying forces, America uses

its quick formula of blaming Pakistan based Haqqani network and thus tries to

absolve itself of all the sins of incompetence and mismanagement. With the war in

Afghanistan pacing towards its logical end, the only concern of the United States

and its NATO allies would be a safe, honorable exit which, at the moment, seems

unlikely. The recent thrust in pressure on Pakistan to ‘do more’ against Haqqanis

is a bleak reminder that Pakistan is being cornered by America as a possible

scapegoat for American follies and failures in Afghanistan. A beleaguered

Pakistan will not be too blunt if it asks its ‘ally’ America: is this the final fruit that

Pakistan will have to reap after all sacrifices of a decade long faithful following of

America’s war on terror?

Increasing influence of Pakistan’s arch enemy India into Afghanistan is another

threat to the interests of Pakistan. If America leaves Afghanistan in the present

chaotic state Pakistan will be left with no choice but to bet again on ethnic Pashtun

militants to counter the influence of India as other ethnic entities in Afghanistan

are overtly pro-India. While America seems to be interested only in her own

interests leaving Pakistan in the lurch, it would be wise for us to look into our own

interests too. Definitely, ‘War on terror’ mantra will soon loose its spell and we

will have to face the changing regional challenges. After toeing the American line

for more than a decade now we should wisely change our priorities according to

the interests of our own country. Serving America blindly will serve no purpose at

all. We should not take the crucial decision of hunting or harboring Haqqanis on

any American coercion. Our own national interests should always come first!

32

*Shahid Iqbal*

33