Militants and Politics in Pakistan

The emergence of new Islamic political parties, with some having links with the outlawed militant groups, has generated a heated debate in the country.
The use of religion’s platform in politics is not a new phenomenon in Pakistan but the participation of what many believe as resurrected Islamist banned groups has raised many eyebrows inside and outside the country.

The religio-political parties have a very small vote-bank in Pakistan and historically they have never been able to grab more than a dozen seats in the general elections except in 2002 polls when they swept across the Khyber Pukhtoonkhuwa, the former North West Frontier Province, and Baluchistan by cashing in on the anti-American sentiments in the wake of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan.

However, the emergence of the new religion-centric political parties might shrink space for the mainstream political parties in the national politics, particularly the ruling Pakistan Muslim League led by deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif, which traditionally has bagged bulk of the conservative votes in the national elections.
Some analysts believe that the emergence of these new Islamist groups was orchestrated to weaken the political base of Nawaz League after Sharif’s ouster as prime minister by the Supreme Court ruling.

The victory of Begum Kulsum Nawaz, former Prime Minister Sharif’s wife, in the bye-election for a National Assembly seat in Lahore, with much less margin than that of Sharif victory from the same seat in 2002 polls was said to be the result of the split in deposed prime minister’s vote bank in that constituency as over 13,000 of his traditional votes are said to have been polled to two new religio-political groups.

Same trend is expected to prevail in many constituencies of Punjab, country’s political nerve centre which is the main stronghold of Sharif as well as political base of these groups too, in general elections due next year.

The mainstreaming of these groups would not only have an impact on internal politics of Pakistan but it might also raise concerns among Islamabad’s Western allies, particularly the United States, as well as rival India which see these groups as a threat to regional security and beyond.

The most significant of the new political groups is Milli Muslim League (MML) which is seen is as the political wing of Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), a charity group placed on the U.N. list of terror outfits.

The JuD itself is suspected by Washington and New Delhi of being a front for the outlawed Lashkar-e-Taiba group which India blames for the 2008 Mumbai attacks. India alleges that Lashkar’s founder, Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, masterminded the Mumbai attack and the U.S. has also placed 10 million dollars bounty on Saeed’s head.

Though Saeed, currently under house arrest, did not attend the launch of MML but its leaders demanded his release in their maiden news conference and said they would seek his guidance after his release.
Ironically, Saeed had been refusing to join electoral process in the past and called democracy “unIslamic” but what made his followers to change their mind is still unknown.

The interior ministry has asked the election commission not to register MML as a political party but even the participation of the candidates backed by MML in elections could complicate matters for Islamabad.
Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif during his recent visit to the United States faced many pointed questions on this issue during his interaction at New York’s Asia Society.

The proponents of mainstreaming of these groups argue that Britain too had adopted the same strategy while dealing with the Ireland issue. It allowed Sein Fein to take part in the political process after its militant wing Irish Republic Army gave in its weapons.

They also point out to Afghan government’s strategy under which warlords Abdul Rab Rasool Sayyaf and very recently Gulbuddin Hekmatyar joined political process by giving up militancy.

The critics, however, say Irish militants and Afghan warlords as well as Pakistani militants are two different cases.

The Irish militants and Afghan militants pledged to renounce violence before they or their political wings are allowed to join the political process.

In case of Pakistan, the cadres of the new Islamic groups were never involved in violence in Pakistan. But these groups which are dubbed by the critics as “good Taliban” for Pakistan are accused of being involved in violence outside Pakistani borders.

Such a scenario requires Pakistani government, security establishment as well as diplomats to close their ranks and prepare a well thought-out strategy to convince the international community that the mainstreaming of these groups is a genuine effort to move these young cadres away from militancy.

The U.S. could be reminded of its historical mistake in the late 1990s when it abruptly washed its hands off Afghanistan after Soviet withdrawal leaving the Mujahedeen groups it nurtured to turn guns against each other and make their country a hub of international terrorism.

Pakistan committed its own mistakes. These war veterans joined Afghan internecine fighting as well as Kashmir’s freedom movement.

As pressure piling up on Pakistan to curb activities of these groups, Islamabad should secure international guarantees that its security concerns – exclusion of any Indian’s role in the Afghan peace process – are properly addressed. Moreover, it should also step up its diplomacy to mobilise world powers’ support for a settlement of lingering Kashmir dispute.