Refleksi : Perbedaan antara Pakistan dan Indonesia terhadap terorisme ialah: di Pakistan diserukan kepada para teroris untuk "meletakan senjata dan meminta pengapunan dari Allah", sedangkan di Indonesia hanya dikatakan "terorisme musuh semua agama".
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\07\20\story_20-7-2009_pg3_1 Editorial: Fight against terror and India The interior minister, Mr Rehman Malik, addressed a press conference jointly with his Afghan counterpart in Kabul on Friday and pledged better cooperation between Pakistan and Afghanistan in the fight against the Taliban insurgency. He admitted that "mistakes have been made by both sides in the past". Mr Malik characteristically warned the terrorists: "Stop it! We've decided to take you on, we've decided to flush you out...you've killed so many people...throw down your arms and ask for mercy from God". The joint press conference sounded like any that has happened in the past between the dignitaries of the two countries. Kabul is always polite and courteous, unwilling to express differences in the open; and Pakistan has likewise responded with niceties. But if you look at what the two say about each other at home, one comes across divergences and antagonisms that may take long years to overcome. Is there, however, a difference of tone detectable in the latest statements from the interior ministers? One clear difference is that Pakistan is now less confused about what to do with its own Taliban than ever in the past. It has decided to take on the warlords of its Tribal Areas, and the world clearly sees that it is fighting them in real earnest, killing the terrorists and losing its own soldiers in the process. Has Kabul, too, undergone a change of heart? Is there a hopeful change of policy there too? Unfortunately, there is a big area of discussion where the two will not speak openly and their positions may still be far apart. Kabul has looked at Pakistan as the nursery of Talibanisation and is bothered by "invasions" from inside Pakistan led by Taliban commanders and containing Pakistani Taliban, confirming Kabul's claim that all Taliban are under a joint command. It has accused Pakistan of giving shelter to the Afghan Taliban in Balochistan and has been pointing the finger at Quetta as their stronghold. Pakistan has consistently denied this and it is a matter of record that Islamabad has asked the Americans to inform it of what they mean by the Quetta Shura. Nothing substantive has been given to Pakistan except more allegations and newspaper reports about Taliban presence in and around Quetta! On the other hand the presence of some Baloch secessionist leaders in Kabul is now an established fact. Kabul also reads its own messages in the presence of India in Afghanistan. Apart from the considerable reconstruction and development work being carried out by India there, it is also seen as a strategic make-weight against the potential dominance of Pakistan. In this thinking, Kabul is not alone. The Americans see India as a "useful partner" in the task of Afghanistan's reconstruction. They may also see the Indian presence as a permanent solution to Pakistan's policy of interference and dominance in Afghanistan, though the more discerning analysts realise that such a policy is doomed by the constraints of geography. Kabul is strengthened further by the support India enjoys from Iran as both try to limit Pakistan's leverage over Afghanistan. Pakistan's "unofficial" view is that Kabul is being run by a puppet government put up by the Americans, and it sees India as a part of the American plan not only to prevent Pakistan from asserting its legitimate influence over Afghanistan, but also to set it up as the hegemon of South Asia. Pakistan is yet to clearly define the role of Iran, just as it was unable to reconcile its decision to construct an Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline with its permanent strategy to challenge India in the region. India, on the other hand, doesn't give Pakistan the role the world wants to give it as the fighter against terrorism. It actually thinks it is a part of the problem, but no one listens to it. America thinks Pakistan is crucial in the fight against terrorism and is reacting positively to Islamabad's change of policy towards the Taliban. But, just when the US Congress passes laws to reward Pakistan for its new policy, India wants Pakistan punished instead. This is where New Delhi, pushed by its domestic politics, is isolating itself. Its interference inside Pakistan, so far ignored by the world, could thus become an international worry. If India relents, Pakistan will be happier changing its view of India and move forward and normalise its relations with India. It has to mix its old "realist" strategy of maintaining stability through power-balance with a new "liberal" approach of achieving stability through economic interdependence. Till that happens, however, the various state postures in the region will remain ambiguous and contradictory, with possibilities of covert wars being fought by non-state actors through infusion of funds and weapons. * Second Editorial: Staying on in Swat The NWFP government has announced that it will spend Rs25 billion on revamping the security infrastructure in the Malakand division, and that it will ensure that the army remains deployed in Swat for at least two years "to allow for the capacity building of local security forces". It wants to double the number of police officers and police stations there, giving them state-of-the-art weapons and communication systems. Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani has already announced Rs20 billion in support of the plan. As the IDPs stream back to their homes in the division, they need the army in place for psychological reasons. On ground, troops are needed to help a rudimentary administration reassert itself and impose order on an area that had become the stronghold of the terrorists for nearly three years. The trauma of killings and beheadings is still fresh and trust in the permanence of the state is still shaky. Worse, warlord Fazlullah is still alive and broadcasting from his FM radio, reminding us that some areas of Malakand are still "infected". The economics of setting up a cantonment in Swat continues to recommend itself. The Pannu Aqil cantonment in Sindh was politically inappropriate when it was conceived and built. But the economic infrastructure it has bestowed on a backward region has made people forget that they had opposed it once. In a country where new cities emerge as a result of the incremental encroachment of slums, new cantonments remain a significant planned way of urban growth. The tourism industry in Swat, ignored over a long time, would be revived if human security is ensured. There is now hope that the NWFP will take advantage of the present moment to rectify all the mistakes made in the past. Swat must not be allowed to become a permanent liability on the province; it has the capacity of being on its own with its tourism potential. And tourism's first requirement is stability and security. * [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
