Appearing from Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore, Peshawar, Muzaffarabad & QuettaTuesday, September 13, 2011, Shawal 14, 1432 
What is terrorism and when did it start? While many responses can be provided to the question depending on how the word ?terrorism? is being defined, there exists a somewhat consensus that it is not a new phenomenon. Before 9/11, any act of violence involving the loss of innocent lives, with the motive of creating terror among masses, to draw their attention towards a certain ?cause?, used to be treated as a ?crime? and was presented and proved in the court of law. A legal process inevitably investigates the motives of the crime. However the motives of the attacks on the twin towers and the presence or absence of a ?proof? were left untouched and consequently, many important questions concerning the incident of 9/11 were ignored; in response the WoT was announced as the American government and the global media, under its influence labeled the 9/11 incidents as not just acts of terrorism and violence but an ?attack? on America. By implication, the whole strategy was designed around war craft and military actions while the political aspect of the situation was entirely ignored.
War affects all aspects of life, and its effect goes on for generations. The WoT is still going on and it is difficult to predict when, and in what shape, it might end. However on the basis of 10 years of experience, its political and economic effects and its influence on the nature of relationships between the major powers as well as reflections on the global system, it is possible to draw some conclusions and paint a likely scenario. The biggest price to be paid in a war is the loss of human lives. As per a well-documented study, prepared by Eisenhower study group of the Brown University?s Watson Institute for International Studies, in WoT, until now, 225000 people have lost their lives, including 6000 American soldiers and 175,000 ordinary citizens. An important factor leading to human loss in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan is the unavailability or destruction of medical and health facilities, and use of lethal ammunitions and the hazardous radiation effects that have caused fatal diseases. There are social and economic costs as well. According to independent analysts US costs including its future liabilities are expected to be over 4 trillion US $.
What exactly is the target and how the success may be defined in this war has remained uncertain and unclear owing to the very nature of this war. There is however little progress towards the stated objectives of initiating the war; nevertheless the US accomplishments (if any) of this war can be cited as follows: The ?repressive? regimes in Iraq and Afghanistan have been overthrown with the establishment of new governments therein, and the two countries have been introduced with new constitutions and the process of elections. Some developmental work has also been done in Iraq and Afghanistan. However the war is still going on in Afghanistan and no immediate signs of stability can be spotted there at present. In Iraq, though the situation apparently seems relatively smooth and calm, 43,000 American soldiers are still posted; Iraqi communities are more segregated today than before in terms of ethnicity; and violence and casualties in Iraq are on the increase. From the US perspective, its presence in strategically important areas and legitimizing the extended role and scope of NATO can be counted another attainment. In addition, since Osama Bin Laden (and a good part of Al-Qaeda leadership) is believed to have been killed, it is hoped that Al-Qaeda will grow weaker with time.
As to the Chinese response in this overall scenario characterized by an aggressive response in form of WoT by America, it is quite understandable that it was not ideal for China as an emerging power to stay out of the matter. It had four major options: first, unequivocal support i.e. taking part in the war with all its resources, without any reservations; second, conditional support i.e. asking something in quid pro quo third, tacit endorsement of U.S. actions showing its disapproval of the war while keeping itself away from the proceedings; and fourth, concern voice from the sidelines not separating itself from the international atmosphere of sympathy for America and ?supposed? eradication of terrorism, but keeping a distance from US while saving itself from practically taking responsibilities and offering its human and economic resources in the war; this could also have presented the combat between America and Al-Qaida as an opportunity for China. China went for the fourth option keeping in view its broader post-Cold War security agenda which is founded on the importance of economic development, reunification with Taiwan, and the development of a multi-polar international order. China, along with expressing its principal stand - that the armed action should be based on concrete evidence, abiding of international rules and on the authorization of UN, and that the innocent civilians should in no way be hurt - has taken part in WoT in such a way that it has not taken any part in the social, human, economic and environmental destructions caused by the war.
On the other hand, utilizing its prudent approach, China has made optimum use of the time and opportunity, to gain tremendous development on the political and economic grounds. Unlike America, China has gained a boost in the global standing. Of the numerous advantages it has gained, along with a focus on its national development, some of the significant successes of China include strengthening regional, trade and economic cooperation, solving border disputes with neighboring countries, cooperation in various parts of the world, participating in economic and development projects in Afghanistan, and evading the ?terrorists?? direct target.
However, setting aside China?s own national interests, Beijing?s policy has not helped much in genuinely dealing with the problem of terrorism, addressing its root causes and moving towards a just global system. As a result, even after the war, spanning over 10 years, which practically has China?s consent too, and involving the loss of over a quarter million of human lives and trillions of dollars, the question still remains: Is the present world a safer place than the world in 2001? And that without real peace in Afghanistan, and consequently in a large part of Asia, can peace, progress and development is expected in all these areas? Considering the overall human development, another important question is that what would have the present world been like if trillions of dollars, spent on war craft and ammunitions, had been spent on the eradication of poverty, illiteracy and disease? Wouldn?t it have been a much better place if the efforts had been made for cooperation on human miseries?
While terrorism should not be acceptable in any form, there is a need to define various forms of it. It has to be realized that military actions and war cannot eliminate it. It needs proper strategies and measures. In this connection, addressing the political dimensions of the issues, which trigger violence, a somewhat smaller number of perpetrators can be isolated from the much larger population of prospective followers. Moreover, using police and surveillance networks to preempt the acts of violence, treating these acts of violence as crime, and a judicial process to deal with the criminals will help eradicating support for terrorism on sustainable basis.
At a higher level, the global institutions should be able to proceed and prove that they are moving towards worldwide justice, as opposed to ?might is right?. There is no option but to find out the real causes of deprivation, frustration and disappointment alongside making efforts to build an effective global system which is fair and capable of providing justice to the weaker elements against the powerful players in the world. It is no doubt a long journey; nevertheless, it is inevitable to make this journey speedier not only for the peace and stability of Asia but for the progress and prosperity of the whole world through mutual cooperation, movement for sustainable peace, and respect for harmonious world and human values. It is but natural to expect from China which ? though yet to match the comprehensive power as compared to the traditional powers is an emerging power, having greater stakes in the global system, and also the only Asian country among the permanent members of Security Council that it will lead the journey both at conceptual and operational levels while emphasizing its approach of harmonious development, common progress and respect for human values.
?The writer is DG Institute of Policy Studies, Islamabad.
? Pakistan Observer 1998-2011,All rights reservedHURMAT GROUP
Zahid Malik
President & Editor-in-ChiefFaisal Zahid Malik
Phone: 021-32211777,3 2631102Gauhar Zahid Malik
Phone: 051-2852028Feroz Uddin Khan
Cell 03009185669
Email: khan007_feroz@yahoo.comAli Akbar House G-8 Markaz, Islamabad, Pakistan
Phone: +92 (051) 2853818, 2852027-8, Fax: +92 (051) 2262258
Email: observer@pakobserver.net FAISAL ZAHID MALIK
Editor
Phone: 021-32211777, 32631102
Fax: 021-32626902
Email: obskhi@pakobserver.net
Resident Editor
Phone: 042-37593341, 37566702
Fax: 042-36300043
Email: obslhr@pakobserver.net
Resident Editor
Phone:081-2829238-40
Fax: 081-2829072
Mobile: 0333-7944760
Web Editor
For any query, complaint or suggestion regarding website please feel free to email at: webmaster@pakobserver.net
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿