The second annual index of ‘failed states’ was based on 11000 articles from different sources gathered over the months between July and December in 2005 and reviewed by experts. The ‘failed states’ were listed by observing as many as 12 indicators that included demographic pressures, refugee movement, legacy of vengeance, human flights and human rights, economic development, criminalisation of state, widespread violence etc. Some of the factors that contributed to the ‘elevation’ of Pakistan were its inability to police the tribal areas close to the Afghan borders, the inapt handling of the October 2005 earthquake and alarming rise in ethnic tensions.

While it is not sure if the Pakistanis were very pleased about it, their ‘arch enemy’ India was way behind them at 93rd spot. It was clear from the list of the ‘failed states’ that nearly all of them were from the continent of Africa and Asia with South Asia contributing significantly—Bangladesh (19th), Nepal (20th), Sri Lanka (25th) and, of course, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Clearly, India is an island surrounded by states which may resent the tag of ‘failed states’ but are unstable and poorly governed. Not an ideal neighbourhood perhaps, but luckily ‘failed states’ is not a contagious phenomenon.

A ‘failed state’ has many definitions. But in the report under discussion here it was about states in which the government does not have an effective control of its territory, is not perceived by a significant portion of the population as legitimate and is unable to provide domestic security to a large section of the population. Another factor considered before preparing the list of failed states was large-scale violence and its sections of its citizens.

As could be expected the Pakistanis were quick to take umbrage at the Foreign Policy and Fund for Peace report. In what will appear to be typically Pakistani style of bluster and bravado, the information minister of the country dismissed the report as ‘the joke of the year’. According to the minister, Mohammed Ali Durrani, billions of dollars of foreign investment was pouring into Pakistan and the law and order situation and the human rights record of Pakistan were better than many other countries. Was he joking? No, he was speaking to the BBC. Problem solved. QED.

But unfortunately the minister was in no position to support his exaggerated claims with some hard facts. As recently as March 13, the US energy secretary, Samuel Bodman, had said that the bad law and order situation in Pakistan was ‘an impediment’ to investment in Pakistan. The Shia-Sunni clashes in Pakistan are becoming deadlier and taking a heavier toll of life than before. Not just the tribal areas but also the provinces of Balochistan and large parts of North West Frontier are witnessing violent clashes between the local population and the security forces and a growing sense of alienation among the people is setting in.

The people of Pakistan-occupied Kashmir have become more disenchanted with the Pakistani authorities after the October 2005 quake. The banned militant and terrorist organisations that were active—under new names--in POK’s relief programme are back in their ‘usual’ business of killing the innocents in India. This has drawn unfavourable American attention but Pakistan lacks the authority or the will to ban them again.

Pakistan’s efforts to blame a ‘foreign hand’ for the violence in Balochistan has not been heeded by anyone outside the country, nor has anyone bought the propaganda that those opposing the strong-armed methods of the Pakistani authorities in the troubled areas are against development. Islamabad has failed to get the American backing for its decision to dub the Balochistan National Army as a ‘terrorist’ organisation. The Pakistani rulers know of only one way to sort out problems in restive provinces: send the army. Only a ‘failed state’ would refuse to explore a political solution to an internal problem.

The free hand that Islamabad has given to the Taliban cadres living in their Pakistani safe havens has begun to haunt Pakistan itself with unrest spreading more intensely along the Pakistan-Afghan border areas and increasing civilian and military casualties. Many observers have reported that Balochistan was witnessing a nationalist insurgency that the authorities are unable to handle. NWFP’s is marching fast towards Talibanisation.

The minister who dubbed the American report as a ‘joke’ probably did not want to admit that much of the foreign investment in Pakistan would not have come without some behind the scene encouragement from the US which continues to see a key role for Pakistan in its so-called war on terror. Policy makers in the US realise that the actual situation in Pakistan is very different from what the publicists in either country say. As the time for general election (due in 2007) approaches, tensions in Pakistan are mounting with mainstream (also calling themselves ‘secular’) political parties demanding that the military ruler, Gen Pervez Musharraf, doff his uniform and the latter refusing to oblige despite a ‘promise’ to do so that he had made nearly two years ago.

With hardly any credible civil control over the government or the army, Pakistan’s present set up is a long way off from democracy and accountability. At the same time the popularity of Musharraf has been steeply declining even as the mullahs are tightening their grip on the society groping for ‘enlightenment’ under the military ruler. It will not be a surprise, if within the next few months, anti-Musharraf rallies become the norm because large sections in the country fear that an election held under the aegis of the military, or the ISI to be more specific, would be rigged. The state authority will be under more strain.

Despite all the praise that the American periodically showers on Musharraf they cannot but be worried about reports of Pakistan becoming a ‘failed state’. One of the major worries for Washington has been the extent of damage caused by the clandestine ‘nuclear Wal-Mart’ run by Pakistani metallurgist A.Q. Khan, since disgraced. Almost coinciding with the report of Pakistan ranking high among the failed states was a statement from Islamabad that the chapter on investigations into the AQ Khan network has been ‘closed’ with the ‘release’ of Mahmoud Farooq, one of the 11 men working at Pakistan’s premier nuclear weapons laboratory, the Khan Research Laboratory, who were arrested in 2003 under American pressure after the unearthing of the AQ Khan’s nuclear black market. Now all the 11 have been ‘released’ though Farooq, like AQ Khan, has been ‘advised’ to stay indoors and not to talk to the media.

Pakistan did not give any details about the ‘release’ of Farooq, much less any details about what he told the investigators. But then Pakistan had also not been very forthcoming about the disclosures made by AQ Khan. A strict veil of secrecy remains over Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation activities, suggesting that either it has (or at least had) no control over its nuclear weapons programme or, as is more likely, it has no wish to let the world know about the extent of harm its secret proliferation activities have caused to the world. Only a ‘failed state’ can be that irresponsible.

Printer-Friendly Version