There is a definitive difference of opinion over the nature
and potential outcomes of ongoing peace talks between the government and the
Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

Such a disagreement was witnessed among experts on Monday at
a panel discussion at the Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) on whether
the talks could actualise peace.

Among those opposed to peace dialogue in its current form
was panellist Zahid Hussain, a journalist and security expert. “If peace can be
reached, that’s great. But the way the whole negotiations are being conducted,
I don’t think it can deliver peace.”

Hussain said all previous peace deals between the government
and militants ended in failure, claiming that they were always broken by the
militants first. He did not advocate an all-out military operation in place of the
talks, but called for a “coherent strategy” to enforce its writ and curb
militancy.

On the contrary, former ambassador Ayaz Wazir supported the
idea of talks with the TTP without justifying or defending the militants’
position. Wazir’s core argument was that if the military’s presence could have
brought peace to the tribal areas, the past 10 years should have done the
trick.

He said some of the demands unofficially associated with the
TTP committee, such as withdrawal of Pakistani troops from the tribal regions,
were also the demand of many residents of the Federally Administered Tribal
Areas (Fata).

Another panellist, Lieutenant General (retd) Talat Masood,
said the demand for Shariah rule associated with the TTP was an attempt to
capture power and compete with democracy and constitution in the country.
Masood said military presence is necessary in the area for border management
and the foremost requirement for the state is to maintain its writ by
eliminating sanctuaries for militants.

Hussain argued that the basis of the talks, which
have brought an outlawed organisation on equal footing with the state, is wrong
and legitimises the past activities of the TTP.

Nadeem Afzal Gondal, a former Pakistan Peoples Party
legislator challenged the composition of the government committee.

Gondal highlighted the broader geopolitical context of
domestic conflict and the need for regional cooperation to end extremism.

Hussain agreed with Gondal and said people in the government
committee seem to share the Taliban’s ideology. “So in a way, it is a dialogue
within the Taliban,” he said.

Meanwhile, Jamiat Ulema Islam-Fazl spokesperson Jan Achakzai
said there should be “across-the-board political ownership” while dealing with
militancy, and talks with TTP should be supported with some local conflict
resolution mechanism involving tribal leaders.

Wazir brought to attention the plight of the Fata residents,
who have long suffered under the draconian Frontier Crimes Regulation.
Panellists argued that there was no denying that Fata’s residents should be
provided basic services and the same level of development as the rest of the
country. The speakers did however agree that all state institutions should be
on the same page for addressing militancy-related issues.