Year: 2012

Team Member: Ejaz Haider

Introduction:   

Pakistan has suffered the negative political and policy-making consequences of military coups since the late fifties. Repeated military interventions have not only created a civil- military divide but also twisted the entire concept of national security. Even before 1958, the military had arrogated to itself the role of the state’s defence, both physical and ideological. It remains wedded to that concept to wit even as its power has declined over the past few years. The problem with the military’s unilateral and linear view of what is good for Pakistan is that it runs against the diversity of people that came together under a single flag in 1947. This divide has played a negative role in many areas and done immense harm to the very idea of Pakistan as a nation-state. Pakistan is situated in a tough neighborhood and cannot afford the reflection of the civil-military fault-line in the formulation of its security policy. But that has happened and the state’s strategic options have steadily reduced. On the civilian side this has resulted in apathy and an abdication by the civilian principals of their primary role in security policy formulation even during periods of democratic rule. Today, as Pakistan faces multiple external and internal challenges and threats, the despondency that informs the Pakistani state and society and makes it more difficult for the state to formulate a response, is largely underpinned by this divide. It is ironic, however, that despite this divide being the biggest security threat to Pakistan, not much quality work has been done in this area which could (a) develop a theoretical base for the problem; and, (b) make some projections on the basis of the theoretical understanding of it.

The panel discussion seeks to address the broader issue of civil-military imbalance, its impact on policy-making and a prognosis for the future. We will try and attempt to answer four broad questions, though the panelists may not necessarily confine themselves to these questions:

1. Is there any difference in how the civilians and the military perceive Pakistan’s national interest?
2. If yes, how does it impact national security strategy and other policies flowing from it?
3. Can Pakistan expect to have a coherent policy, given various internal and external threats, if the civilian governments and the military leadership view those threats and the responses to them through different prisms?
4. Has the military’s power declined in the past five years; if so, does it provide the civilian government to become more proactive or does it create a vacuum at a crucial stage in Pakistan’s life?

There will be two sessions of three hours each which will include both the retired and serving Army officers, notable journalists, academics, and policy makers who have previous practical or research experience in the issue of civil- military imbalance in Pakistan. The routable is the first in the series of two roundtables, with the second one scheduled for Nov-Dec 2013. The panel is organized in a core group that will participate in both the Oct-Nov and Nov-Dec roundtable, and a rotational group which will bring diverse experts in the two roundtables.

Partner: International Alert, London

Duration: May to October, 2013

Locale: Gujrat and RahimYar Khan

Team Member:  Mome Saleem, Seemi Bano, Sadaf Liaquat

Introduction:

Urban violence is not a recent phenomenon. It was a major development concern in the last century due to the rapidly growing urban population, high pace of urbanization and depleting natural resources. According to an estimate urban population is likely to increase around 50 percent in developing countries and 80 per cent in developed countries by the year 2030.

In Pakistan, social competition is evident from ever growing ethnic, religious and social feuds. Several ethnic, religious and social groups feel threatened by other groups hence leading to violence and crimes of acute nature. Frustration among youth on the basis of unemployment and lack of positive engagements within a community leads to engagement in criminal activities such as murder, vehicle lifting, mobile phone and jewelry snatching, cattle theft, bank robbery, kidnapping for ransom etc. The violence leaves psychological, social and economic impacts on the victims and its trickle down effect is also seen on the family and society.

The study aims to explore the dynamics of violence prevalent in urban centers of Gujrat and RahimYar Khan districts. It focuses on exploring the non-conventional linkages between violence and crime. It also focuses on repercussions and response of masses to gauge the resilience of communities.  The study aims at providing a credible data to the policy makers to not only better understand the dynamics of discrimination and crimes leading to violence in these areas but also assist them to tailor their strategies/policies according to the public needs.

Objectives:

• To explore the perceptions of indigenous population, law-enforcement agencies, civil society, district government and advocates regarding the reasons of prevalent crimes.
• To explore the impact of urban violence on the psychological, social and economic state of people
• To know the coping mechanisms of communities
• To explore nature of violence experienced by marginalized communities (women, youth, ethnic and religious minorities)

Activities:

• Primary data collection from Gujrat and Rahim Yar Khan
• Longitudinal study from mainstream newspapers published from the two districts
• Publication of a report on Ecology of Urban Violence

Peace and Conflict Zones funded by the Ford Foundation, USA and Pakistan Environment Program.

Study objectives

1. To redefine conflict, conflict zones and security concepts in Pakistan,
2. Challenging conventional peace formulae;
3. To re-conceptualize peace in relation to everyday life as part of process of deconstructing and embedding the concept of peace in civil society

The major external threat perceived by Pakistan emanates from its eastern neighbor: the traditional arch rival, nuclear equipped India. The other increasingly consequential vein of conflict has been it’s relations with Afghanistan.

A substantial focus of the peace movement in Pakistan has therefore been India-centric. After Partition and its upheavals and violence, borders were sealed; the two countries have since then fought three direct wars, engaged in constant border skirmishes with thousands of civilian lives lost. The tensions have been accompanied by ‘protective’ measures such as mining of border territories, deployment of troops, policing of communities; orthodox education vilifying the ‘other’ and such. The balance of power solution touted has been nuclear capability.

With Afghanistan, Pakistan has oscillated between periods of disassociation, intensive engagement for ‘strategic depth’, respected borders and boundaries and intruded beyond, depending on a host of geo political factors. The post 9/11 security discourse in Pakistan has necessitated the closing of borders, immense troop deployment, while simultaneous overtures of solidarity with the new regime have been made. Meanwhile, under the umbrella of the War on Terror, the country has witnessed internal conflict and state sponsored repression and military operations. The emerging regional scenario has propelled the peace movement to respond to this increasingly militarized version of peace.

Similarly ethnic and sectarian militancy and violence within the country has been answered at the state level by arrests, detentions, court cases, banning of sermons, Section 144 (prohibiting public gatherings) and such measures.

In the face of geo-strategic and political compulsions and domestic power wrangling, the people who suffer in the conflict, directly and indirectly, have been rendered invisible.

There have been no moves to build a positive peace fostering plural values. The moves, so far, are aimed to minimize violence, not build peace. Peace is seen as essential for national security, for saving people from death, for investment, economic and trade ties, for continuity of governments. It is still not envisioned as important for normality and quality of life for all. There seems to be a limited understanding of what peace can and should entail and what formulas for peace should contain

The common understanding seems to be that since military and paramilitary forces fight wars, they and their instruments should govern peace as well; for example, UN peace keepers are in effect, an armed army. This militarization of peace takes on special significance in the current world order post 9/11.

Pakistan’s role in the war on terror and consequent actions of the State are largely predicated on the assumption that peace building is a compulsion of state and global states’ security. That it is a necessity for humanism, requiring all human beings to respond is still not understood. Against the backdrop of military operations, house searches, arrests, bombardments and elimination of terrorist bases and networks, the root causes of conflict, growth of religious right and fundamentalism and volatility of people’s sentiment are given little attention. A culture of peace remains the Holy Grail.

Rationale

The study will undertake to question traditional notions of conflict and peace. It will seek to empirically prove summary observations of peace activists and the women’s movement; that that mere cessation of hostilities does not create peace and that peace cannot exist by default. In conflict, notions of insularity are imaginary. The battleground expands to encompass the community, society and country, making the frontlines a conjectural border.

In the first part, the study will analyze conflict zones and zones considered vulnerable to conflict. It will develop indicators for assessing the impact of hostilities on the ‘civilian’ community who may or may not be ‘active’ as ‘soldiers’. It will examine the emotional, psychological, familial, communal, economic and cultural opportunity costs of conflict, with reference to the human rights and entitlement framework. It would look at areas seen as vulnerable, cross comparing the two, and looking at the gains and losses of being on the ‘edge’.

It would attempt to draw out the ‘spill over’ of war into communities, examining the relevance of battlefront and home divide. The basic assumption that it will seek to challenge is the idea that there is a public private dichotomy and the war takes place in a public zone, a militarized, male frontline whereas the ‘feminized’ home is a safe, private, secluded zone, unless the enemy attacks it directly. The study will analyze this, through for example, seeing if a rise in external violence results in internal, domestic violence. And see how homes and communities become ‘militarized’ in response to external hostilities that they may not even be directly a part of.

It will reflect whether intrapersonal peace and inner peace is possible in a hostile environment, by gauging the mental health of communities in question, highlighting the dividends of peace.

In part two, the study will use the same indicators developed for conflict zones and test them in ‘non conflict’ zones. The premise here is that non-conflict zones suffer on the same counts, and that peace is as absent here as in conflict zones, and that these communities have also been militarized. The data will prove that people’s emotional, psychological, familial, communal and economic health are scarred even in areas deemed peaceful, with the exception of overt, physical impacts such as injuries and death from conflict, and consequences such as caring for the infirm and invalid. This will highlight that peace cannot exist simply if there are no violent hostilities.

It will examine what peace would mean in people’s lives and compare it to visions of peace of people in conflict zones. The study will aim to move the peace discourse beyond the current limited continuum of national security, illustrating the need for a holistic approach factoring people’s lived realities, showcasing peace as a process and culture.

Study Design

A two-part study comparing active conflict zones, zones vulnerable to violence and ‘non conflict’ zones:

Part 1: Conflict Zones

Active conflict zones Zones vulnerable to conflict
Gilgit Badin
Chakoti Kasur
Wana Karachi

Issues to be addressed:

• Cost of conflict
• Impact of conflict
• Is conflict equivalent in human terms to threat of conflict
• Who is on the battlefront Is there spillover in homes or does the public/ private dichotomy hold
• Gendered perceptions of conflict
• Who does the conflict serve and who suffers
• What inner peace and interpersonal peace mean there

Part 2: ‘Non Conflict’ Zones

Possible areas
Urban: Rural: Tribal (spillovers):
Lahore Jhang Bannu
Dera Adam Khel

Issues to be addressed:

• Similarities, consistencies and differences from active violence zones
• Are there ‘non conflict’ zones
• In the absence of formalized conflict, are they ‘peace’ zones
• What are the perceptions of conflict Violence Threat
• Are perceptions altered by gender
• Visions of peace What does interpersonal and inner peace mean
• Peace can be realized only through agency of state

This component was conducted in two tiers. The first aspect focused on the training of young Pakistanis from various parts of the country in familiarizing them with the dynamics of South Asian security. The second aspect dealt with asserting ordinary Pakistanis’ perceptions about security issues facing the country. Along with young analysts, we held public focus group discussions with various strata of the society to gauge perceptions about national security.

The objective of the project is to document the oral history of the 1947 Partition which saw the biggest movement of people in history. Friends became foes instantaneously and the world witnessed the worst form of genocide. Despite the fact that this left more than 10 million people dead

Partner: DANIDA and SFCG

Duration: August 2012 to November 2013

Locale: 25 districts of Pakistan

Team Member:  Mome Saleem, Adnan Talib, Muhammad Arslan, Kashmala Choudhry, Mikail Toru, Sadaf Liaquat

Introduction:

The widespread community feuds and chaos in the society based on religious, ethnic, societal and a class difference lead to violence and promotes negative attitudes among the youth. Considering the current conflict situation in Pakistan, SDPI established platforms/mechanisms for the youth, civil society, and local government officials to foster greater collaboration towards constructive dialogue and understanding of local conflict dynamics hence enabling tolerance and spirit of co-existence.

Click here to view Introduction to District Dialogue Forums(DDF’s)

Objectives:

• To enhance the capacity and sustainability of Pakistani media electronic and print to play an active role in promotion of peace, tolerance, co-existence and harmony
• To enhance the capacity of Pakistani youth and local leaders to explore issues affecting them through a constructive, solutions-oriented approach that is geared towards reconciliation and Peace building
• To establish platforms and mechanisms for Pakistani youth, civil society, and local government officials to foster greater collaboration towards constructive dialogue, increased understanding of local conflict dynamics and issues of key importance to youth, thereby fostering increased harmony and tolerance across the country.

Pakistan Peace Initiative:

Pakistan Peace Initiative is a multilayered project, which involves three key components; (1) Media; (2) Youth; and (3) Local Leaders. Through the involvement of these critical stake holders the project aims to create connections within and across communities, and at multiple levels of society, particularly among youth constituencies, and will leverage the core strengths, reach and influence of the media, thereby opening doors to a national shift in the way conflict issues are perceived, while building a critical swell of informed support for change.

The study consists of four phases. In the first phase, baseline survey was carried out in the four provincial capitals of Pakistan and its report was launched in October 2013.

In second phase, mainstream electronic media anchors, youth, and community leaders from 25 districts were selected and trained on conflict resolution and peace building methods. Subsequently, the trained social capital called peace leaders were enabled to organize dialogues in their respective areas on real time conflicts at community level.  Later, the trained anchors and journalists from print, radio and TV produced and aired programmes on the outcomes of dialogue forums. The project was implemented through a consortium. In the last phase National Peace Summit was held to bring together peace leaders from across the country. The participants included 50 media personnel from electronic media, radio and press. Some 25 youth trainees and 75 community leaders also attended the summit. Besides sharing success stories, a petition signed by more than 700 people of different gender and age groups was also presented to policy makers. The Summit allowed the trained social capital across the country to develop a ‘Common Vision’ for future peace building endeavors. A network to promote peace activities in future was also developed with the stakeholders in a roundtable to share lessons  learnt a day before the summit.

Recommendations:

• Better service delivery and social justice equates peace
• Quick and easy dispensation of justice and sophisticated mechanism for accountability of the policy makers

Trainers

 Participants – Selected Districts