PROGRAM

ABSTRACT
KEY NOTE ADDRESS
TARIQ FATEMI

The subject of conflict management mechanism and the challenge of peace is both vast and complex, but it can be understood to reference to measures that aim primarily at preventing war, while endeavoring to promote peace. 
            While it is the primary responsibility of states to promote conflict management, an enabling atmosphere for this can be created by conferences, seminars, discussions and workshops, in which governments, NGOs, associations, societies, clubs and even informal movements are involved to strengthen and reinforce the government’s efforts.
It is also now increasingly recognized that in conflict management confidence building measures play a critical role and may also create the conditions that promote conflict resolution.  In fact, CBMs have become part of the institutionalized strategic language following the Helsinki Final Act, which created a series of East-West confidence and security measures that are credited with having contributed greatly to conflict management between the two rival blocks.  The CBMs cannot however deal with the root causes of conflict,  though they reduce the risk of miscalculation or misunderstanding that could escalate into war.
            It may also be noted that development cooperation is now considered an essential element in conflict management, for it can help not only in the removal of the causes of conflicts, but also in creating opportunities for non-violent conflict resolution.
            Now as regards Pakistan, it is essential to recall the circumstances surrounding the birth of the new state.  Not only did Pakistan face enormous hostility from its eastern neighbor; it also started off with a very weak economy and virtually non-existent state structures that included an army bereft of weapons. Further, its problems were greatly magnified because of the country’s  separation into two distant parts.  Ethnic, sectarian and linguistic differences added to the country’s woes.  All of this led to the armed forces playing an unusually dominant role, both for the country’s defense against external threats and to ensure order and stability within the country.  The failure of the political leadership to settle the issues relating to the Constitution of the country, relations between the two wings, inter-provincial rivalries within West Pakistan and other related issues, have continued to plague the country all these past years. 

In addition, relations with India have continued to cast a shadow on the country’s external policies.  This is true even today, notwithstanding the fact that since January 2004, the Musharraf regime has made “normalization” with India, an important element of its foreign policy.  This effort has spawned a large number of confidence building measures between the two countries. These have lowered the temperature, reduced tension and created a “feel-good” atmosphere, that has generated some expectation that they will graduate to meaningful negotiations on core political differences as well.  There is, however, little evidence of a desire on the part of India to engage in substantive negotiations that could resolve their political disputes.  This has led some political analysts to the conclusion that the CBMs may well run their course and then lead to anger and frustration among the people of Pakistan that could derail the peace process.

            Pakistan’s long and deep involvement in Afghanistan’s internal affairs, first as the leader of the U.S-led international coalition that promoted a “jehad” to oust the Soviets from that country and later by its efforts to sustain the Taliban regime in Kabul, have resulted in the presence of three and a half million Afghan refugees, along with thousands of Muslim youth from the Middle East and Central Asia, who decided to make Pakistan the staging ground for the pursuit of a “holy war”.  All this has brought the drug and gun culture to Pakistan, in addition to encouraging the scourge of terrorism, all of which have created an unprecedented law and order situation in the country.  The government’s tendency to use force to resolve its difficulties, without coupling it with political dialogue and economic incentives, has polarized society and created enormous challenges that have created a situation that has led many international observers to express the fear that the country could actually be headed for very choppy waters.
            In such a situation, the government has to engage in a strategic change of direction.  First and foremost it must recognize that only an elected, civilian, democratic political dispensation can create trust and confidence in the people of Pakistan that their political leadership has their genuine interests at heart Thereafter, the government must take constitutional, legal and administrative measures to meet with the aspirations of the people of the smaller provinces not only in the context of their political rights but also as regards their rightful share of the state’s resources, including oil, gas, coal, minerals and water.

*Paper presented in an International Workshop on Conflict Management Mechanisms and the Challenge of Peace organized by the Program on Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution, Department of International Relations, University of Karachi in collaboration with the Hanns Seidel Foundation, Islamabad at the Arts Auditorium on November 26-27-2007