Sovereignty at stake

I have been in Cairo where I had arrived two weeks ago to talk to the Arab intellectuals of strategic and Islamic affairs. Regrettably then on May 27, 2009 the third major terrorist attack in three months occurred in Lahore. Since then there have been more blasts in the country including the destruction of a five star hotel in Peshawar and the brutal murder of a pro-government highly respected cleric in Lahore.
Recent hostilities in the country concerning the war events in Swat have already initiated a debate in many regional and international influential media and intellectual quarters if Pakistan could survive this newly created reality, in which serious questions about the policies and decisions of the government are manifestly involved. This debate revolves around the painful topic of the very survival of the country; it is a subject of tremendous significance for the entire Muslim world. This inquiry is of highest strategic importance but in terms of fundamental realities of contemporary transnational political facts entails two connected but separate and clearly distinct matters.
Firstly, we have to see if this eventuality is theoretically possible and not raised just rhetorically by our foes or disgruntled friends; secondly, we have to determine and evaluate the relevant circumstances to see if God forbid, a collapse on the basis of the identified criteria could happen.
The first question is whether it is considered a rationally justifiable inquiry that should be examined; I would have thought that it is really being melodramatic to even raise the question that a nuclear-armed nation possessing about the fifth largest military can just collapse as a result of domestic skirmishes. However, that such a scenario which has been now circulating for months at least raises the concerns to a level in which the matter needs to be objectively analysed.
In this context three composite factors need to be listed in the causation of this particular phenomenon dealing with the government.
* The over-excessive official followed by private tours abroad have exposed our ruling leadership to the world negatively. His choice of key advisors and ambassadors is perceived to be unwise; it is also simply disturbing that in taking stock of the country's woes, more than the majority of them are lumped up with the current incumbent of presidency.
* The continued touting of the now worn-out mantra, which is really embarrassing for any sovereign state, particularly one of a nuclear capacity, that seeks and accepts getting more and more money, presumably for the country, for fighting this current war against terrorism. Many in Pakistan are now alarmed that it has effectively become a mercenary establishment.
* Whether or not these wars are of Pakistan's choice or in its long-term interests or is it simply the inability of the current leadership of Islamabad to speak up to the powers that may be external or internal. This last point is really reaching scandalous proportions when one sees the articulations of several key members of the US Congress; it is maintained by leading Congressional members, particularly of the Republican Party that it is naive for Washington to handover a billion plus dollars to the incumbent Pakistani government.
I have yet to find any credible with evidence which might suggest that people in the country are convinced that it is not Washington's war that the army is fighting for a heavy and pricey interest. I find that except Imran Khan, no one has the courage to speak the truth for fear of alienating some perceived US support.