Monitor on Civil-Military Relations in Pakistan for May 2016

In this Issue:

  • Pakistan-Afghanistan Border Management: Need

    for a Unified Strategy

  • Custodial Killing of MQM Worker: A Dent in

    the Karachi Operation?

  • No Meeting of the National Security Committee
  • Premier-COAS Interactions

Pakistan-Afghanistan

Border Management: Need for a Unified Strategy

Advertisement

Macintosh HD:Users:muhammad.saad:Desktop:Torkham.jpg

A view of the logjam of trucks and passengers witnessed at

the Torkham border crossing, after it was closed down on May 10, 20161

Effective border management, especially along

the Pakistan-Afghan border, remains an issue of urgent national importance.

PILDAT has been highlighting an urgent need for a better-managed Western border.

Our focus stems from the belief that no State can survive with soft borders

and unless Pakistan secures its borders, it will continue to face a host of

issues branching not only in internal and external complications, terrorism

and espionage, but also matters relating to health and trade, among others.

The Pakistan-Afghanistan border has attained

renowned notoriety for being a soft and porous border and is frequently described

as one of the most volatile and dangerous places in the world largely due to

the alleged presence of terrorist safe havens and lax Governmental control.

Various forms of illegal activities such as smuggling of weapons, narcotics,

vehicles, timber and electronic goods are routine matters. The health hazards,

posed over the years due to the spread of polio and other viruses through free

movement also poses another challenge.

Despite positive news on measures to improve

border management in May 2016, the issue does not seem to be resolved so far.

Some of the recent developments and facts in this context are listed below:

Towards Effective Western Border Management:

  1. The National Assembly passed a resolution

    on March 15, 2016 stating that ‘the Government should take effective

    steps to strengthen Pakistan-Afghanistan border’.

  2. On April 02, 2016, a meeting of the Provincial

    Apex Committee of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa was held, where improving border

    management at all crossing points with Afghanistan, especially Torkham,

    was stressed. The Committee decided to enforce a proper border management

    system and also to send a high-powered delegation to Afghanistan to seek

    resolution of the issue.2

  3. According to the salient features of the

    National Action Plan available on the website of NACTA, although ‘FATA

    reforms with immediate focus on IDPs’ repatriation’, and

    formulation of a comprehensive policy to deal with the issue

    of Afghan refugees, beginning with registration of all refugees

    are mentioned, nowhere is the objective of improved management of our western

    border explicitly stated.3

  4. On April 08, 2016, the Political Agent

    of the Khyber Agency issued a notification directing Afghan nationals living

    near Torkham within the Pakistani territory to vacate the area; they were

    given a four-day deadline in this regard. 4

  5. According to media reports, as early as

    April 17, 2016, the number of Afghan nationals coming to Pakistan from the

    Torkham border crossing had dropped as the Pakistani authorities allowed

     only those to pass with the required travel documents. According to

    various estimates, almost 20,000-25,000 persons cross over into Pakistan

    from the Torkham crossing, with only 1,800-2,000 Afghan nationals having

    the required documents. 5

  6. On May 10, 2016, the Afghan authorities

    closed the border crossing at Torkham. Afghanistan protested that it was

    not intimated in advance over the fencing being carried out by Pakistani

    security forces in the area. Reportedly, a two-kilometer fence was being

    constructed by Pakistani authorities beyond the 30-meter radius of the border

    crossing involving barbed wires to check unauthorized movement across the

    border. A news report carried out in daily Dawn in this regard

    cited the Political Agent of the Khyber Agency, who stated that ‘We

    had duly informed the Afghan authorities at Torkham border much in advance

    about our plan of fencing some unauthorized points at the border but they

    did not respond on time … Being a sovereign country, we have every

    right to make our own decisions’.6 The Political Agent

    went on state that the border would remain closed till the Afghan Government

    formally responded to the development.

  7. On May 13, 2016, the Ambassador of Afghanistan

    to Pakistan, Mr. Omer Zakhilwal, called upon the COAS, Gen. Raheel Sharif,

    at the GHQ where it was ‘agreed to resume routine cross border

    traffic at Torkham’.7 The border re-opened on May

    14, 2016, after a span of four days.

  8. According to a Press Release issued by

    the ISPR on May 21, 2016, a newly constructed border management facility

    at Angoor Adda was ‘handed over to the Afghan authorities’.

    The Press Release went on to state that ‘this gesture will act

    as a catalyst and is envisioned to bring momentum for establishing peace

    and stability along the Pak Afghan Border… It was reiterated during

    the process, that all border related issues will be amicably resolved through

    mutual consultations subsequently’.8 

    Angoor Adda was a part of a longstanding border dispute

    between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Previously in 2007, Pakistan had erected

    fences and posts near Angoor Adda in South Waziristan. Afghanistan alleged

    these to be located a few hundred meters inside its territory. Afghan National

    Army quickly removed them and began shelling Pakistani positions. According

    to news report by The News, a security official involved in the

    process stated that Afghanistan had been claiming ownership of the border

    crossing point near the Pakistani border in Angoor Adda and this had affected

    relations between the two countries. According to him, Pakistan finally

    decided to ‘hand over’ the border area to Afghanistan

    in a bid to improve its relations with it.9

  9. Complications started to surround the Angoor Adda development

    when it emerged that the Federal Minister for Interior, Chaudhry Nisar Ali

    Khan, MNA had written a letter to the Prime Minister ‘expressing

    reservations’ over his Ministry not being consulted on the handover.

    A news report carried by the daily Express Tribune cited the letter,

    which apparently stated that ‘There are very clear rules which should

    be followed before taking such important decisions …  The Government

    is the custodian of each and every inch of the motherland. We must follow

    the legal procedures if we have to take such decisions’.10

  10. On May 24, 2016, the Afghan authorities closed down the Angoor

    Adda border-crossing facility, which remains closed till this date.11

  11. On May 31, 2016, news reports emerged that the Pakistani

    authorities had decided that no Afghan without the requisite travel documents

    would be allowed to crossover from the Torkham border crossing from June 01,

    2016 onwards. Apparently, previously no such documentation was required as

    traders were allowed to pass through only on the basis of ‘route

    permits’. Afghanistan reacted negatively to the move, with the

    Ambassador of Afghanistan to Pakistan stating that the ‘Afghan Government

    was not taken into confidence over the matter’.12

As welcome and important it is to put in place

a stringent and effective border management system that puts to rest any mention

of the Pak-Afghan border as a “porous” or “soft” border,

the developments leading to the positive actions on border management appear

to suggest that some of the recent steps have not been taken with the required

consultation among civil and military institutions. In fact, Federal Minister

of Interior’s reported complaint indicates that effective civil-civil

and civil-Military consultations had apparently not taken place over the important

issue of handing over the border crossing facility at Angoor Adda to the Afghan

authorities.

This underlines a disjointed civil-military

approach, to say the least, especially when it comes to our Afghan policy.

While a consensus seems to be there within Pakistan

for securing the border with Afghanistan, the issue of transfer of Angoor Adda

border crossing point should have received the importance and the deliberation-based

policy it requires. Certainly the subject warranted a discussion among all stake

holders within the Government including the Ministry of Interior and the decision

should have been executed after explicit approval of the country’s Chief

Executive. The issue warrants a deeper analysis and a Parliamentary probe by

the Parliament’s Interior and Defence Standing Committees.

The border management issue also needs to be

approached and understood within a certain Pakistan-Afghanistan cooperative

framework. It remains undeniable that the Durand Line is the internationally

accepted border between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pakistan also reserves its

right as a sovereign nation to secure its side of the border by any means including

fencing or trenching and must move swiftly to do so. Precedents for this also

exist in the case of United States fencing its border with Mexico and India

fencing its border with Pakistan, unilaterally.

Although the newly introduced border management

system at Torkham needs to be lauded for its intentions, it is hoped that its

operations will become smoother and more efficient over time.

Pakistan must work together with Afghanistan

by invoking the international law and UN resolutions that ask both countries

to “deny safe haven to those who finance, plan, support, or commit

terrorist acts, or provide safe havens” and to “prevent

those who finance, plan, facilitate or commit terrorist acts from using their

respective territories for those purposes against other states or their citizens.”

13  On the

domestic front inside Pakistan, a comprehensive strategy may also include bringing

Parliament into the fold by enacting a comprehensive legislation enabling Pakistani

authorities to document persons crossing the Durand Line. In order to institute

an effective system of checks and balances along the Durand Line, the proposed

legislation should define easement right users and issue special ‘easement

right user IDs’ to individuals falling under this category. Detailed recommendations

on the subject are available in an earlier PILDAT paper titled: Pakistan-Afghanistan

Border Management:  A Legal Perspective.

Custodial

Killing of MQM Worker: A Dent in the Karachi Operation?

Macintosh HD:Users:muhammad.saad:Desktop:Torkham.jpg

Since the launch of the Karachi Operation in

October 2013, and its renewed vigour in March 2015, the MQM has repeatedly claimed

that the Operation is being carried out to exclusively target the party. The

polarization further seemed to increase when an MQM worker, Mr. Aftab Ahmad,

serving as the personal assistant of Dr. Farooq Sattar, died in Rangers’

custody on May 03, 2016. Mr. Ahmad was arrested from his residence and produced

in front of an Anti-Terrorism Court by the Rangers on May 02, 2016, for a 90-day

remand.14

Although it was initially denied by the Pakistan

Rangers (Sindh), the Director General of the Rangers, Maj. Gen. Bilal Akbar

later admitted that the MQM worker had died due to torture under Rangers’

custody and the Standard Operating Procedures were not followed in the course

of the investigation.15 The post-mortem report also confirmed that 35%-40% of Mr. Aftab Ahmad’s

body bore bruises and abrasions.16 In the meanwhile,  the COAS  directed the concerned authority

to carry out an inquiry into the incident, following which four personnel of

the Rangers were arrested.17

PILDAT believes that custodial killings and

the case of missing persons has should not become a recurrent feature of the

Karachi Operation. Consider the list recently submitted by the MQM to the Supreme

Court, which showed that 171 of its members had gone missing since the Operation

was launched, with ‘90% of them picked up by the Rangers from their

residence’.18

Such actions are needless given the various

legal amenities that the Pakistan Rangers (Sindh) have been provided with, including

Special Policing Powers granted under the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1997 and 2014

for the operation. Therefore, custodial killings and the case of missing persons

is not only unacceptable, unnecessary and unwelcome, but also dents the credibility

of the significant progress achieved under the Karachi Operation.

It is hope that the enquiry ordered by the COAS

will lead to administration of justice and recommendations for precluding any

suc