Abduction of a Pakistani envoy
It now appears from a BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation) report, the ambassador of Pakistan to Afghanistan - who was reportedly abducted by Taliban militants, a few months ago was released recently by his captors. It should be a piece of good news for family and friends of the envoy plus government of Pakistan, per se.
But the drama (I would like to call it that way) unfolded so far in connection with, and ancillary to the above matters has given rise to inter alia several initial questions. For example:
Whether or not it was a case of abduction? 2. Was it an outcome of planned engineering and execution of certain events in a certain manner or otherwise? 3. What was the motive behind for example, abduction and release of the envoy? 4. Who were and are involved in the process? 5. What was the role of the media (print, electronic) in the process? 6. What are or will be the gains or losses (or both) - for whom and when? 7. Does there exist any link between the on-going war on terror and efforts of Pakistani government plus others (as applicable) when it comes to re-applying political solutions to problems concerning terrorism in Pakistan and adding an additional dimension to anti-terror initiatives? 8. How and to what extent, the information, the experience and the lesson derived or to be derived (or both) from events associated with say, abduction and release of the envoy could be beneficial or not beneficial or a mixture of both to the government, abductors and others against the backdrop of the present day anti-terror efforts by Pakistan, Pakistanis and others? 9. How would the resultant benefits and losses contribute to escalation of the war or de-escalation of the war or otherwise? 10. What are the hidden terms and conditions of 'negotiations' that led to the release of the envoy by the captors? 11. What will be the cost-wise implications for those terms and conditions and who will bear the costs? 12. What are the real identities of abductors - what are their present denominations? 13. Where are they located at present and what are their average areas for say, operation related manoeuvrings? 14. If the drama is a product of planned events - how could then the resultant outcome affect and shape the future of the US-led war on terror in the near future?
Two of the reasons for presenting the questions now to readers and others are: to create an additional space for them to re-explore and re-examine the drama in a more objective and investigative manner; and to assist world people and countries in the efforts towards - - how best and quickest they could get rid of terrorism and its ramifications at local, national, global and other levels. One of the underlying assumptions here is - abandoning the existing mode of anti-terror war in favour of a 100 percent political mode of anti-terror war or the application of an unrealisable, as well as unproductive mixture of both the modes could do more harm than good to all concerned under certain situations and circumstances. In that respect, it may be mentioned here that evolving challenges that are associated with food, natural disasters and energy at local, global and other levels and the continuation of those challenges without any significant remedy through the foreseeable future could lead to a natural death of terrorism or a further escalation of terrorist activities or a maintenance of status quo.
The last word: the present day challenges have, in a sense, provided world people and countries an additional rationale for fighting the war on terror in a more united, result-oriented and satisfactory fashion at local, regional, global and other levels.
For all latest news, follow The Daily Star's Google News channel.
Comments