Help Pakistan, strengthen Britain

Pakistan is facing the greatest natural disaster in its history. Britain should be leading the aid and recovery efforts for three reasons. First of all Britain’s immediate geostrategic need is Pakistan’s logistical and political support in fighting the war in Afghanistan. From a longer-term geopolitical perspective Britain needs a stable and prosperous Pakistan so as to guarantee its interests in the wider South Asian region.  Beyond the geostrategic and the geopolitical there is also an often overlooked long-term domestic reason — Britain’s organic links with the country through its colonial past and it being the current home to one of the largest Pakistani diasporas in the world.

In analysing the current crisis it is imperative to keep the recent context in mind. Since 2005 Pakistan’s population has been through the mill. The list starts with the 2005 earthquake with 82,000 people dead and more than 3.3 million people left injured or homeless. Since then, the country has had to bear the brunt of the effects of the ‘war on terror’ played out in Afghanistan. There has been the growth of a Pakistani Taliban movement with an increasing number of terror attacks in Pakistan. There also have been two major counterinsurgency operations with many internally displaced people — first in Swat and later in South Waziristan.

The second half of 2009 was a particularly violent time in Pakistan. The war on terror in neighbouring Afghanistan led to increased US drone attacks in border and tribal areas with scores of civilian deaths. After the 2009 Ramadan, a wave of terrorist attacks started, targeting both government and security institutions (police, security services and army) as well as civilians (markets, a university), leading to 3,021 deaths, up 48 per cent on 2008 figures. There were a total of 12,600 violent deaths across the country in 2009 (14 times more than in 2006) including those killed in drone attacks, and security forces killed in the Swat and South Waziristan operations. The situation was not helped by an abysmal economic situation, with rising food prices and sugar and electricity shortages — none of which were adequately addressed by an unstable and inept civilian government.

At the time of writing the floods have affected more than 20 million people; many are homeless and living in overcrowded camps. 25 per cent of the country was or is under water. The number of dead seems relatively small for such a large scale disaster, but the number could swell as waters recede and disease, lack of food and shelter claim more lives. The real tragedy goes beyond the current floods: the difficulties will be compounded by the fact that crops and fields are destroyed, livestock is dead, and the infrastructure is badly damaged. The army, the most effective agency in the relief operation, has been terribly overstretched as the scale of the disaster affects all four provinces and they still have to maintain their responsibilities on the Afghan and Indian borders.

Given this backdrop it is essential that Britain leads the immediate relief effort but also works on a long-term plan for post-flood recovery. Britain’s links to Pakistan go back to colonial times. Today, Britain is the home to one of the largest Pakistani diaspora communities in the world. Many have links both to their country of origin as well as contributing heavily to the political and economic life here. Not only has the diaspora a right to mobilise the British government for help, but it should be clear that increased radicalisation in Pakistan due to despair and poverty will have repercussions on Britain’s streets.

The other long-term effect of a poverty stricken and unstable Pakistan will be felt across the whole South Asian region: if local governance fails and the government weakens, this could lead to the political destabilisation of the country. There is a lot of anger amongst the general population already. The lack of security and the harsh economic conditions have created disillusionment with the current government. The people are also angry with the opposition for not stepping up in the time of crisis. At the time of writing it looks unlikely that the army will take over. There is already a certain level of sympathy for certain radical groups amongst some sections of society. More despair could very likely lead to further Islamic radicalisation.

If the world does not step up during this hour of need then anti-Western sentiments are only going to grow. The perception is that the US and UK only want Pakistan’s help with the War on Terror; that they don’t really care about Pakistanis. This, more than Jamaat-ud-Dawa running relief camps, will cause resentment against the West and will in due course lead to the destabilisation of the entire region as the threat of another war with India becomes more credible.

Most pressing and most obvious is Britain’s need for Pakistan in fighting the war in Afghanistan. The hardware and supplies for the NATO troops come overland from Karachi to the Khyber from where it crosses the border. The fact that Pakistan’s road infrastructure is now in tatters will have serious implications for NATO’s logistics.

It is therefore essential that Britain considers its short- and long-term domestic and foreign policy interests and understands that aid is needed to help rebuild a stable and prosperous Pakistan where the general population has a stake in its own future. Whilst avoiding the minefield of corrupt feudal and government structures, the British government must not stop pledging aid. It is also important to make sure that British aid does not flow back into British pockets through contracts with British or other western consultants or firms. The whole point of aid is to develop local capacity whilst we move from immediate disaster relief to reconstruction.

Dr Marie Lall is a South Asia expert working on India, Pakistan and Myanmar at the Institute of Education, University of London and Chatham House. In 2009 she spent five months at the Lahore University of Management Science(LUMS) researching Pakistani views on citizenship and the state.