Is NSP a step forward for Pakistan?

Prime Minister Imran Khan on January 14 unveiled a public version of the country’s first-ever National Security Policy (NSP), while claiming that Pakistan was in dire need of a multi-pronged strategy for the future to ensure the protection of its citizens and guard economic interests. The federal cabinet approved the NSP on December 28, a day after the National Security Committee gave it a nod of approval. The policy defines the direction the country should take in the coming years. Its makers have apparently taken a citizen-centric approach to national security and placed a special emphasis on economic security. Bol News asks experts as to how they view this new policy.

Air Marshal (retd) Masood Akhtar

Senior Defence Analyst

The National Security Policy (NSP) gives no solutions to a number of very crucial issues. It does not tell how we can eliminate terrorism in Pakistan and how we can save our soldiers from falling martyr every now and then despite a major victory in a campaign against terrorism.

It does not tell how we can bring an end to insurgency and how we can protect Hazara in Quetta from continual attacks. It also fails to mention how to neutralize, if not finish off, the extremist groups, because of which the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is at our throat.

The policy does not give a guideline to establish the writ of state viz a viz the Tehreek-e-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) and the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).

It also doesn’t tell us how we can become a sound economy despite being totally polarized. It also does not tell how we can ensure foreign direct investment (FDA) in a terrorism or violence infested state. It doesn’t explain how can defend Kashmir and Siachen.

How will our NSP and public policies succeed when we teach and learn at the National Defense University that we must pursue national interests and yet the term national interest is not defined?

It also does not explain why did former prime minister Nawaz Sharif and his foreign secretary quietly bring Kashmir from multilateralism to bilateralism in 1999 and declared in so many words that it was not a core issue and is merely a part of a composite dialogue about 5 or 6 other problems.

It also doesn’t tell why General Musharraf continued with the same policy after muscle flexing in Delhi and Agra during his first visit to India and later came up with his 4-point solution.

However, despite all these shortcomings, the NSP is still a good first effort. I hope we can connect the dots to remove these acute insecurities.

Khawaja Khalid Farooq

Senior Defence Analyst

The first NSP talks about good things that we all have been talking about. But unfortunately, it doesn’t tell how it will be implemented or put into practice. It doesn’t tell what will be the budgetary allocation; how the target and aims identified in this policy will be implemented and what will be the course of action for practically implementing it.

The first NSP rightly mentioned that the most acute form of efforts to undermine stability and national harmony of a society is terrorism. Pakistan pursues a policy of zero tolerance for any groups involved in terrorist activities on its soil.

With national resolve and dedication, Pakistan has fought one of the most successful wars against terrorism in the past two decades. Despite this success, the threat remains.

The use of terrorism as well as soft intrusion through various non-kinetic means has become a preferred policy choice for hostile actors. Terrorism is also being used to disrupt and delay development initiatives.

Pakistan has been acknowledged globally for taking positive strides towards creating a strong financial monitoring system to prevent terror financing. The state has also undertaken special development projects in parts of the country previously affected by terrorism.

The NSP calls for continuing this positive trajectory by strengthening police forces and associated counter-terrorism agencies; undertaking intelligence-based operations against all terrorist groups; preventing any use of financial sources for terrorism; addressing structural deficiencies and sense of deprivation in recruitment areas, and promoting a pluralistic anti-terror narrative

But it fails to tell how we will stop or mitigate the menace of terrorism.

The NSP has rightly mentioned that Pakistan is a diverse nation comprising various ethnicities, religious beliefs, sects, and languages. Extremism and radicalisation on the basis of ethnicity or religion pose a challenge to our society.

Aisha Saeed

Policy Analyst

The National Security Policy (NSP) was a much-anticipated document and comes at a crucial point in the country’s history. Setting the course till 2026, the NSP is not only a comprehensive umbrella framework but also entails an implementation mechanism that will be used to make the policy document practical.

With economic security at its core, the NSP also takes into consideration other traditional and non-traditional threats and challenges and the need for the citizens to understand those threats, without which the NSP cannot achieve its aim of national cohesion or present its case for formulation.

With Pakistan’s motives to shift from geopolitics to geo-economics, the NSP largely covers and addresses all aspects that are required to become an economic-centric country in the region. The document also suggests that Pakistan’s foreign policy will be grounded in economic diplomacy while projecting the country’s positive reality. Backed by the civil and military leaderships, the NSP will be supervised and implemented by the National Security Division along with the concerned departments.

The NSP is not a document meant to push the state or the current government’s narrative. It rather provides a guideline for the current and the future governments and policy-makers to ensure the perpetuation of wellbeing and the safety of the country.

The NSP ensures that all threats and challenges are addressed through comprehensive strategies that are systemic and enduring. Moreover, the NSP serves as a framework for a policy watchdog by assessing the evolving threats and challenges. This means the document is open to changes as threats and challenges evolve over years.  Hence, the NSP is the first of many steps required to bring a change in the ways policy-making and implementation are thought of in the country.

Dr Hassan Shehzad

Assistant Professor IIUI

Frankly speaking, the policy document is as bold and banal as any of the speeches of Prime Minister Imran Khan. It opens with his message titled “bold visions and big ideas”. Any rational soul would have started with baby steps instead of bold or big.

It is flush with abstract terms, unlike the objective policy documents countries develop usually. A reader looking for details or operationalization of these abstract terms would come across the ice-cold statement that details are not part of this public document. In the paragraph on maritime security, there is some meat, however.

It is of utmost importance that it mentions Indian Ocean security and discourages any one single actor from assuming the role of security provider of the globe. If this statement aims to warn India, as is perceived generally, the policy document is incomplete without mentioning South China Sea.

This is the sea that has become a hotbed of future conflicts between China and the US. This is the region from where bulk of international trade takes place. In addition to the US and China, European countries including Germany have made the South China Sea an explicit part of their security policy documents. India is not only openly standing by the US and allies in this sea but also is in a dictating position at some places. Due to this cooperation, India has been acquiring a very powerful role in the Indian Ocean too.

Though Pakistan stands with China, it also hosts European ships monitoring the South China Sea. In India, Pakistan and China have a common enemy. But then India offers both Pakistan and China some common opportunities and Indian business and cultural ties with China are getting stronger. Things are not as simple as laid out in this document.

On the political front, this document says national security should not be made subject to changes in the political landscape. At the same time, it has no mention of the leadership that initiated the process of formation of this policy seven years ago.