By Ayesha Siddiqa
THE world is worried about increasing Talibanisation in Pakistan. It is concerned that this phenomenon might reach other countries too. Hence expatriate populations are looked upon with suspicion and blamed for all ills in foreign countries.
 However, it is important to recognise that these states are equally responsible for creating an environment that propels people towards aggression or a certain ideology.
 A case in point is the British government and relations between Pakistanis and the UK state. There is a growing perception in the UK that Pakistani expatriates are linked with terrorism and there are several cases in which such linkage has been established. More importantly, there is concern regarding the links between these expatriates and their country of origin. A number of young men are exposed to militant organisations and join these outfits during visits to Pakistan.
London’s response has been to curb communication and enhance scrutiny measures pertaining to these expatriates and Pakistanis visiting the UK and to concentrate on issues which, in its view, will help resolve Pakistan’s extremism problem. To begin at the end, the British government is keen to help Pakistan with building the capacity of the police and paramilitary so that militants can be fought effectively. This approach is beneficial for the government and consultants who thrive on aid. However, this formula alone might not work when the police are artificially disempowered. London does not seem too keen to ask the recipients of its aid any questions.
Similarly, the British government is trying to exercise greater control over the community in the UK that has some links to Pakistan. London is also busy making efforts to control the movement of Pakistanis to the UK. The recent case of the Pakistani students is an example of this policy. So is its peculiar visa policy. The general policy is problematic and will exacerbate the threat that the British are trying to eliminate.
For instance, the arrest and holding of innocent Pakistani students without charge is not going to win the British friends. The case of the students and the earlier incident of the shooting of a Brazilian man after the London bombings in 2005 demonstrate the need for the British police to build their capacity. In both cases, the police miscalculated badly. The shooting of the Brazilian proved to be a case of mistaken identity and the students were probably arrested without any evidence.
The above argument does not mean that one does not sympathise with Britain’s sense of insecurity. A state and its government must protect the people. However, methods of protection must not be confused with faulty and problematic policies. What is required is a lot more integration of communities in the country rather than looking out for those ‘others’ who can be blamed for whatever has gone wrong.
Despite all the hue and cry about justice, fair play and respect for rules and regulations, the fact is that all governments tend to stray when they feel the need to do so. So, whatever high values the British system subscribes to, its policies and the behaviour of its representatives can be held questionable, especially in the current context of the strategy on fighting the war on terror. Surely, London has never thought about the highly questionable position of its diplomatic outposts. These days, embassies and high commissions appear more like an extension of the East India Company.
Take the simple case of obtaining visas. In Pakistan, it is not the exorbitant visa fee which is the problem. Rather, it is the unfriendly attitude of the high commission which is bothersome. One would expect that after charging huge sums of money, it would have an effective system of response. But that does not seem to be the case and there have been several instances where passports have been stuck with the high commission in Islamabad for months. Besides, there doesn’t seem to be a workable system where people can get their passports back in case of an emergency that entails travel to another country.
Is this approach reserved for ordinary Pakistanis? Where an exorbitant visa fee is involved, there might be consistency and other nationals may also be subjected to it. However, there is much to suggest that stringent treatment is reserved for a few nationalities, Pakistanis being among them.
This kind of behaviour can make people reluctant to visit Britain and bar genuine travellers from doing so - a group of people that could otherwise have been sympathetic to Britain’s concerns. Inconvenience and humiliation can hardly win friends.
Furthermore, not everyone can lay claim to an ‘above board’ attitude. In Britain’s case, there have been stories of the involvement of prime ministerial families selling weapons to countries perceived as having dubious intentions and of kickbacks given to certain Middle Eastern countries to buy British military technology. It would make a lot of sense for the British government to investigate its own missions as part of its strategy to fight the war on terror.
The writer is an independent strategic and political analyst.
