The Middle East should deal with non-state actors with an iron fist
Following the end of the Cold War, the world has seen a proliferation of non-state actors. For the sake of clarity, it may be useful to define non-state actors, in the context of this column, as any individual or group which enjoys a huge clout in a country and is not funded by the government.
By that definition, a big business corporation or a prominent charity organization is a non-state actor as well. But here, we will discuss only those private groups that use violent tactics to further their political goals. Prominent examples of non-state actors of our times are Al-Qaeda, the Tamil Tigers, the Taliban, the Irish Republican Army, and Daesh. Non-state actors invariably prosper in ungoverned or poorly-controlled areas. These are spaces where the writ of the government is either non-existent or extremely weak.
Such ideal spaces for non-state actors to flourish are created by foreign intervention for a regime change, as was the case in the un-called for foreign attack on Iraq in 2003.
Consequently, the new governments in Baghdad emerged as weak bodies; ones that were unable to have a strong foothold or stamp their authority on every nook and corner of the country. As a result, Daesh found its way through and was able to spread its tentacles in the empty spots.
The story in Yemen was only a shade different. Here, a legitimate government in San’aa was toppled by a non-state actor, the Houthi militia.
The result was chaotic; a situation which was fully exploited by Al Qaeda and Daesh to gain a foothold in Yemen. That being said, until an effective and legitimate government returns to the Yemeni capital, these non-state actors — who have made a mockery of state sovereignty — will not fade away. Therefore, all national and international efforts that are pushing for legitimacy should be supported. Additionally, any effort to seize power by force must be strongly opposed at all levels.
If non-state actors are given a free hand, they can mutilate a state beyond recognition. This is because the objectives of such organizations are at variance with those of a legitimate government.
Javed Hafeez
At the turn of this century, Hezbollah acquired prominence in Lebanon. By expelling Israeli occupation forces from south Lebanon, the group achieved a feat that had eluded the Lebanese government.
However, the problem with this non-state actor is that it is widely perceived as an Iranian proxy. Its role in protecting a highly-repressive regime in Damascus through military means has made it very controversial in the Muslim World. It has also been categorized as a terrorist organization internationally. Another noteworthy feature about this outfit is the obvious contradictory roles in Syria and Lebanon. While it is represented in the parliament in Beirut, on the other hand, its militia in Syria is governed by Iranian desires.
Daesh, for its part, was a highly enigmatic organization, too. There was nothing Islamic about their policies. Even if half the stories about their criminal acts carried by the western media are true, they have only brought a bad name to the noble religion of Islam.
The edicts of Islam attach highest importance to the rights of human beings, including non-Muslims, especially those living in a Muslim majority state. Daesh, a mysterious “state” which was mercifully short-lived, also chose not to talk to any other government or establish contact with any international organization including the United Nations (UN) and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation.
Meanwhile, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula’s presence in Yemen has only complicated matters there. The same can be said for Daesh in Afghanistan and Yemen.
The main function of the state is to provide a secure environment to its citizens. Its second most important duty is to provide robust infrastructure in terms of roads, telecommunications and social deliveries such as health and education.
It is in this secure and healthy environment that the citizens of any country can pursue their economic, social and political activities in a meaningful manner. Non-state actors vitiate this healthy enabling environment and create dissatisfaction among the populace to bring a bad name for the legitimate governments. They achieve their goals by spreading confusion, fear and frustration.
A prime example of a normal country becoming dysfunctional through tribal feuds and activities of non-state actors is Somalia. If non-state actors are given a free hand, they can mutilate a state beyond recognition. This is because the objectives of such organizations are at variance with those of a legitimate government.
The authority to go for a war has to solely lie with the governments. Any effort of using proxies in conflicts would invariably lead to confusion, discord and destruction.
– Javed Hafeez is a former Pakistani diplomat with much experience of the Middle East. He writes weekly columns in Pakistani and Gulf newspapers and appears regularly on satellite TV channels as a defense and political analyst.
Twitter: @hafiz_javed
