Unnecessary one-upmanship

Published January 28, 2017
The writer is a former editor of Dawn.
The writer is a former editor of Dawn.

LESS than eight weeks after Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa was chosen to head the army by the prime minister, and some six weeks after Nawaz Sharif is said to have handpicked Lt-Gen Naveed Mukhtar as the director-general of the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, do civil-military relations appear harmonious?

It is way too early to give a categorical answer, but let’s look at some signs — the foremost among them perhaps the latest statement from the Inter-Services Public Relations Directorate (ISPR) boss, which adorned the front page of this newspaper on Friday (yesterday).

In his statement, Maj-Gen Asif Ghafoor ‘clarified’ that the 90 acres of agricultural land allotted to retired army chief Gen Raheel Sharif was done in accordance with the rules, regulations and the ‘Constitution’. This, of course, wasn’t all.


Both the government and the army have their hands full with issues that can potentially derail Pakistan.


Gen Ghafoor’s tweeted statement added: “This debate with [the] intent to malign [the] Army also has the potential to create misunderstandings among state institutions, thus considered detrimental to existing cohesion.”

The debate the ISPR boss alluded to were a series of media reports that first broke the news, including the facsimiles of the official paperwork that the former army chief was allotted the land in Bedian near Lahore some two years prior to retirement, followed by a spate of critical comments.

Even then, how would such reports that the army described as having the intent to malign it have the potential to “create misunderstandings among state institutions”?

Informed sources say that many in the army believe (whether rightly or mistakenly) that not just the land allotment reports but also earlier media criticism of Gen Raheel Sharif was orchestrated by the PML-N government owing to their differences in his final months in office.

After relinquishing office, the former army chief was invited by the Saudi Royals for a meeting against the backdrop of reports that he would be asked to head the multinational Islamic force being set up by the Saudis to counter terrorism.

Many discussion programmes on TV channels and newspaper articles raised concerns that such a decision would not be wise as it may further fan sectarian divisions in Pakistan since the force is seen as one aimed at isolating Iran as much as its avowed task is to curb terrorism.

This prompted Maj-Gen Ejaz Awan (the brilliant GOC, Swat whose career was cut shortly after the operation began there because of a disagreement with the then egotistical ISI chief Ahmad Shuja Pasha) to speak to the media, sharing what he said he’d heard from the ‘horse’s mouth’.

According to Gen Awan (and this was echoed by Lt-Gen retired Amjad Shoaib), the former army chief had made his acceptance of the Saudi offer conditional on three factors and the first was that, having headed one of the best armies in the world, he’d not serve under any other general.

He is also said to have insisted that Iran be invited to join the force even with a token presence, and that he should be allowed to take the initiative to try and play the mediator when Islamic countries developed differences.

As the former army chief’s position became clear and there seemed to be no Saudi response the controversy started to die down and, over the course of a few days, literally seemed to have disappeared from the media.

Just shy of mid-January, there was a statement by the new chief of army staff, Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa, who said that the “army’s dignity and credibility shall be upheld through selfless performance of our role and duties”.

One media report said that this statement came in response to questions by officers gathered during his address on a visit to Kharian Garrison. They expressed unhappiness over the media coverage of military-related issues, including criticism of the former chief.

It was not that this was the only sign of apparent friction between the two key institutions of the country, one of which is constitutionally subservient to the other. The prime minister stopped in London on his way home from Davos. It wasn’t long before I heard from two totally different and unrelated sources that the prime minister met the Qatari ambassador to the UK during his stopover. According to the details of this (unconfirmed) meeting, Hasan Nawaz drove his father, brother, Husain Nawaz, and the Qatari ambassador around the city for two hours.

During this unconfirmed meeting, the ambassador is supposed to have facilitated a phone conversation between Nawaz Sharif and Qatar’s former prime minister Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jaber al Thani.

He is the man who submitted an affidavit earlier and another letter this week in support of the Sharif’s contention before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, which is hearing petitions seeking the disqualification of the prime minister on account of Panamagate.

The story is puzzling. For how could anyone have known what was going on in the car? Having heard this from two unrelated people who were not prepared to divulge their source, I did a reporter’s ‘triangulation’ and realised that the only common thread between the two reached a certain official on an assignment at the Pakistan High Commission in London. In this case, the source pushing the story is as significant as what is being circulated.

This rather silly and pointless apparent tit-for-tat and one-upmanship must stop, especially if it is indeed originating where I and many others believe it is. Both the civilian government and the army have their hands full with issues that, left unaddressed, can potentially threaten to tear Pakistan apart.

Tolerance among extremist groups is understandably non-existent. It would a great shame if the state institutions also betray such lack of tolerance towards each other and towards their critics, such as was manifested in the ‘enforced disappearance’ of the social media activists earlier this month. They are still ‘missing’ without trace.

The writer is a former editor of Dawn.

Published in Dawn, January 28th, 2017

Opinion

Editorial

‘Source of terror’
Updated 29 Mar, 2024

‘Source of terror’

It is clear that going after militant groups inside Afghanistan unilaterally presents its own set of difficulties.
Chipping in
29 Mar, 2024

Chipping in

FEDERAL infrastructure development schemes are located in the provinces. Most such projects — for instance,...
Toxic emitters
29 Mar, 2024

Toxic emitters

IT is concerning to note that dozens of industries have been violating environmental laws in and around Islamabad....
Judiciary’s SOS
Updated 28 Mar, 2024

Judiciary’s SOS

The ball is now in CJP Isa’s court, and he will feel pressure to take action.
Data protection
28 Mar, 2024

Data protection

WHAT do we want? Data protection laws. When do we want them? Immediately. Without delay, if we are to prevent ...
Selling humans
28 Mar, 2024

Selling humans

HUMAN traders feed off economic distress; they peddle promises of a better life to the impoverished who, mired in...