A LITTLE over seven months after a news story in this newspaper seemed to ignite a civil-military row that could potentially derail democracy, the matter was finally concluded with the two protagonists agreeing to draw a line under it, but not before three civilian heads had rolled.

“Former army chief (Raheel Sharif) pumped way too much air into the Dawn Leak balloon. Then my good friend, the former DG ISPR, continued to keep it on the boil,” Shaikh Rashid, the Rawalpindi politician who is normally seen as close to the military, told a TV channel earlier this month.

And guess what? For once I found myself in agreement with him. If a mountain was indeed made out of a molehill, as Shaikh Rashid suggested, then there was a background to it. The news story came at a difficult time in relations between the prime minister and the man he chose as head of the army.

The tension primarily owed itself to some of Gen Sharif’s top aides convincing him that continuity was needed at the head of the army in order to consolidate the gains from the anti-TTP operation launched at the chief’s direction.

In an interesting twist to the saga, it was also hinted by various sources that the extension being discussed was for a year only rather than one similar to a full extra three-year tenure given to his predecessor, Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani.

Some insiders then were mentioning intricate calculations of seniority etc. as to who would be in the running for chief if and when Gen Sharif retired after completing his extended tenure and spending an extra year in office.

The prime minister seemed adamant that there would be no extension granted to any service chief and a fresh appointment made as the tenure of the incumbents neared its end. Against this background the then military leadership may have seen the Dawn story as undermining its standing.

Hence, it reacted as it did. In fact, it wouldn’t be inaccurate to say equally complicit in pumping air into this balloon to bursting point was the government which, by describing the news story as a national security breach and whatnot, seemed to endorse the military’s concerns about it.

When an inquiry committee was set up, among those who agreed to appear before it were the editor and the reporter of Dawn. The latter returned from the United States, where he had been sent to cover the presidential election.

But the issue continued to snowball and, on several occasions, seemed to rock the government as belligerent statements from Corps Commanders’ conferences continued to build pressure and many junior officers started to see it as one great conspiracy against their institution.

So much so that Shaikh Rashid says when the present army chief presided over his first corps commanders’ conference the issue of Dawn Leak was the foremost on his formation commanders’ lips. The situation was no different when Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa went on his maiden visit to Kharian as chief during a Q&A session with garrison officers.

It wasn’t surprising then that the new chief started to feel the heat. Also, Lt Gen Asim Bajwa had mastered the art of Twitter warfare and was very adept at it. His successor’s lack of experience in media matters was evident in the ‘rejection’ Tweet when the prime minister’s office notified its reaction to the inquiry report; perhaps, he was misguided by someone.

A controversy raged again.

It is also ironic that at least one minister was asked to resign earlier on because ‘he did not attempt to stop the story’s publication’ even as he was made aware of it (not clear why two others were penalised later), while we have heard of no action against the ‘military officials who declined comment’. If they were approached they were aware too.

I think if anything related to the inquiry report warrants a rejection is the recommendation to have the editor and the reporter of Dawn ‘disciplined’ by the newspaper owners’ body not least because it has no such jurisdiction.

As a journalist with 33 years of experience of working in some of the best news organisations in the world as an editor and then having had the privilege of leading the formidable editorial team at Dawn, I have repeatedly read my friend and colleague Cyril Almeida’s story of October last year.

Each reading has led me to the conclusion that the allegation that Dawn carried a story which breached national security and, therefore, was detrimental to national interest was utter nonsense and poppycock.

If you ask me it was a story that reflected the decision-makers in a good light, where key civil and military leadership had put their heads together to identify certain significant national security challenges and also agreed how to jointly deal with those.

Also, it is clear that the newspaper did due diligence before it published the story. Its official detractors can’t even decide whether the story was based on facts and, therefore, a ‘breach of national security’ or was ‘concocted, fake’ and untrue. A consistent stand could have helped in assessing the veracity of their charges.

Instead, for seven months what Dawn faced was a vilification campaign in sections of the traditional media and the social media which often appeared orchestrated; certain misguided politicians also joined in this chorus.

I have often wondered if I would have silently suffered such insults and innuendos as my successor and his team did with such dignity. Bravo and hats off to them.

One is also relieved that the current military chief has decided to lead and not be led by misplaced concerns within his rank and file. This will allow all the state institutions to concentrate on real issues confronting the nation. Some of these are existential in nature; civil-military ties will also benefit. All of this augurs well for Pakistan.

The writer is a former editor of Dawn

Published in Dawn, May 11th, 2017