The much-hyped tug-of-war between the government and the army in the recent past, and the seemingly deteriorating civil-military ties, have been under the proverbial microscope for a while now. Given Pakistan’s history, anything from a potential military ...
Do you believe the Geo-ISI tussle was blown out of proportion? Are both parties guilty of overreacting?
Saeed Shafqat: Certainly, it was blown out of proportion and continues to be debated that way. None of the contesting parties have given sufficient space for graceful face saving or amicable closure to the other, thus the real act of crime against an individual/ freedom of expression is sidetracked.
Ayesha Siddiqa: I don’t think that overreacting is the right term. There are two options as far as Geo is concerned. It either miscalculated its power, or played a game of calculated risk. As for the ISI, the overreaction is inevitable because how else would it protect its domain. If you read the literature on civil-military ties in the rest of the world, the fear factor is an important aspect. The hounding of Geo is to create fear amongst the media and the larger society. Even if other media groups make gains, tomorrow they may be mindful of losing the advantage they have gained.
[quote]It either miscalculated its power, or played a game of calculated risk[/quote]
Hassan Askari Rizvi: Geo’s transmission on April 19 was an obvious case of extremely unprofessional reporting. Unsubstantiated accusations were being hurled left, right and centre, and obviously the backlash was inevitable. You cannot accuse people associated with the intelligence agency and then not expect a backlash.
General Raheel Sharif
How do you perceive General Raheel Sharif’s first public speech at the GHQ?
SS: Positive, constructive and civilized. It does reveal that despite visible tension, the military is willing to partner with the civilian leaders. It recognizes that locally and globally, the political environment is favorable for sustaining democracy. However, the onus of responsibility is heavy on the political leadership and political parties. For establishing civilian supremacy, they will need to show respect for rule of law, reveal democratic dispensation and build a credible and democratized party system. More importantly, the military will remain vigilant in protecting its interests.
[quote]Wrong timing, wrong place and wrong call – a great cricketer lost in the complex maize of Pakistani politics[/quote]
AS: General Raheel Shareef is trying to assert himself as a new army chief. As the army grows more political, it is a tougher call for the head of the organisation. He has to prove that he is up for the task. This is exactly what Gen Raheel Sharif did in his speech.
HAR: General Raheel has demonstrated clarity that the current government is lacking in dealing with issues. The army’s stance on every issue, from dealing with militancy to the importance of democracy, is clear, and by using belief in the sanctity of the constitution as the benchmark for negotiating with any militant groups, the army chief has divulged both his counterterrorism stance and support for democracy. The onus now is on Nawaz Sharif to show similar clarity on issues.
Tahirul Qadri at the Supreme Court building in 2013
Is Tahirul Qadri’s ‘movement against the government’ – a self-proclaimed revolution – just a case of déjà vu from last year?
SS: Lesser said the better. In this age of media glamour, all that shines is not gold. A fading voice struggling to sustain a niche in the conservative segments of Pakistani society.
AS: TUQ has an ambition. It seems that he is an agent of instability who is used to teach a government a lesson. I can see this government survive but the same way as the previous one, which means a limited democracy. Characters like him are used to constantly keep the political system away from settling down.
HAR: This is a quintessential opposition move in Pakistani politics. As soon as you see the government in a vulnerable position vis-à-vis the military, pounce on the opportunity. The previous PPP-led government faced the same antagonism during the issue of the Kerry-Lugar Bill, and when Tahirul Qadri led his march to Islamabad, among other occasions.
Imran Khan with his supporters
How does Imran Khan calling for a ban on Geo and his protest against election rigging fit into all of this?
SS: Wrong timing, wrong place and wrong call - a great cricketer lost in the complex maize of Pakistani politics.
AS: Imran Khan has suddenly found a queue. He can smell the rat and fears that the government may take some advantage of this crisis and expand its space. He has joined the battle strengthening the military.
[quote]The civil-military battle is a game of gradual gains or losses[/quote]
HAR: Imran Khan is killing two birds with one stone. He is putting more pressure on the government when it has its back against the wall, and simultaneously he is proving his loyalty to the military. And of course for him, the timing couldn’t be any better.
Finally, considering the historical trends, how do you see the civil-military relationship unraveling in the near future?
SS: In the short term, occasional tensions, but the civilian regime continues. In the medium term, if the party in power and its leadership continues to shoot itself in the foot, turmoil could rouse anxiety and disrupt the precarious civil-military balance. In the long term, the India and Afghan factor – that is the rise of the BJP in India and the emergence of Abdullah Abdullah in Afghanistan – could alarm the military and put enormous pressure on the political leadership, and this could cause regime change, which could mean installation of a still more conservative civilian leadership. This process can be arrested if the political leaders and their parties adopt people centric policies and build consensus on consolidating the party system and democracy as an alternative to military-hegemonic system.
AS: The civil-military battle is a game of gradual gains or losses (in Pakistan). Although Geo may not be able to prove anything, it will create an embarrassment for the military. Eventually, the forces will have to do some settlement because the society is not entirely supporting them in their cause against Geo. The army will try to take help of its hundreds of partners but the fact that a dent has been made in its reputation is a small gain. If it manages to completely destroy Geo, then military gains. The incident is critical for civil-military relations.
HAR: I believe the next three or four months are going to be crucial and would tell us more about the direction in which the civil-military ties are headed. If the government can reciprocate the military’s clarity and finally take a stand on issues that are jeopardising Pakistan’s security, then both the civilian government and the army can work in tandem to sort out the various issues facing the country. If the prime minister continues to dillydally, the interference of the military in politics would increase. These are tricky times for the civil-military ties in Pakistan.
