There is more to it than meets the eye
Interesting developments that raise uneasy questions took place before the memo case was filed in the Supreme Court. DG ISI travelled to London to meet Mansoor Ijaz on 22 October. On 24 October he reported to the army chief that the sequence and contents of text messages and telephone calls exchanged between Ijaz and ambassador Haqqani created a reasonable doubt about the latter’s association with the memo. The ISI chief, however, did not take the prime minister into confidence. As Haqqani’s name had not appeared in the article written by Ijaz in the Financial Times, the media was totally ignorant about there being any possible connection between the memo and Haqqani. The opposition too had nothing to say about its alleged author. Interestingly, within a week of DG ISI’s return, Imran Khan knew about it. Imran made this an issue during his address at Minar-e-Pakistan on 30 October. Imran in fact went a step further by accusing President Zardari of being the author of the memo while he described Haqqani as being only a carrier. It is yet not known who passed on the name to the PTI chief and for what purpose.
It is remarkable the way the PML(N) shifted its position. The issue was taken up in the National Assembly by the hotheaded PML(N) MNA Khwaja Asif on 7 November. Asif claimed that the foot prints led to the Presidency and a sedition case had to be registered. Some of the Opposition leaders demanded a joint session of Parliament. Mian Nawaz Sharif, however, called for an investigation committee to probe the matter thoroughly. He wanted the committee to finish the job in 10-15 days. In case the government failed to do this the matter, he said, would have to be taken to the Supreme Court. Days before the cut off date the party mysteriously shifted its position. While Ishaq Dar had told the Parliamentary Committee on National Security, “I will push the committee members to take up the Memogate affair as well”, Mian Nawaz and Dar sent petitions to the SC to take up the case and Dar maintained that the parliamentary committee was void of any constitutional cover.
Whatever else there may be in the memo, the issue has been used by some of the players outside the SC to pursue their peculiar agendas.