Defining national interest

No one has the right, except parliament

One can explain why certain recent events have raised hackles in the army leading the COAS to issue a strongly worded statement. The SC has passed strictures against the security agencies while hearing petitions about law and order in Balochistan. Disposing of the petition by Asghar Khan, the apex court held former COAS Gen (retd) Aslam Beg and ex ISI Chief Lt Gen (retd) responsible for distributing money among a group of politicians. The decision to reinstate and then try three retired army generals accused in NLC case was interpreted by many as an attempt to shield them from civilian courts. The NAB summoned three other retired generals for their alleged involvement in the fraudulent land deal. All this, however, did not justify the strong reaction.

Pakistan is no Turkey where the government can arrest the former COAS, order the retirement of dozens of generals and admirals who were already awaiting trial for plotting a coup. In Pakistan, Gen Musharraf who overthrew an elected government was sent abroad respectfully with a guard of honour. A pragmatic SC would like to sack the inefficient Balochistan CM, but wouldn’t go beyond a slap on the wrist of the FC and ISI officials against whom evidence was available for illegal disappearances. Similarly, while the SC held Beg and Durrani responsible for acting in violation of the constitution, the apex court’s directive to the government to take necessary steps against them has yet to be carried out.

The trust that once existed between the army and the people has been considerably eroded on account of successive military coups, hanging of ZAB and the exile imposed on the Sharifs and Benazir. Forced disappearances and the dumping of dead bodies of political activists and journalists have created doubts and suspicions. What is needed now is to rebuild the trust. For this transparency and good governance have to be exercised in the working of all institutions, including the army. The security agencies should function strictly in accordance with the law. To further strengthen the trust, no institution should be treated as a holy cow.

Military adventurists in the past unilaterally defined national interest in the light of what suited them best. Thus staging a U-turn was considered to be as much in national interest as supporting the Taliban before 9/11. There is a need to change this now. Instead of a single individual, institution or a troika deciding it, the determination of what constitutes national interest should be left to the Parliament. Parliamentary committees should seek inputs from different institutions, including the army, security agencies, think tanks and various stakeholders, before submitting their suggestions to the parliament. This would also remove the perception that the army continues to formulate major foreign and domestic policies.