The memo controversy may lead to civil-military confrontation

NEWS ANALYSIS – There is a clear divide – the government, not President Asif Ali Zardari who has not filed his reply in the memo case, through the ministries of Foreign Affairs and Interior, denies its involvement in the memo controversy while the Pakistan Army and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) are convinced that the memo did exist and the evidence, in the light of the proof shared by Mansoor Ijaz, is substantial but it still needed to be investigated as someone, somewhere did it.
In their replies, submitted to the Supreme Court, the ministries of Foreign Affairs and Interior not only distanced themselves from the memo but also, on behalf of the federation, took a position that the government, including the president and the prime minister, or any other one of its component had neither conceptualised nor initiated or had anything to do with the memo.
Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani submitted that there was nothing, in the evidence and the investigation, denying the fact that the memo existed and it was also delivered and received by the US authorities. ISI Director General Lt General Ahmad Shuja Pasha submitted that he was satisfied with “enough corroborative material” that Mansoor Ijaz had to support his version of the incident.
While General Kayani sought an examination of the facts and circumstances leading to the conception and issuance of the memo and General Pasha also asked the Supreme Court to summon Mansoor Ijaz and demanded forensic examination of the computers and all cell phones used by Mansoor Ijaz and Husain Haqqani since May 2011, the government is not willing for an investigation through a commission appointed by the apex court. The government wants the parliamentary committee, which, it says, is fully empowered to probe into the matter, to record evidence and ensure production of any evidence as all powers of a civil court are available to it. Both the army, the ISI included, and the government want an investigation but the latter wants it through parliament.
However, the army did not clearly express its no-confidence in the parliamentary committee but tacitly suggested that this process should be carried forward under the direction of the apex court as the ISI chief submitted in his reply that he would comply with all directions of the court and render necessary assistance to its appointed commission. The ISI chief also made a point in his reply that Mansoor Ijaz also insisted that he would present the details of the evidence himself before “a commission or a court of law” if asked to do so.
The government appears to confront the judicial process as it continues to maintain that the parliamentary committee should be given the task instead of the investigation being assigned to a commission appointed by the Supreme Court. What the government intends to politically achieve is evident from its position – pitch the parliament against the judiciary and emerge as a victim of a judicial coup in the evolving situation.
There is no apparent disagreement between the government and the army. Both want investigation into the memo conspiracy but they clearly differ on the procedure – judicial or parliamentary. The government’s insistence that the parliamentary committee should do the job implicitly expresses its no-confidence in the judiciary, which is already seized with some critical cases like the NRO, again involving the president.
The government’s stance is that parliament comprises the president, the Senate and the National Assembly thus moving against the president would mean moving against parliament. The political observers see a well-planned design to make the judicial investigation controversial and out of place even before it starts. Except the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), no other political party, including the government’s coalition partners, has so far opposed the appointment of a commission and supported the investigation by the parliamentary committee.
Though a lot has been discussed in the media about the memo and the replies submitted by the government (ministries of Foreign Affairs and Interior), General Kayani and General Pasha, another significant aspect, which is equally important, of the memo controversy is Mansoor Ijaz’s claim that General Pasha had travelled to some Arab countries for the approval of their rulers to oust President Zardari.
This was revealed in a recent article published in a British newspaper, The Independent. The Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) remains silent on this article that accuses the ISI chief of conspiring against the supreme commander of his country’s armed forces. Though the Foreign Office spokesman rubbished it as “ridiculous”, no official word came from the army. A reference to this disclosure by Mansoor Ijaz also constitutes a part of the government’s reply submitted to the Supreme Court.
And when the investigation, judicial or parliamentary, starts, the alleged visit of General Pasha to the Arab countries and the ISI’s role in politics – “Pakistan’s Memogate: Was there ever going to be a coup?” – will surely be questioned and examined and this will open up another Pandora’s Box. The controversy may finally lead to a confrontation between the civil and military establishments with the parliament and the judiciary also locked in it.