The media was going bananas with all kinds of theories and scenarios. There was talk of some kind of move afoot to oust the elected president – either by impeachment or by using the incapacitation clause in the constitution. For the first, you need a two-thirds majority and for the second you need to establish that the president is incapacitated. There is no way that either of these conditions can be met. The unconstitutional method of a military coup is out of the question in the present environment, as denied by the COAS himself. The president is the driving force behind the political coalition that is the government in Pakistan and all are agreed that the change they want can only come through the ballot box.
There is the rumour about a civil-military confrontation over the memo-gate affair. The media is going to great lengths to point out that the military and the government are on a collision course. The reality is that the government asked the Pakistan ambassador to the US to resign so that the matter could be processed and a conclusion reached.
The opposition took the matter to the Supreme Court while the government sent it to the Parliamentary Committee for Security. The matter is proceeding on both tracks. The army chief and the DG ISI have given written responses to the Supreme Court because the Supreme Court had directly asked them for their views. If the Parliamentary Committee asks them they will no doubt respond positively. Both the government and the military want the matter to reach conclusion because of the inherent implications. The Supreme Court is on record as having said in an earlier case that they will not act to derail the system.
There have been statements from responsible people asking for the resignation of the ISI chief because of the allegation made that he visited Arab capitals to solicit support for ousting the government. The methodology to do this has not been spelt out nor has anyone considered exactly how such support could be extended and to whom. The reason being given for the demand is that because the ambassador resigned therefore the ISI chief should also resign. The difference, of course, is that the memo was investigated and found to be a reality and that this was confirmed by a retired US general who also admitted being the courier.
The investigations now being made may well exonerate the ambassador. The ISI has denied the allegation, called it baseless and sent a legal notice to the British tabloid that made the allegation. The government may investigate the matter if it has any reason to doubt what has been stated.
There has been the thought that there are plans afoot to disrupt the Senate elections due in March 2012. Beyond voicing suspicions, no one has spelt out exactly how this is to be achieved and by whom. If all are agreed that the 2013 elections are the only acceptable methodology for change then disruption of anything that is constitutional will be counter-productive. Neither the military nor the judiciary would want to interfere and the opposition even if it wants to has no means of doing so. Spreading anarchy and chaos is in no one’s interest.
The military has often been seen as being soft on the US-Pakistan relationship. The US through several actions spaced over a period of time left no option for the military but to assert itself as there is no way it could accept being seen as weak domestically. The US may want to ponder over this before a point of no return is reached. Salala is an atrocity that has cast a long shadow and could wreck the process underway in Afghanistan. Pakistan’s response has been calibrated to show strength without creating a situation that cannot be retrieved. The US-Pakistan relationship remains important for many reasons and it can be reviewed and rebuilt assuming that the US wants and needs this to happen. Waiting for Pakistan to come calling may not be the right course.
The real problems for Pakistan are the state of the economy and its future, the situation in Balochistan and the dire and urgent need for governance that responds to the sufferings and grievances of the people. All three have implications for national security and would be the concern of every institution charged with the responsibility of securing the country against internal and external threats.
The recent State Bank of Pakistan Report and the statement of a prominent Baloch nationalist leader have highlighted the dangers. The first requirement for steps to be taken to address these issues is political stability and it needs to be figured out how this can be brought about if there is no disagreement on fair and free elections as the only option.
Spearhead Research is a private centre for research and consultancy on security, headed by Jehangir Karamat. Spearhead analyses are the result of a collaborative effort and not attributable to a single individual.
