Not the time to create divides where none exist
“In the theater of peacetime, it is the statesman who plays the main role. Then suddenly war calls another actor from the wings, pushes him to the middle of the stage, and trains the limelight on him: the military chief appears – so closely interwoven is their dialogue that nothing said by either has any relevance, point, or effect except with reference to the other. If one of them misses his cue, then disaster overwhelms them both. However widely, in fact, the work of the civil government differs from that of the military, no one would seriously question the interdependence of the two authorities. What policy can hope to succeed if the country’s army is brought low? Of what use is strategic planning if the means of carrying it out are not forthcoming?”
–Charles de Gaulle on Statesmanship in ‘The Edge of the Sword’, 1932
While our country is faced with multiple internal and external challenges, Pakistan army upholds the sanctity of all institutions and will resolutely preserve its own dignity and institutional pride, the COAS said while responding to the concerns of soldiers on undue criticism of the Institution in recent days.
–ISPR Press Release
The quote from Charles de Gaulle sums up the extreme importance of the military and the civil government working together in the best interest of the country. No one and nothing should ever be allowed to create a rift between these two institutions.
The military should be aware of and respectful of civilian supremacy in a democracy and the government must be aware of and sensitive to the military’s concerns, especially the concern of the man entrusted with the responsibility of keeping a 500000 man force cohesive and in fighting trim.
Unhindered and frank institutionalised communication between the two institutions is absolutely vital. This is the reason why all democracies have a mandated forum for discussion and decision making and use it to the fullest to make sure that not only is everyone on the same page but is seen to be so.
Is the army reacting to some statements in the media? These statements may have created the concerns voiced by soldiers to which the COAS responded. In any case the prime minister is reported to have cautioned people against such statements and that should be the end of the matter.
The statement by the COAS reproduced above has been the subject of much analysis, speculation and debate. The venue for the statement – an SSG Base – is being seen as significant. Would the meaning or impact have been any different if he had said the same thing at some other gathering of his men? He was where he was because he was scheduled to be there. Much is being made of the fact that he made these remarks in response to the concerns of soldiers. There is a free and unfettered debate between officers and men at all levels but being able to directly ask the ‘Chief’ is a very special event for officers and men. So if they told him what was bothering them and he reassured them to allay their concerns where is the harm in that?
The hidden meaning or as some are saying the ‘veiled threat’ behind the words ‘resolutely preserve its institutional pride and dignity’ is the subject of much speculation – even to the extent of some backtracking from their earlier statements and some giving retaliatory statements. It is just possible that the COAS responded with carefully modulated words that would be just enough to address concerns and not overstep in any way. After all he did categorically state that the army upholds the sanctity of all institutions. What he implied was that he expects the sanctity of the military to be upheld too by other institutions but he did not say this outright.
Finally there are questions being asked about the need for the ISPR to issue a press release and even whether there should be an ISPR at all. The media is a powerful force in today’s world and like all institutions the military is entitled to use it positively.
Is the military responding to the media debates on the trial of former President Musharraf? If it is then it has taken a long time to get in on the act. The best course is to understand that the matter is sub-judice and should not be discussed till a judicial verdict is out.
Is the military responding to the media debates on the trial of former President Musharraf? If it is then it has taken a long time to get in on the act. The best course is to understand that the matter is sub-judice and should not be discussed till a judicial verdict is out. This will end all speculation and the raking up of old issues.
Is the army reacting to some statements in the media? These statements may have created the concerns voiced by soldiers to which the COAS responded. In any case the prime minister is reported to have cautioned people against such statements and that should be the end of the matter. Is the government playing a good cop-bad–cop game – some people being egged on to criticise while the leader steps in to chastise them and calm the situation? It would be unkind to even consider such a possibility. After all this is the Pakistan army and this is the Pakistan government – why should anyone even think of such Quixotic behaviour?
This is not the time to create divides where none exist. This is the time to learn from the past and consider the present and future. The changing external and internal environment poses very serious challenges and these are what should be debated and discussed to find responses. The internal environment needs to be strengthened and not weakened.
