Someone is pitching the government against the military, the military against the media, and media against itself
Whatever backlash Geo TV’s high management expected from its handling of the Hamid Mir incident, it has become clear it did not incorporate such a harsh reaction from other prominent media houses. But even though the counter narrative diluted its own attempts to influence public opinion, its posture remains one of confrontation. Mir’s first public statement since the attack pretty much backed his brother’s first reaction, only this time he mentioned threats from non-state actors as well.
Interestingly, media frenzy has focused more on the battle of wits triggered by this incident than the safety of journalists, which should have been the bigger concern. Geo, too, was clearly more interested in accusing the ISI chief than focusing on media security concerns, and a media circus followed. ARY’s Mubashir Luqman used the opening to sharpen his baba ji rhetoric, accusing Geo TV’s owners of deliberately maligning key security institutions. On another channel, Javed Chaudhry couldn’t control his smile when Gen (r) Hamid Gul equated initial government silence with collusion, especially since Geo broadcast blatantly accused Gen Zaheer ul Islam like a common criminal. Geo TV’s Islamabad bureau chief said not airing Mir’s family’s concerns would have been “irresponsible journalism”. And on other programs Ansar Abbassi continued to smile his way through accusations of irresponsibility, and defended his initial demand that the ISI chief step down voluntarily, or the PM order him to, to preserve the sanctity of the organisation.
Who dunnit?
Yet not much real work has been done to trace the attackers, even if, according to some accounts, much has been done to disrupt, or at least delay, a formal investigation. Mir’s car was cleaned and his driver and guard allegedly kept away from the police. The grieved party did not file an official case and the FIR was not launched till the fourth day. And the prime minister’s judicial commission, ordered prior to the FIR, was perhaps the first of its kind.
Then there is also the question of Mir’s own activities, and his brothers’. Going by Geo’s narrative, it was his focus on the Balochistan missing persons march, along with similar issues, that upset the agencies. According to his post-op statement, ISI officers recently alerted him of a possible attack from “non-state actors”, which he interpreted as a veiled warning.
Both brothers have had long standing links with intelligence agencies. And while that is not unknown in this line of work, just how and why this association turned sour – to the degree of (attempted) murder – is difficult to understand.
Both brothers have had long standing links with intelligence agencies. And while that is not unknown in this line of work, just how and why this association turned sour – to the degree of (attempted) murder – is difficult to understand.
“Journalists have been attacked for a long time, but nobody paid much attention, and suddenly this one is all the rage”, said Dr Ayesha Siddiqa, analyst, writer, and author of the controversial bestseller Military Inc.
“The truth is these people routinely work with the agencies. Take Amir (Mir) for example, he reports on important matters yet he is never in the field. Where do you think he gets his information from?”
Recently, though, Amir’s reporting has occasionally become openly critical of the ISI. After the Nov1 drone strike that killed TTP commander Hakeemullah Mehsud, he cited anonymous sources claiming Pakistan’s intelligence was to blame. According to the report, the ISI had assured the Haqqanis of not targeting Hakeemullah while he consulted with the shura regarding talks with the government, and subsequently guaranteed his safety in North Waziristan.
And the hit caused a split with the Haqqanis, following which, it was alleged, intelligence agencies killed Naseeruddin Haqqani in Islamabad. Other pieces also implied an ISI hand in the murder of pro talks TTP commander Asmatullah Bhitani.
“There is no truth in these allegations”, intelligence officials told Pakistan Today, also requesting not to be named. “And it is not true that the Haqqanis have turned. In fact we are sure Afghan intelligence (NDS) was involved in all three hits, and we are concerned where certain journalists are getting their information from.”
‘Spoiling for a fight’
But, despite the background, there is much about the Apr19 attack on Hamid Mir that nobody has bothered to clarify, at least not yet.
Mir was shot, apparently six times, on the road Gen Musharraf’s VVIP convoy was due to take just a couple of hours later. And security agencies usually go about securing such routes well in advance. So the complete absence of any form of security just outside the airport, and CCTVs going offline (for whatever reason) just then and there, raise disturbing questions.
The government’s long silence, too, spoke volumes. According to some accounts, the government did not intervene, and let Geo badmouth the military, because they calculated it as helping them in their own growing confrontation with the brass. But for others, the intent may have been more sinister, and the government has not helped clear matters.
“Nawaz Sharif seems bent upon ignoring the counsel of better wisdom”, said Gen (r) Hameed Gul. His analysis carries all the more weight because in addition to being former ISI chief, he is also the current president of the Ex Servicemen Society, and reflects the collective position of retired officers.
“And now his own party is divided, with interior and information ministers taking opposite positions. In this way the ruling party is not helping deflect rumours of collusion”.
The sudden lapse of security, conflicting reports about the attack itself (from number of bullets to the chase to the hospital), and the ruling party confusing matters instead of pushing for clarity, have led to accusations of a secret understanding between Geo owners and N league leaders.
This has happened, according to Gen Gul, when much of the media, except perhaps only Geo, sided more with the army than the government in handling the insurgency. And since Nawaz did not immediately crush Geo’s accusations against the ISI head, nor made any efforts to refute allegations of state complicity, Nawaz’s agenda seems dubious.
While civil-military relations have been steadily worsening for some time, and the Mir attack might have accelerated the trend, this episode has also brought inter-media differences to the fore.
“It seems he (Nawaz Sharif) is spoiling for a fight”, he added. “But the army is in no mood for such a confrontation. It can sense a bigger conspiracy, where foreign powers are pulling local strings to pitch institutions against each other, and the government is playing a very negative role”.
Civ vs mil; mil vs media?
While civil-military relations have been steadily worsening for some time, and the Mir attack might have accelerated the trend, this episode has also brought inter-media differences to the fore.
“Islamabad is processing a very difficult debate at the moment”, said Salman Zaidi, deputy director at Jinnah Institute, an Islamabad based think tank. “The strains are similar to the memogate situation in the time of the previous government, but then the situation did not blow up like now because it was contained between institutions”.
Now things are more complicated because events are increasingly pitching key institutions against each other, with sections of the media perhaps playing a deliberate role.
“This situation has also exposed many polarised shades of opinion within popular media, and differences within opinion leaders”, he added, which has led to the civil-military debate playing out in the public arena in a particularly ugly way, even transforming it into a military-media confrontation. Parts of the media, especially Geo, have become excessively belligerent, which eventually does not serve anybody’s purpose.
The government, according to Zaidi, has always been bad at public diplomacy, a classic example of which was the fallout of the OBL episode in Abbottabad. It is “routinely out of response and at a loss to articulate its case”.
The ISPR is no different. Sometimes it deliberately maintains silence to observe how situations develop, but mostly it is just without an effective narrative.
But even if all principle parties to this new conflict are unable to define their positions clearly, a growing government-military confrontation, spurred on by parts of the media, is not a likely outcome, said Zaidi.
“Democracy is not under threat”, he added, but also pointed out that while there is no clear effort to diffuse tensions, of which media will have to be an integral part, we will remain stuck in a situation “where rumour is taken as opinion and heresy as policy”.
Not only will that keep civ-mil tensions from subsiding, it will also stoke fires of hatred within the media, which deepens divisions in society at a time when the country is not without its share of existential problems.
