Restraint is the best policy

Both military and media better make it their watchword

The murderous attack on television anchor and columnist Hamid Mir has seriously impacted already frayed military-civilian relations. Although it is being claimed ad nauseum that military and the civilian leadership is on the same page, ground realities tell a story starkly different in texture.

Among other incidents, stances and postures in recent days and months, the latest red herring is the poor handling of the Hamid Mir incident by the government. In the immediate aftermath of the attack on the anchorperson, the Jang GEO group went to town at their provocative best while directly naming the ISI chief Lt Gen Zaheer ul Isalm as the perpetrator.

Technically the media group was airing the emotional reaction of Hamid Mir’ s younger brother Amir Mir, whose own real or perceived spats with the premier intelligence agency in the past are well known. However the manner in which the unsubstantiated allegations were aired on Geo along with repeated display of a mug-shot of the ISI chief, even if unintentional, to say the least was a shoddy piece of journalism.

The military should adopt a more nuanced approach, for war against media is unwinnable in this day and age.

The prime minister owing to his penchant for lack of attention to detail, or perhaps in this case as a matter of strategy, immediately announced forming an inquiry commission of three judges of the Supreme Court to probe the matter. Of course he condemned the dastardly attack on Hamid Mir. But instead of simply passing the buck to the courts he should have taken a position on the matter.

As a gentleman and as the chief executive of the country, Nawaz Sharif did the right thing by visiting Mir in a Karachi hospital. But at the same time he was perceived as failing to shield his own intelligence chief from wild and frenzied attacks. After all he is the appointing authority of the ISI director general, who also reports to him. Theoretically he can also sack him, and there is precedent as Benazir Bhutto as prime minister in her first stint had sacked Hameed Gul in 1989, the gung-ho ISI chief she had inherited.

With some of the journalists making scathing attacks on the military in unison and the government a silent spectator, the COAS had to step in to demonstrate his solidarity with the ISI chief by paying an unscheduled call on him at the ISI headquarters. The same evening the government belatedly chose to speak through its interior minister Nisar Ali Khan, defending the armed forces from unwarranted attacks.

The situation became even more complicated by the ISI going on the front foot by formally launching a complaint against Geo with PEMRA (Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority), aiming at cancellation of the news channel’s license. Without even waiting for the complaint to be formally addressed by the regulatory authority, an undeclared ban has been imposed on the media groups’ newspapers and news channel in cantonment areas, and cable operators have been made to push Geo from top of the queue amongst news channels to almost touching bottom.

Freedom of press despite its warts is a success story of our incipient democracy. Nevertheless media houses and journalists should resist the temptation of playing God.

Admittedly a blitz against the ISI and its chief in Pakistani media has implications even beyond our borders. The foreign office spokesperson thus had to step in, reiterating that India before maligning the ISI should look into its own internal matters.

The media group should have been more circumspect and less emotional on the Hamid Mir issue. It should have gauged the grave implications of launching a tirade against the military and its premier intelligence agency, especially in the prevailing circumstances.

Nonetheless demanding closure of the Geo news channel is an overreaction on part of the ISI, detrimental to future of freedom of press in the country. The premier intelligence agency is no angel and has a lot of skeletons in its cupboard. It has played havoc with democracy and political institutions. Allegations of bribing, intimidating, threatening and even killing journalists in some cases in the past are well documented.

The media group should have been more circumspect and less emotional on the Hamid Mir issue. It should have gauged the grave implications of launching a tirade against the military and its premier intelligence agency, especially in the prevailing circumstances.

Such underhand and third degree tactics are typical of tin pot military dictatorships but do not have any place in a democratic set up. The ubiquitous establishment should also try to change with changed times.

Freedom of press despite its warts is a success story of our incipient democracy. Nevertheless media houses and journalists should resist the temptation of playing God.

Liberty does not give a carte blanche to the media. In fact it entails more responsibility, unfortunately lacking hitherto, more so in the top echelons of the media.

The military should adopt a more nuanced approach towards the media. It should realise that in this day and age war against media is simply not winnable.

The military-media divide as well as the acrimony amongst different media groups could not have come at a worse time. The country is already grappling with an existential threat in the form of rampant terrorism and can ill afford to be at war with itself.

Such underhand and third degree tactics are typical of tin pot military dictatorships but do not have any place in a democratic set up. The ubiquitous establishment should also try to change with changed times.

On one side of the divide, the military and the civilian leadership do not seem to be on the same page on the so-called peace talks with TTP. The fate of beleaguered former dictator Pervez Musharraf being tried for high treason is another bone of contention between the civilian and military leadership.

At this crucial juncture battle lines are being clearly drawn within the media itself. The pro-establishment media persons of yesteryears as apologists of the Taliban generally support the now-stalled dialogue process with the TTP. Generally speaking they oppose a military operation to flush out terrorists from our badlands.

Paradoxically, the so-called liberal media is more favourably disposed towards the use of force against the militants and consider the so called peace process as a form of capitulation. The PML-N government leaning in favour of the born-again peaceniks has made the divide amongst the media even more complicated.

The president of the newspaper publishers organisation, the APNS (All Pakistan Newspapers Society) has finally broken its silence. It has called upon the prime minister and the information minister to formally initiate a dialogue with the APNS and other media bodies, “to attempt to provide a meaningful framework in which journalists can tell the truth”.

The PML-N government leaning in favour of the born-again peaceniks has made the divide amongst the media even more complicated.

Noble thoughts, but unfortunately both the APNS and PBA (Pakistan Broadcasters Association) are so faction-ridden and dominated by the Jang and Dawn groups that they can hardly deliver on niceties like press freedom and ethics.

Unfortunately when journalists belonging to a rival media group were recently gunned down, Geo maintained a stony silence on the cowardly attack. Also when Raza Rumi, an analyst with the same rival group was attacked but miraculously remained unscathed, the publishers’ body, the broadcasters association and its patrons failed to stand up against this potent threat to the media.

The judicial commission to inquire into the attack on Hamid Mir should also be entrusted with the task of ensuring parameters of media persons’ safety. Media organisations should be invited to depose before the three-member commission.

Fortunately Hamid Mir is recovering well. In his initial formal statement he has held both state and non-state actors responsible for the murderous attack on him. However he has desisted from naming the ISI chief or holding him directly responsible.

The media group has set a noble example for others to emulate by fully standing by its star anchorperson. It should however follow a policy of restraint as exercised by Mir in its utterances when criticising the military and its premier intelligence agency.