Government’s issues
One would readily agree that the concerns expressed in the ISPR statement about government’s poor implementation of NAP and its negative impact on the counter-terrorism efforts were not completely unfounded. What remains questionable, however, is the manner and the timing of the observations.
The reaction from the PML-N to ISPR’s critical statement has varied from assertive to apologetic. The federal government has contended that it has taken ‘decisive action’ against extremism and terrorism over the past two years. Further, that in any case the implementation of NAP is a shared responsibility of all the institutions. It has also been suggested that in case the government’s shortcomings were to be pointed out, the exercise should have been undertaken at the right forum rather than in public. The Punjab government, on the other hand, has conceded in a letter sent to provincial police officers and administrators that the implementation of NAP leaves much to be desired.
A cursory look at the facts is enough to convince that under the PML-N, governance in general and in relation to the implementation of NAP in particular has been unsatisfactory. The Senate was told the other day that NACTA which has to play a key role in the fight against terrorism had been functioning without a formally appointed staff for six years as it has not been provided service rules. The progress on madrassa reforms has been insignificant. Little has been done to register the seminaries, check the sources of their funding and block the terror financing.
That said, since the army is a department of the government, it was inappropriate to openly criticise the administration’s performance. In another country this would have been regarded as insubordination. The issue had already been taken up at a high level meeting. The matter should have been left at that. Taken up publicly when the COAS is travelling to the US, it is bound to convey a disconcerting message giving birth to uncertainty in the country.
