A latest interview of the former DG ISPR to the BBC seems to have turned the general into an instant celebrity. He spilt sufficient beans for people to pick up and introspect for at least a couple of days. In the absence of any other ‘breaking news’ material, this certainly filled the appetite of television channels. Given that the Tahirul Qadri drama is pretty much over and the operation in North Waziristan is on its way with little information coming out except for the military reported body count, Major General (retd) Athar Abbas’s revelations made the day.
It would still be interesting to find out why the general found it appropriate to spill the beans now and not earlier. It is not as if the official secrecy act that binds former bureaucrats to silence for at least a certain period had lapsed. He has been out of service for less than two years. There are many questions that come to mind such as, was the story that General (retd) Ashfaq Parvez Kayani was not ready to launch an operation, told to make the current top management look good in comparison with the former army chief? Or did it simply indicate an ongoing tension between the two former generals, Musharraf and Kayani, whose allies are engaged in mud-slinging to make their side look better? Or is it to make the world believe in the new theory, which is being actively expounded by some in military circles, that there is a fundamental shift in military thinking regarding militancy and Talibanisation of the country? There is a lot more stuck between the lines in that BBC interview than meets the eye.
We now know that military matters are totally controlled by the generals, with little regard for the civilian leadership. According to the former DG ISPR, a decision was taken in 2010 by the government to launch an operation in 2011. But then General (retd) Kayani balked. Although Major General (retd) Abbas claims that this was partly due to American pressure, he did also in passing mentioned the Haqqani Network. We can assume from this information what we knew all along that the former army chief was worried about his inability to secure a friendly neighbourhood after the 2014 withdrawal without the help of the Haqqani Network. This is a modified version of the concept of ‘strategic depth’, which is not about a territory where the Pakistan military can withdraw and regroup if under an attack by India. This is about a neighbouring country that would either help Pakistan in its war efforts or remain silent and not add to the military’s aggravation at the time of conflict. Has the concept been abandoned now as we may wonder after the above-mentioned BBC interview? The answer is, not entirely, as the North Waziristan operation continues to not target the Haqqani network or various other forms of militants.
Latest reports from Bannu suggest that militant and religious outfits like the JuD, the JI and the JeM dominate welfare activities in the area. The services provided thus, will pave the way for recruitment of more jihadis from amongst the IDPs or build greater sympathy for these outfits amongst the displaced people. This is not an ethnic issue — the IDPs are physically, psychologically and emotionally vulnerable, which makes them easy targets for exploitation. Intriguingly, non-religious NGOs are finding it comparatively difficult to set up base. This pattern certainly does not indicate a reversal of the ‘strategic depth’ policy. Thus, it may be criticised by a few military commentators, but not abandoned as a dominant strategic framework that depends on building a partnership with private warriors to pursue the goals of the state. We are still confused about where we are headed and what will be the fate of hundreds of soldiers deployed in the battle.
But in case we are actually viewing a reversal of policy, then it would be imperative for the government to debate the new direction. What will be Pakistan’s options in case of not hedging bets on the Haqqani Network and the Afghan Taliban or not using Pakistan-based jihadis in Afghanistan? Who will be Pakistan’s possible new partners and how will they protect Pakistan’s interests? If a decision has been taken to accept the democratic process in Afghanistan, then which players will ensure that the anxiety average Afghans feel towards Pakistan does not hurt Islamabad’s interests? For a long time, Rawalpindi’s Afghan policy was tied with its India policy. The generals are concerned about not having dependable partners who will protect them against Indian influence in Kabul. The question is that has this perception changed because the perception on this count will determine in which basket Pakistan lay its eggs? A fundamental shift in policy on Afghanistan will have serious repercussions for Pakistan’s relations on both the western and eastern borders. In fact, a shift does not become fundamental unless we take into view the overall national strategic framework.
Referring to the interview, it certainly is a lesson about institutional culture in the army and its inherent weaknesses. A decision in 2010 not only indicates an agreement by the civilian government, but also by the military. This means that the armed forces made an assessment about the costs and benefits of such a venture. Other sources even claim that the then DG ISI had updated General (retd) Kayani about ways of containing repercussions in Punjab where a lot of militants are holed up. Yet, it seems that one man at the top decided for inaction.
The most important lesson, however, is the need for institutionalising accountability in military decision-making. If decisions are as personal as the interview makes it sound, then it is important that we increase the level of accountability of the institution at least to Parliament. This also means that the political class would also have to prepare for a more intelligent engagement with the defence services. Technologically modern militaries are politically very tricky. To harness them requires building institutional capacity that we lack today.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 3rd, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (24)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Np: The corporate media and bodies such as the British BBC do not necessarily tell lies. They may not tell the exact truth.if it suits them not do do so, they may stretch the truth, they may get it wrong, or if they relate the truth they may not provide balance, and of course they occasionally apologize if discovered. The bottom line is that it is very difficult to determine what the truth is in light of the constant propaganda and vested interests emanating from the huge number of corporate and government news sources. Further, the news being printed is quite often in the best interests of the source and not the reader. Best of luck in attempting to decipher the truth.
@Waqas: You ask me to see things 'from international politics point of view' and yet you want to ignore CNN and BBC? By the way even UN has declared JuD as a terrorist organization. So how much more international do you want to be. Also if the organization listed aove are not neutral, exactly what are the neutral sources - madrassas in Pakistan?
@Np: If you believe everything that is fed to you through channels, you need more help from God than I do. Please see things with a neutral mindset, from international politics point of view and not narrow it to “Indian Claims” and “CNN says” and “BBC reports”…..
@Mirza: "Public is the employer and boss of these highly paid govt servants and has every right to know their activities and performance." When were the activities of " .. these highly paid govt servants .. " a secret? They have repeatedly overthrown legitimate civilian govts, suspended judicial processes, and re-written the Constitution several times. Their performance is equally well known. They lost every war they fought, lost half the country, and have driven the economy into the ground. So as " ... employer and boss ... " what do you plan to do about it? By the way, are you sure you are the boss? Why don't you ask them? They seem to think otherwise.
@Author: ma'm, it is not Pakistan's decision to make whether to accept Afghan democracy. It is ot your 5th province, it is a sovereign country. Its relations with India are none of your concern.
@Waqas: If you think that an organization which is responsible for killing 166 people in neighboring country and has been designated as a global terrorist is positive for Pakistan, God help you.
"We are still confused about where we are headed and what will be the fate of hundreds of soldiers deployed in the battle." +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ So what was the fate of the soldiers deployed in Kargil? why r u confused?
"If a decision has been taken to accept the democratic process in Afghanistan" ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Wow what a wonderful thought. So it is Pakistan that has to accept or reject democracy in Afghanistan.
"If decisions are as personal as the interview makes it sound," ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ in the same tradition the ET moderator rejected my comment about another similar military decison in 1991 vis a vis India!
"then which players will ensure that the anxiety average Afghans feel towards Pakistan does not hurt Islamabad’s interests? " ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Maybe the word u r searching for is hostility?
Pakistan in wonderland +++++++++++++++++++ Strategic Depth is a misnomer for strategic shallowness just as Pakistans purely transactional relations with US are called strategic ties.
" Latest reports from Bannu suggest that militant and religious outfits like the JuD, the JI and the JeM dominate welfare activities in the area. The services provided thus, will pave the way for recruitment of more jihadis from amongst the IDPs or build greater sympathy for these outfits amongst the displaced people"
No NGO has even spoken for IDP's relief and u r trying to undermine the ones who are doing some good. Nice! Where is your so called liberal civil society? where r the an NGO's who never let go any opportunity to malign Pakistan's already tarnished image?
BTW, JeM is not doing any welfare work there. Only JuD and JI are doing welfare work... and they do not support terrorists. Only a person who has no insight into these organizations can say that they recruit terrorists from such camps. Do ur own research, instead of relying on "sources" and try to be a bit positive FOR Pakistan.
Institutionalize the accountability of the Army? Can the writer name an office or institution the Army has not, can not, or will not overthrow at will? When Pakistanis cheered every Army takeover, they consented to the Army being the sole institution of the country. If, now, they don't want even that institution, they have a problem on their hands! A side issue: what's with all this "strategic depth"? I thought Pakistan's nuclear weapons were it's insurance against Indian invasion. Is there an alternative scheme of retreating in a conventional war and taking the goodies out to Afghanistan, so they can be dropped back on Pakistan to stem the invasion? It gets more fascinating with each passing day ........... !
In the US and some other democratic countries generals write books and go in the media against all that they thought was wrong. There should not be a Mafia like code that everybody keep their mouth shut no matter what was happening. For example the atrocities in East Pakistan would not be possible if some military officials had courage and conscience. Public is the employer and boss of these highly paid govt servants and has every right to know their activities and performance.
waiting for kiyani's response........
No retired general ever says anything in an interview which he thinks the current COAS will dislike. Corollary: whatever was said in the interview was not spontaneous, but pre-cleared, pre-analyzed for consistency with the PR plan of the current COAS.
@ModiFied: "Don’t be surprised if operation becomes open ended and continues for ever" +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Well the operation may end but you know "welfare 'activities' are endless,wink wink.
The episdoe also reveales the spinelessness of the PPP Govt that extended a second 3 year term ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ to now we know ,a moderately incompetent and highly indecisive General.
The Parliament is a legislative nody. The army is an executive function and should be accountable not to the parliament but the executive i.e. PM and cabinet. In Omdia this accountability is ensured by having COAS actually report to the defense minister who is part of the cabinet. Anything short of this is going to be an eyewash.
Fighting militants on the one hand and allowing their well wishers like JuD etc to run welfare activities in IDP camps on the other hand is an indicator of the things to come. Don't be surprised if operation becomes open ended and continues for ever.
The interview was a complete sham. Its obvious that the current setup wanted to make it appear as if not going into NWA was a completely decision of Kayani and everyone else wanted to get in there. If this is the case, then might as well be done with corps commander meetings etc, if later every decision is going to be a "personal one".
" Latest reports from Bannu suggest that militant and religious outfits like the JuD, the JI and the JeM dominate welfare activities in the area". Same thing happend in Awaran Quake Relief efforts. Non-Religious NGO's were not let in Awaran siting security concerns but the JuD & other Stretigic depth patners were.
During the present operations, the military is targetting the Haqqanis as well, so the author's contention that we have not entirely abandoned the "strategic depth" concept is erroneous. Both the civilian/political authorities/political class, has long given up on that outdated thinking. Now, not only is there stress on cooperating with the present Kabul set up but as well to help the Afghans find an all inclusive government in their country. Although the military long ago gave up the the so-called "strategic assets" theory and practice, it will take some time for "intellectuals" to become seized of the reality.
Mr Abbas has right to say what is right.