The plot is thickening. In an unprecedented move yesterday, DG ISI Lt Gen Nadeem Ahmed Anjum addressed a press conference and questioned why the army is being dragged into all kinds of controversies. He pointed out at the so-called media trial that is underway against the armed forces in a section of the press and by a particular political party in the backdrop of journalist Arshad Sharif’s killing in Kenya. The ISI chief was flanked by DG ISPR Lt Gen Babar Iftikhar, who went at length to dilate upon the modus operandi of upheavals going on since the ouster of Imran Khan’s government, and as to how issues are being concocted to make an issue out of non-issues.
Some pertinent points were raised by the army’s intelligence sleuth who spilled the beans by saying that those blaming the army chief with a political vendetta were seeking meetings late at night, and were bent upon offering extension in service. He made it clear that Army Chief Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa had turned down all such offers, as he wanted to doff the uniform by the end of his tenure in November. This hints at the policy decision of the top brass to stay out of politics, and resist political temptations. Likewise, calling into question who advised Arshad Sharif to travel abroad, and who was behind his onward sojourns to East Africa, the duo made a categorical reference to elicit the point that the shadow of doubt falls on the beneficiary.
The presser has upped the ante, and it is likely to stir a political storm of arguments. This will set in a new phase of instability, and that too on the verge of the PTI’s long march on Islamabad set to begin today. The army leadership has opened its heart, and the intention perhaps was to undo the rumour-mongering associated with the institution, as well as to browbeat the political vested agenda of few in the cahoots. The need of the hour is to strike a chord of consensus, and do away with point-scoring and blame-game business
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ