Military 1, Democracy 0

Memogate indicates that while civilians have to prove their patriotism, the military remains unquestioned.

The memogate scandal — which had been brewing for some time and went viral with Mansoor Ijaz publically naming Husain Haqqani, the Pakistani ambassador to Washington — might as well have been the equivalent of the Lawyers Movement and Lal Masjid combined for the PPP-led democratically-elected government. While there are lots of questions which need answers, the issue seems to have been blown out of proportion by obvious actors who wanted to capitalise on the situation and undermine and hijack certain aspects of democracy. After speaking to various stakeholders including the Americans, Mansoor Ijaz and even security personnel, I am convinced that Husain Haqqani indeed wrote that controversial memo. However, before passing judgment, one needs to understand very dispassionately that this particular memo was written just after US-Pakistan relations were at their lowest point post the OBL assassination and that this is not the first memo ever written by a Pakistani to the US.

A detailed look at the memo reveals nothing shocking and, in fact, it appears that it was a desperate attempt to save US-Pakistan relations and establish a new social contract between the two countries which went terribly wrong. Interestingly, points one and two in the memo promised to form an independent committee — like the 9/11 commission — to probe the OBL fiasco, which incidentally was implemented with the approval of the military. The second point said: “It is certain that the OBL commission will result in immediate termination of active service officers in the appropriate government offices and agencies found responsible for complicity in assisting OBL” — a valid promise which is indeed also in the interests of the Pakistani military, as the military itself had been trying to purge the force from radicals within. Point three talked about establishing a “new national security team” and allowing US personnel to carry out raids and handing over al Qaeda members and other fugitives, something which the military had been doing since 9/11 by allowing drone attacks and joint raids (such as the one that led to the arrest of Mullah Baradar in Karachi). The fourth point, which was widely criticised, said that “the new national security team is prepared with full backing of the Pakistani government — initially civilian but eventually all three powers centres — to develop an acceptable framework of discipline for the nuclear programme”. Calls for bringing the nuclear assets under “a more verifiable, transparent regime” one widely misunderstood since General (r) Khalid Kidwai had been in charge of the command and control authority and the memo was reflecting a deep fear of potential stealth raids on the country’s nuclear assets. Compare this to General Pervez Musharraf who had transformed the nuclear command and control authority to please a foreign power. Or Dr AQ Khan who was involved in the proliferation of our strategic weapons for financial gain? Husain Haqqani comes across as a saint and a small fry.

Point five was about eliminating the ISI’s S section, something which needs to be discussed and debated. Finally, the last point talked about “bringing all perpetrators of Pakistani origin to account for the 2008 Mumbai attacks, whether outside government or inside any part of government including it’s intelligence agencies”. This, too, would seem to be a legitimate point which the Pakistani government has always advocated.

Finally, one should understand that this particular memo had been the first one drafted by a civilian, as all such drafts had previously been prepared by uniformed officers, and this obviously didn’t go down well with the military — and perhaps that explains its reaction. Husain Haqqani expectedly resigned on November 22 but he will remain a living martyr for democracy. Sherry Rehman’s appointment as the new ambassador shows that President Zardari and the PPP will remain in government, but the memogate scandal itself is indicative of how civilians have to prove their loyalty to this country every day, while uniformed soldiers not only remain unquestioned, but wear badges of patriotism.

Military 1, Democracy 0.

Published in The Express Tribune, November 25^th, 2011.