Since every one of us was opinionated by profession and by nature, the discussions between representatives of various institutions were very interesting.
There was deep consensus in how the political agitation in its immediate context threatens the Red Zone but it was felt that we as a nation will not remain stuck up for a long time in the ‘grey zone’. The majority opined that politicians in the past allowed the military to exploit their failures and even now the current political behaviour of the politicians suggests that the military is once again being forced to exploit their political divisions to ‘once again’ assume the responsibility for the conduct of civilian affairs in the country. It was felt that the ever worsening and deteriorating political situation was fast erasing the merits of the popular political narrative that ‘the military’s hands are full and therefore it will desist from interfering in politics’.
The most interesting aspect of the discussions was the question why the two major political parties of the country could take such a diametrical political position on the role of army on the current political issue in the country? The PPP’s political narrative clearly advocates for the ‘non–involvement of third umpire’ in the resolution of the dispute. But as a clear rebound to the stated position of all democrats in the country, it has been reported that the PML-N hung out its democratic boots and directed the army to act as facilitator, giving a new twist to the unfolding political drama in Islamabad. There was no doubt in anybody’s mind that the government was a clear loser not only because it abrogated the essence and spirit of the charter of democracy that its leader signed but also because it critically damaged the ever-evolving nature of civil-military relations for the past six years or so in this country. If the motive of such an evolution was to institutionalise civilian control over the military then that motive was seriously damaged and dented.
Lastly, the most debated point was — ‘what was the military leadership thinking?’ The lessons from the past were very clear; the military can only be expected to adhere to the principles of political neutrality, constitutionalism and obedience to civilian authority as long as the agitation politics on the streets remain under the governmental control and does not threaten the safety and security of the state. But when the government itself becomes the part of such protests (government rallies also taking to the streets) then such political strategy is consequential and is fraught with immense danger.
Why has the PML-N government allowed itself to be trapped in a corner was another interesting point of the debate? Majority felt that the PML-N government (compulsive as it felt) because its previous government was wrapped up by the military definitely proceeded to lay the bear trap for the institution that fixed it in the past. The hawks in the PML-N government hastily resorted to building an anti-military narrative. The foundations of this narrative were already laid during the election campaign when the PML-N government that promised to appoint two commissions when it came to power — the Mumbai commission to hold an inquiry into alleged ISI involvement in the incident and the Kargil commission to conduct an inquiry into the Kargil war.
Summing up the general feeling among the participants of the workshop was that with every passing day the more indecisive this government is the more unreliable it will look.
PS: My sincerest thanks, respects and admiration to the NDU, the participants of the workshop and those who taught us and enlightened our minds over a course of two weeks.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 7th, 2014.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (7)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Aik Pakistani:
Is TuQ not doing similar gestures etc; like Altaf Bhai ? who is also a British passport holder...yet over the years Altaf Bhai has been able to show his street power to such an extent that today Moulana Fazlul haq Sb calls him & rqst him not to send his party MNAs resignation to NA speaker, today most of the parties especially PPP has to live in Karachi for the sake of peace & likewise...same insha Allah TuQ will emerge but with more power...his 10 point demand is not digestible for many political parties because it points out for a change in system of governance etc; which will eliminate these status quo & make them accountable, which presently is main ill that is infested this country - from top to bottom....
Simplistic analysis, as always.
I like your article .
@observer: Please do not pick on the Pakistan Army. They have refrained from stepping in. That should say it all. The Facts are: 1) The Third umpire did not raise his finger showing great maturity. 2) IK has retreated to D chowk showing dwindling support 3) TUQ is still making silly contradictory statements. But why would I listen to a non Pakistani with no interest in the country any way (doesn't he live in Canada and is a citizen there) 4) Script writers are working furiously on a new scene
The majority opined that politicians in the past allowed the military to exploit their failures and even now the current political behaviour of the politicians suggests that the military is once again being forced to exploit their political divisions to ‘once again’ assume the responsibility for the conduct of civilian affairs in the country.
Poor Pakistan Military, being 'Forced' to 'Exploit' all over 'Once Again'. My heart bleeds for such innocent victims.
Now, can we come down from cloud cuckoo land Please.
More than a fair assessment of Nawaz and his brother Shahbaz's Bungling Bunch. On steroids. It is shocking to see how incompetent this govt. really is. And the juvenile behavior displayed by both sides. They should take lessons from Papua/New Guinea in how to govern/behave.
Participants felt "the military is once again being forced to exploit [the politicians'] political divisions". Wow! What a remarkably disingenuous statement. Is the author completely blind to the irony in this oxymoron?