IN the backdrop of all sorts of rumours, conjectures and propaganda campaigns by some vested interests about the role and functioning of the State institutions, Director-General Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) Major-General Babar Iftikhar clarified ground realities in a manner that would surely inspire confidence among people.
The remarks made by him during a news conference on Thursday conveyed an unambiguous message that all state institutions stand for the Constitution, rule of law and continuation of the democratic process in the country.
It is, perhaps, for the first time that not only Pakistan Army but also the institution of judiciary has become what General Babar described as ‘apolitical’, which augurs well for supremacy of the Constitution and Parliament and now it is for the parliamentarians and the politicians to demonstrate their commitment to the democratic process and strengthening of the democratic norms and traditions.
It is known to all that despite near breakdown of the governance for various reasons during last tenures of PPP, PML(N) and PTI, the leadership of Pakistan Army did not exploit the opportunity to grab power and now General Babar has categorically stated that the military would “Absolutely Not” impose martial law ever in future, noting that democracy was the only way forward for Pakistan and the COAS had time and again reiterated the same, a statement that has widely been acclaimed by politicians, opinion-makers and the general public.
General Babar aptly stated that it had been the demand of political parties for the last 74 years that the Army had nothing to do with politics, “and we fulfilled their demand”.
He said there were no complaints about receiving any calls during by-elections and local government polls.
He also quoted the unanimous view of the recently-held conference of the formation commanders that democracy, strength of institutions, supremacy of law and role of institutions within the ambit of the Constitution guarantee national interests.
Therefore, the Army has made its intentions known by making an unambiguous statement about its commitment to democracy but democratic stability is dependent upon several other factors that need to be taken care of by political parties, shunning their self-centred policies and actions.
There is also another categorical announcement from the Army — Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Javed Bajwa is not interested in further extension and would retire, in any case, in November 2022.
This should put to rest a spate of rumours circulating on social media about possibility of another one year extension, which are understandably aimed at creating rift in the rank and file of the Army.
It was also rightly pointed out by DG, ISPR that the institution of army functions as per unity of command; all its soldiers and officers look towards the army chief, adding neither there is any change in this reality nor there will be any.
The Army has become ‘apolitical’ but unfortunately it is facing an onslaught of criticism on social media for this very reason, which is nothing but a myopic approach by frustrated elements, who are not much bothered about peace, security, stability and economy of the country.
Any attempt to create a rift between masses and the defence forces is against the national interests and, therefore, it is responsibility of not only the Government but also the people of Pakistan to contribute their share by discouraging such tendencies and foiling conspiracies of vested interests.
As has been pointed out by the military spokesperson constructive criticism is right, but character assassination through fake rumours and propaganda is not acceptable at all.
There were also irresponsible remarks regarding the fate of the country’s nuclear assets under the broad-based government, sparking a warning from the Pakistan Army that no such attempt should be made in future.
The political remarks about the nuclear assets were uncalled for as the parties that are in power these days are widely acclaimed for their contribution to make Pakistan a proud nuclear power.
PPP’s founder Zulfikar Ali Bhutto is widely regarded as father of Pakistan’s nuclear programme while PML(N) supremo Nawaz Sharif took the bold decision of detonating the country’s nuclear device resisting immense foreign pressure.
‘Lettergate’ is yet another issue that is used to pollute the political environment in the country and with this in view the clarification given by General Babar would go a long way in settling the dust.
Contrary to the viewpoint repeatedly being hammered by former Prime Minister Imran Khan that the no-confidence against his government was linked to a foreign-funded conspiracy, the ISPR chief emphasized that there was no mention of any ‘conspiracy’ in the press release issued after the meeting of the National Security Committee (NSC), which discussed the issue threadbare.
Imran Khan also accused Washington of supporting his ouster as he visited Moscow against the US advice and here too General Babar clarified that the Pakistan Army was onboard on the Russian visit.
Another pertinent clarification related to the issue of ‘absolutely no’ with ISPR chief stating that the United States did not ask for any military bases.
All this makes it absolutely clear that the issue of military bases and ‘conspiracy’ theory are being propagated to gain political mileage and that too at the cost of the country’s foreign and strategic interests.
Some cabinet members of the PTI government also propagated that the proposal of ‘three options’ (resignation of the Prime Minister, dissolution of the assembly after withdrawal of no-confidence motion and announcement for fresh elections) came from the Army Chief but General Babar asserted that the former PM approached the military leadership to help resolve the political and constitutional crisis on the basis of these options.
Imran Khan preferred the option of fresh elections but the joint opposition rejected the proposition for withdrawal of the motion for vote of no-confidence.
It is also pertinent to point out that the role played by the judiciary during the peak of the constitutional crisis is also reflective of its deep commitment and resolve to defend the Constitution and Democracy.
It is the responsibility of the judiciary to uphold the Constitution and take prompt notice of any attempt to violate or trample this otherwise sacrosanct document and proudly it did what it should have done in such circumstances.
There is, therefore, absolutely no justification to raise accusing fingers towards the judiciary or the army.
The clarifications given by ISPR should form the basis for moving ahead in a spirit of accommodation in the larger interest of the country and democracy.
