Today at 5pm marks the start of Pakistans third ever in-camera parliamentary briefing on the security situation in Pakistan. It is to be made by the top brass of Pakistan army specifically Director-General of Military Operations, Lt.-General Ahmad Shuja Pasha, who will be presenting the Pakistan Army’s point of view which has been approved by the President Asif Ali Zardari.
While I would be the first to accept that this is a positive step in the right direction to take the Parliamentarians into confidence but I have a few reservations. More along the lines that this is a one-way conversation and the strategy is not open for debate / revision. If this one-way conversation cannot be questioned or modified then I fear it is all hoopla and this session will only serve as a rubber stamp for allowing a free hand to Zardari a license to do as he or Americans desire ‘in the name of war on terror, as approved by the members of Pakistani parliament’. Its sadly has all the hallmarks of the rubber stamping parliament that Musharraf used previously, took them ‘into confidence’ but did everything as he pleased
Overlooking my own reservations, what is your take on this in-camera briefing
Comments
40 responses to “In-Camera security briefing – Your analysis?”
I think you are reading too much into Zardari’s power in the new setup. I don’t think he has given much input in the present policy being followed by the Army, although he does support it wholeheartedly because the US supports it.
I think he is a powerful president as far as his say in running the govt. goes not affecting State Policies. I doubt the armed forces will give up their control in deciding the States foreign/defence policies – These have & will remain outside the influence of politicians as i see it – As it is the politicians are more interested in filling their pockets & those of their friends & supporters rather than entangle themselves with such issues.
I remember one old Kiswahili saying “Shukrani ya Punda, Ma’tekey” (When a Donkey needs to thank, he’ll kick you on your ass)
I just don’t know what are we (Pakistanis)waiting for? Havin’ a kick on the ass? or let the Donkey do whatever he wants to do?
(Gaad) save Pakistan
Awab,
Dont worry!
Nothing will change and nothing will happen….except what is already planned. We are back in Musharraff’s times.
Damn…how long we have to travel in a circle. We go back on same point after every struggle!
Shame on you, Sir!
> this is a one-way conversation and the strategy is not open for debate
In your hatred for Zardari, you have lost all sense of fairness and responsibility.
Dear sir, I have seen your blog transforming from a great voice against oppression to a heap of stinking horse shit.
Almost all news reports out today say the briefing will follow a debate that may last for two to three days, and some say it would follow a joint parliamentary resolution:
The News:
http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=57269
Daily Times:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2008\108\story_8-10-2008_pg1_1
The Nation (mentions debate in the headline!)
http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/08-Oct-2008/MPs-to-debate-security-terror
APP:
http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=54884&Itemid=1
Dawn is the only newspaper that reported today, October 7, that there will be no debate. Raja Asghar’s report is opinionated and he does not cite his sources. And you don’t either.
In-camera or out-camera does not matter…Check this out: Shocking
http://www.newzonfire.com/2008/10/08/banks-sealed/
Read a letter of one Pakistani at BBC
@PagalInsaan – the question more specifically is that this session is an INFORMTATIVE exchange – does the parliament / opposition [if they wants to] have the right to ask the army to stop all aggression / stop touting Americas war of terror and move towards more important issues – NO
This is just an information sharing BRIEFING – that’s it – organizing it under the joint session has the hallmarks of Zardari turning around the next day to the people and justify any of his ‘presidential actions’ to say “listen I have permission to do this from the parliament” Deja Vu of the Musharraf era and his rubber stamping parliament is it?
This is my question – yes there is a debate – but its a actually just question and answer session, as customary in a briefing.
But that said I could be wrong – and hence i just raised my suspicions
Paagal Insaan,
Why can’t Teetho blog his opinion? If you have a different opinion, go ahead start your own blog. If people like your views they would keep coming back.
As they say it on Pakistani Buses…
Mahnat kar, hassad naa kar
or
Tappar hai to pass kar, warnaa bardasht kar
‘CHOOHON KI MAJLIS’and nothing else….
@ Teeth Maestro
Sir,
I appreciate your response very much and understand your concern, but I’m a disgruntled reader who has begun to doubt your commitment to democracy and law.
The consensus 1973 Constitution defines the framework for democracy in Pakistan, according to which the minority opposition does not call the shots.
* Can you specify a democratic system where the minority opposition’s opinion is binding?
The ruling alliance has an overwhelming majority because the people of Pakistan voted for them to decide our foriegn and security policies. Three of the four provinces unanimously elected the president you claim has no mandate.
* Is the parliament supreme only if it agrees with you? Is the government ineffective only because it listens to its voters all over Pakistan rather than only one party from Punjab? If democracy means the rule of Punjab and ISI, I’d rather pick up guns.
This federation survives only because we have a hope in a consensus constitution, according to which:
a) The job of the civil and military bureaucracy is to collect data and executes policy decisions, and it is answerable to the parliament.
The bureaucracy includes the ISI, that has so far been making its own foriegn policies and interfering in governments and politics by the admission of its own former chiefs – supporting Punjabi Nawaz Sharif and Punjabi Shujaat Hussain against the popular PPP.
The ISI must be answerable to public representatives.
* If you believe politicians are not capable of handling foriegn policy, then that’s exactly what Musharraf said. How are you different?
b) The job of the parliament is to debate policies and make or amend laws.
Resolutions of the parliament’s opinion on policy issues are passed by simple majority and are not binding. Legislation requires a two-thirds majority and cannot be reversed other than by the parliament itself. A council of religious scholars advises the parliament on matters of religion.
* Under what provision in this framwork do you suggest minority opinion be imposed and made binding on the majority?
Does Majority of votes Gives FREE licence to KILL
Should Pakistanis sit silently because Asif Zardari and the gang has won by majority and thus have the liscence to kill Pakistani Muslims in Fata?
The people who voted for Zardari or the PPP voted out of love for BB/Zufiqar Ali Bhutto. This love shouldn’t mean that Zardari and the clowns can kill any one and no body has the right to question?
Paagal Insaan,
Why do you have to resort to “Punjabi Nawaz Sharif and Punjabi Shujaat Hussain”…. is this the best way you can debate?
Shame on you. This attitude is not democratic at all and yet you preach others to prostate before the gaads of democracy.
Why can not minority express its dis-approval? and why can not minority mobilize the people according to what it thinks is right? Which part of it is not democratic?
@Paagal Insan – you have some excellent questions and I seriously wish I had a perfect answer to each and everyone of them ‘in context for Pakistan’ – admittedly I don’t.
When I was on the street fighting against the Martial Law I had faith and hope that a new democracy could have been the answer for Pakistan – but NOW – I honestly feel like jumping off a cliff – its no different then the parliament under Shaukat Aziz. hand smooching ass lickers who only care that their bank accounts are filled up on a daily basis – it is jammed to the brim with politicians who come into civil service for the same of making big money
yes the people elected them into office – but our nation is an emotional nation – issue dont matter glitz and glamour is the only concern when rubber stamping the ballot paper – one party banked on the sentiments of the assassination of BB – while PML got elected on and Anti-Mush and judicial vote bank – those were only election narah’s now once they are in Parliament they resort back to their own all up to the same mischief all over again.
Pagal insaan — in all honesty I to am confused what is the solution – I believe that had if Musharraf left us a clean slate [no BB and NS] I think new wannabe’s would have come and we might have had some hope that they would want to serve the country – I think we would have had better luck with a novice crook as compared to a seasoned robber. Who had the balls to go to the US with a $100 billion begging bowl 😉 even spare change would be a handsome reward. No izzat no ghairat – the only focus is how to make money for their own bank balances nothing more nothing less -Pakistan is just a means to an end
Yes I’m frustrated beyond words – and like everyone else I too am trying to figure this puzzle out and admittedly I too have no answer – Do YOU – ? please please share
On a side not – somehow just referring to you by your nick – is half the satisfaction…. ROTFL
Sir,
General Musharraf, Nawaz Sharif, President Zardari, Benazir Bhutto, Aitzaz Ahsan, Osama Bin Laden,
You and I are all humans. All of us have opinions, values, aspirations, goals, dreams, strengths and
weaknesses, emotions, likes and dislikes. Our mothers have told us stories of heroes with virtues
that we identify with. And although we all have our week moments, and we even justify ourselves, we
also grow up and get better. I do, don’t you?
Liberal democracy is about a belief in the capability of humans to be good. It is about celebrating
this diversity of opinions and beliefs in humans as essential for progress.
Therefore:
a) You cannot say that someone who has an opinion different from yours is deliberately evil,
especially if he represents a majority. You cannot judge their intentions even if you cannot
understand their logic. Isn’t that what we were trying to tell Musharraf?
b) You cannot assume people are crooks without due process of law, in exactly the same way that
Musharraf cannot decide if Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry is corrupt. An Afia Siddiqui deserves a fair
trial, but an Asif Zardari who has spent 10 years in prison without a conviction has also been
treated unfairly in this respect.
c) You can say a whole band of 700 people who risked their lives to represent us are all
financially corrupt, but you can not say they have no other concern than to make money. Have you
never broken a law? Does that mean you are not capable of doing good? Even Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry
took an oath under Musharraf’s first PCO in 1999. That decision was arguably incorrect, but does
that make him evil, or just human?
These are rules we have believed in and fought for, and cannot give them up. We cannot treat people
the way Musharraf treated us because we know it is not fair. And if every one of us has to end up
becoming a mini-Musharraf, then it’s obvious that removing one symbol of intolerance, whimsical
autocracy and self-righteousness will not change anything – or two symbols if you include Zardari.
Any instrumental political activity will involve reaching out to people, street by street,
constituency by constituency, town by town, in line with law, in line with the constitution and in
line with the principles of tolerance, justice and equality.
Any attempts to influence the government’s policy through public mobilisation will also involve
proposals for _sustainable_ solutions of the problems on ground. Democracy allows enormous
opportunities for lobbying and influencing public representatives – the results of which may come
immediately, or after the next election.
It took Prophet Muhammad and his followers a decade of persecution and eight years of fighting for
the revolutionary takeover of Mecca – and the first executive order that followed was general
amnesty.
It took Jinnah 12 years of reorganisation after his return to India to win a majority of Muslim
seats in India, and another of fierce legal battle to achieve Pakistan. In the very first session of
the legislative assembly, he spoke of equal rights for minorities.
Nelson Mandela spent 27 years in prison, only to talk about reconciliation upon being freed. The
Dalai Lama was forced by circumstances to become a head of a government at the age of 15, and has
been leading an unarmed struggle for the independence of his land for the last 50 years, despite
losing one fifth of his population to one-sided violence.
And you lose hope in democracy and rule of law in 6 months?
Sir, from the lives of these heroes of mine, I draw three lessons that I believe are the answer we
are looking for:
a) Patience
b) Perseverence
c) Compassion
Awab,
It’s not clear from the post whether the briefing is for the entire parliament or a parliamentary committee tasked with security issues. Even if the briefing/policy was open to debate/modification, I’m not sure what value the parliamentarians would add.
While it is common for policies to be debated and developed with special parliamentary committees in industrialized democracies, the members of such committees do develop competence in the specific policy domains and make use of experts on their staff and/or through hearings. I am not sure such a tradition exists in Pakistan.
It would be nice if our parliamentarians began to make a serious contribution to policy making.
NO Teetho, you don't need to feel bad because you raised voiced against the dictator…..The current *democratically* elected thugs are the "Baqiaaat" of Musharraf.
Musharraf was the one who Baptized these thugs through NRO. Its not over yet, as Musharraf's policies are still in place and the same clowns are in the parliament.
Hi Doc!
Well it appears the impression being given by the opposition is the briefing session was completely worthless as it contained no new information and a statement of things everyone already knows. Let’s wait and see how people feel after today’s Q/A session.
By the way just noticed the “I Support Obama” thingy on this blog. Is it intentional or you really do?
I am asking because personally I believe for us it does not matter who wins in the US polls as the policy to target Pakistan will continue. McCain certainly is a looney but between the two Obama certainly is the more hawkish as far as Pakistan is concerned. See for example the pronouncements made in the latest debate between the two. For example:
Obama:“We have a difficult situation in Pakistan. I believe that part of the reason we have a difficult situation is because we made a bad judgment going into Iraq in the first place when we hadn’t finished the job of hunting down Bin Laden and crushing Al Qaeda…And if we have Osama bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act and we will take them out. We will kill Bin Laden; we will crush Al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority.”
He went on to insist on withdrawing US troops from Iraq as soon as possible and redeploying them in Afghanistan because “the war against terror began in that region and that’s where it will end.”
McCain on the other hand, though he did not rule out the possibility of using force, if necessary, to uproot Al Qaeda safe havens in the tribal areas, promised to do so with Pakistan’s coordination.”And by working and coordinating our efforts together, not threatening to attack them, but working with them, and where necessary use force, but talk softly, but carry a big stick,” he said.
After reading this, will you continue to support Obama?
Where is RDX? I want to put rdx on all these pagal-parliamentarians so they may get lost and give chance to new faces in politics. I’ve been tired from these ‘Basi’ parties who are kleptocrats instead of democrats.
Pagal Insaan, you can create your party give name to it as Pagal Peoples Party.
Re briefing to MP’s it is surprising that it was given by a person who was in that slot for hardly a week and not by his predecessor who had been managing affairs for long.
This step by the government is only the first of series that should be taken so that the Army can be forced to see the parliament as the source of executive authority rather than the GHQ.
I don’t think we should be expecting wonders on the first day – what I am hopeful for is that this will ‘wet the beak’ of the politicians and they will seek more such sessions from those who have deliberately and foolishly lead Pakistan away from the process of democracy.
Some more sessions of the military generals being forced to answer questions and finally, for once in this country’s history, made to sweat for their actions, and we will have the beginning of the end of the Army’s role as the arbitrator of Pakistan’s destiny.
Anyone who thought that merely restoring the judiciary would complete the revolution was living in a fool’s paradise. I was one of those who thought along these lines as well. The obstacles in having an independent judiciary with heroes like CJ Iftikhar Chaudhary restored are not really those placed by Zardari or the parties allied to him. It is the GHQ. Zardari and his cohorts with their allegations of corruptions do not have anywhere near as much to lose as the GHQ if an independent judiciary was given the power to clean up the rot and answer for all the great blunders – all of which were lead by the military – East Pakistan, Kargil, Siachin, and the policy on Afghanistan.
The step to convince the military to answer questions by parliamentarians is a first in starting the process to hold the Army finally accountable.
Awab:
“but NOW – I honestly feel like jumping off a cliff – its no different then the parliament under Shaukat Aziz. hand smooching ass lickers who only care that their bank accounts are filled up on a daily basis”
Perhaps the source of this chagrin is the rather nonsensical expectations raised. Every institution in Pakistan has to fight for its own independence. The judiciary and the lawyers are doing their part. The Parliament is beginning to do its part. Why expect that one fell swoop – such as the hopeful (now wishful) reinstatement of CJ Iftikhar Chaudhary – would begin to change the decades old foundations?
I think for those of us who are in parties opposed to the government, we should try to find substanceful arguments and come up with real policies to counter with. This ‘Zardari is crooked’, ‘this is not our war’, etc. etc. is getting old.
If Zardari’s government lasts till April, it will start to reap the rewards of a pro-rural economic policy beginning with the raising of support prices for wheat. If it lasts another year, Punjab will begin to look a lot like what it did in the early 1970’s – i.e. a province under the PPP’s book. ZAB became popular and is still remembered for supporting the farmers by giving international parity pricing for produce like rice and cotton – to this day the rural voters remember ZAB for economically empowering them. Zardari’s PPP policy of economically converting wheat into a commercial crop will end up giving farmers the ability to grow two commercial, profit-heavy, crops per year rather than just one. PPP is not fighting for the 30% Punjabi Urban vote where higher roti prices will cause problems particularly with this policy – other parties like N-League, JI, or PTI can fight over this group. But the PPP will bag a large chunk of the 70% rural vote and that will make it more than happy.
Rather than knit pick and denounce everything left, right and center, it’s better that we come up with better policies.
Otherwise if you are feeling disappointed today and accusing Pakistanis of being an ’emotional nation’, two years down the road, you will see a bigger PPP majority. Then it will start to seem like the only ones being emotional were those unwilling to give credit where it was due and in the commotion forgot to come up with better alternative solutions.
@Pagal Insaan & Fraz
I don’t care if Zardari was convicted or not – I KNOW he is guilty. Why?
Well for one after 10 years of denying that he had anything to do with the Surrey Palace he admitted it in 2007 because the court had ordered the property to be sold & the proceeds given the the Pakistani Government. I don’t know how you can defend that.
Secondly, he must have been an extremely successful businessman before he went to jail to keep maintaining houses & cars in London, Dubai & New York all these years. Nobody knows what those businesses were that could generate so much wealth. He doesn’t seem to have been doing anything since he got out of jail & he couldn’t have been doing anything during the 10 years he was in jail.
So his businesses must have been REALLY REALLY successful to allow him this luxury even after 15 years of once again ‘selflessly’ presenting himself for the ‘service’ of our nation instead of looking after his personal financial interests – Or so you want us to believe.
And please don’t teach other people what democracy is after leaders of the party you are defending are selected through personal wills & teen aged children are made party heads based on their blood lines.
Dear Sharp Teeth & Readers,
I know how things work in such cases. Please note…’in camera briefing’ means briefing literally. No discussions. Only Q&A session as noted has been allowed. i.e. queries on something that dumb legislatures failed to comprehend from the text of briefing. No Question outside framework of brief is taken. Nobody can question the strategy/ modus-operandi as it out of the ambit of brief.
Mily does not take dictation from political master players who are considered unpatriotic and self centered opportunists. They are not considered worthy of keeping state secrets.
Footnote. Mush was the only Paki President who has earned total confidence & trust of Israeli PM, as declared by him numerous times. Present Chief is the only one acknowledged and honoured by his collegues in US Mily (during courses at USA). He has been highly regarded and awarded honours by their societies…only when he became COAS…NOT BEFORE.
Does anyone knows what the purpose of holding an in-camera briefing is? I mean the briefing can be given in private to the legislators but why use cameras to record it? What is the purpose of that?
@Altaf
In camera (Latin: “in a chamber”) is a legal term meaning “in private”.[1] It is also sometimes termed in chambers or in curia.
But why the need to record it? Is it that at some point in time if a dispute arises it can be presented as proof to the public or in courts?
@faraz – great points – i too am on the hunt for solution – i have not given up on Pakistan at all – its just that there is a general feeling of helplessness but I sincerely hope we all can bring this country on its right track.
To be honest – I had a short but perfect solution – which never materialzed – I dreamt that making the judiciary independent of the bureaucracy – allowed for a balance between the two – each kept each other in check and no one allowed a free run to do as he/she wishes. With an independent judiciary to check the politician then it DOES NOT matter who gets elected – as long as they are held accountable – I dont care
That my friend was my shattered dream of independence of Judiciary…. will we have another opportunity to make that distinction again I somehow fear not, but for the sake of Pakistan I hope very soon
you are right teeth maestro.there are some questions need to be answered.but i believe we are too late for questions and answers.done is done.now it,s a payback time.
@Pagal Insan,
I am in favour of giving democracy a chance…but confused as Teeth is.
Democracy means will of majority…I hope you agree with me.
Yes, people voted for present governments and expect them to respect the ‘will of the people’. Unfortunately its not happening, what government is doing is exectly against what people want.
Let me be more specific, go and sit with any leader, worker or a jiala of PPP and ask him about CJ, he will turn his head down with shame. Where is the majority’s will?
Unfortunately, in past 30 years democratic institutions has been deterioated, thanks to dictatorship. A party leader is more a gangster or a king then a representative.
PPP was also promising restoration of judges, so do others, but today Nawaz and Zardari both backed out, leaving lawyers and judges alone.
One thing more, if it was a referendum, not election, majority would have gone for CJ and so is today.
yes, issue of foreign policy is not simple, but there are things which reflect the dishonesty and lack of respect for public opinion in present regime.
This government must complete 5 years, but can we give these thugs a free hand to disrespect the mandate we gave them?
Pagal Insan,
1- It is about celebrating this diversity of opinions and beliefs in humans as essential for progress.
Is this you slogan just to earn some brownie points or you really believe in it? or you think “Panjabis” don’t make in the diversity cloud????? Cause in one of your post, you didn’t stop your racism against Panjabis.
2-a) You cannot say that someone who has an opinion different from yours is deliberately evil, especially if he represents a majority.
Does Majority makes an opinion right?. According to this logic Hitler would have been right about any thing, because Germans supported him with a huge majority.
Minority or majority should not be the criteria to term something right or wrong. There should be some other standdard.
b) You cannot assume people are crooks without due process of law.
I agree with you on this. There should be a judiciary system that is fast, fair and accessible. In the absence of such a system people would be treated unfairly.
At the same time there should be a process of law to acquit some one from allegations and not a mere statement from President that washes away some-ones sins.
c) You can say a whole band of 700 people who risked their lives to represent us…..
Sir did you say “risked their lives?? that must be a joke. These are the peoples who have put 200 million Pakistanis at risk.
These are the people who are responsible for the kidnappings for ransom, murders, rapes, burying live women alive and every kind of sin in our society.
Lets say I am a crook and I can not do a bit good for humanity and Pakistanis. But I didn’t stand up to get elected. I am not representing the people of Pakistan.
Both stealing and Zina are crimes. But do they both have same punishemnent? Even there are different punishments for different categories of Zina.
With higer position comes the higer responsiblity and accountability.
You said: It took Prophet Muhammad and his followers a decade of persecution and eight years of fighting for the revolutionary takeover of Mecca – and the first executive order that followed was general amnesty.
Muhammad (S.A.W.W) struggled for a good cause, he came from good background. Even before prophethoot, Muhammad (S.A.W.W) was considered Siddiq and Ameen. What was Zardari known for? Mr 10%???
Can you compare Zardari’s background and his *struggle* to Muhammad’s(S.A.W.W). I think that would be the height of ignorance.
Pagal Insan,
a) Patience
What does patience means? Does it mean, sit idle and hope every thing be good since we have chosen the gaads of democracy.
No, patience means that even if you don’t see good returns of your sturggle for good cause, don’t give up.
b) Perseverence
Again, if getting rid of Musharraf didn’t return us something good, perseverence will in the end get us to what we want.
We should not give up for the struggle to a Fair, Fast and Accessible Justice System
c) Compassion
Yes, among us we should have compassion but that doesn’t mean that we should adore the ignobles because they are the gaads of democracy.
Yes we should have compassion for all of us, be it Panjabi, Sindhi, Baluchi, Mohajir or Pathan
I understand Musharaff doing that he was a millitary man.
Zardari is Politician.If we have Democracy:
Mr.Zardari should have discussed his millitary strategy and polices before going to USA.
Should have people behind him .
Now it is just a charter what ever Zardari has signed .He has no guts to stand and explain that to parliament.
He has chosen army spokes man to take us HIS sugar coated
policy.
Its time we the citizens of Pakistan should provide Hounarary military uniform to Mr.Zaradri.
DEBATE OF THE PARLIAMENT SHOULD BE:
WHAT WILL STOP CITIZENS OF PAKISTAN FROM DYING?
This Pagal Insaan guy to me is a character straight out of fairytail books. Nevertheless, I see some positive signs in his approach compared to majority of others, including myself. He appears to believe in the eventual win of good over evil, the value of people’s vote in so far as the mandate supposedly Zardari has, so on and so forth.
The problem I see in the case of Pakistan is that I simply do not see any possibility, none, nano, that without a major event, be it a revolution or some other sort of political nation wide movement, that people of this country would be able to free themselves from the likes of Zardari and Nawaz Sharif, or for that matter ESTABLISHMENT, whatever that may be. As far far as peaceful political means and processes are concerned the dice is loaded against the ordinary citizens. I mean just look at what PPP has been able to do after making crystal clear commitments on judges and the blatant about turns without fear of any consequences since. The people simply have no means to hold the poiticians’ hands to the fire over broken promises and the politicians know it. The game is rigged, people never win, the poiticians have no morals (by the way Dalai Lama is no better-he is very selective in his notion of peace-me thinks long time CIA asset). So…sorry to say, the situation as it stands, people are screwed, sorry no easier way to put, till they rise up and it wont be without massive pain.
I am sure many of you watched last night’s capital talk. If not, try catching the re-run today.
Hamid Mir questioned Hanif Abbassi nearly a dozen times – over and over again – why the PML-N refused to ask any questions to the Lt. General giving a briefing on the operations in FATA and Swat/Dir.
Every time Abbassi blew hot and cold (like most PML-N cowards) on the misguided policies of the government, Mir asked him why he didn’t react like this in front of the Lt. General of the Pakistan Army. Why remain mum?
This small exchange that kept cornering Abbassi reveals the reality: No politician wants to be on the wrong side of the Pakistan Army. Particularly not the PML-N which is positioned in a difficult crossroads right now. Abbassi and N-Leaguers would gladly have wrecked havoc had it been Rehman Malik or Mukhtar Ahmed giving the briefing.
But no politician has the guts to humiliate a serving Lt. General of the Pakistan Army. Anyone who tries would suffer a fate not so unsimilar to that of Benazir and others.
Before ridiculing this exercise of the in-camera briefing, consider the fact that the PPP could have set a precedent. An example of a serving Lt. General answering questions could pave the way for further queries from more generals on countless topics: Kargil, East Pakistan, Siachin – all incidents where Pakistan lost territorial integrity.
In time, even the PML-N members could learn to grow some balls and become ‘lions’ rather than the pussy cats they are in the parliament.
Fraz
I fully respect your openion but I do not agree with it.
Reason being it is the wrong impression which Benazir and Nawaz Shrief has instilled into the minds of people that Army halters the political process and runs the country.
It is a wide mis-conception which these leaders have fed to people because they hold massive rellies.Whereas Army men do not and should not.
Army officials should not give political statements.The take on Kargil ,we might have not lost the war on ground but lost because Nawaz did not stood behind his army.In terms of negotiating with Bill Clinton and rest of the world media.Now army officials cannot go knocking at the doors for press conferences and briefing the civilians and other governments.It is the job of Prime Minister.Try to assess the behaviour of Nawaz Shrief when he was a Prime Minister.How he treated Jahangir Karamat?How he treated the Chief Justice,and what lengths did he go to secure himself.
Benazir was no innocent in this regard as well.
Two most important points :
How Nawaz Shrief treated Pervaiz Musharaff,which Nation would treat own COAS to be sent to INDIA???
Would you accept that?
I am quite angry at Musharaff that he allowed that Traiter Nawaz to set foot on this soil of Pakistan .Nawaz literally sold out his own army to India by presenting the Chief in a plane to them.
The nearest place the plane could land was in India.
Zardari is sold out on Kashmir and Pakistan territory is given to India for Trade.Are we sure it is only for trade that we are providing length and breath of Pakistan to Indians?????
Awab but u shud admit that Imran Khan is such an ass that he missed another chance ti participate in politics. He’s being a chicken and an emotional fool. I wish Imran shud have showed some wisdom here but then he’s being another Qazi Hussain for Pakistan.
shah:
There is no wrong impression about the Army here. If Pakistan’s number one failure is the absence of rule of law and consequent institutional failures, then the Army, which believes in no constitution and commits treason after treason, is the primary problem of this country.
The fact that every politician looks to it and seeks its approval more than adequately reveals this. And Hanif Abbassi refusing to ask any question to a serving Lt. General is quite indicative that the Army remains sacrosanct.
For myself, India is a secondary enemy. The primary enemy is an entity that refuses to agree to follow the constitution, that refuses to be held accountable, whose leaders have yet to be punished for committing treason after treason, and is an enemy that cannot allow any institution to grow – be it the judiciary or the parliament.
I hope these in camera briefings may be a precursor to a larger change in the power structure.
Fraz agree to you on that.If people demand such telecast which happens nowhere in the world should take palce in Pakistan,than it should.
I personally believe Pakistan has its own political process and we cannot judge democracy in Pakistan by the yard stick of West.
But Fraz I am concerned about this anti army sentiment.It is quite wide spread and the people of my age born in seventies in the city have this strong sentiment .
I only feel that this is a frustration and anger built up in us as a Nation at the time of Zia and Benazir and Nawaz did not deliver anything so we are further frustrated and are taking this bashing out because Musharaff was an army personal.
Who allowed debate and discussion.
My politics is straight who benefits me and looks after my rights.Benazir came into power and selfishly abolished death sentence for woman only.Because she herself was a woman.I do not remember if any woman was hanged in Pakistan?So it was a threat to herself.what about men?Are they not human beings?Is it not right that many a men who are hanged 50% chances are all eveidence was fake.
Benazir did not try to abolish Hadood ordinance or even parts of it.
It is Musharaff who again has abolished some laws, rules against Woman.
It is a fact Musharaff is a millitary man.I cried for Benazir and wrote poems ,I will always morn for the loss but it is a fact she didnot do anything for me.In Benazir time her own brother was murdered if she would have got that investigated maybe she would have not died the way she did?
1973 constitution clearly states twice prime minister cannot be prime minister for third time.
The constitution written by her father for which she struggled for 11 years against Zia to get that constitution restored she came to Pakistan to defy that constitution and to amend it for to be elected as prime Minister for third time.
Nawaz Shrief wanted to bring in caliphate system and wanted to be declared as Monarch chosen by God to rule people and and a dynastic rule for his heirarchy.
I understand we all have grievances against Gen.Zia,his ISlamisation but General Zia was one man .It does not mean every person in army is same.Look at the different personalities of Ayub,Zia and Musharaff.
Bhutto ,Benazir ,Nawaz all wanted to establish a life long rule for themselves.
Being a public we have to examine everyone and everything,Judiciary,army ,politicians they are there for us .We are not for them.
But to turn against the whole institution which happens to be the defence of country is dangerous.
Judiciary,Army or Politicians the institutions are not wrong .It is the individulas, we have differences with.
Without these pillars country cannot exist.
From The Nation
The greatest secret of all
The most notable thing of the last week was something that we were supposed not to know about, the in-camera briefing on the War on Terror of Parliament. It was supposed to take place at a specially prepared bunker, and all members were supposed to tell all their constituents, not just their entire extended families, that they would get this secret briefing at this undisclosed location which the military had prepared, and would tell no one about, except those who would find out anyway, like the victors of 1971, and the Americans, the latter in case their Predator drones had any missiles left over from FATA. The Predators, and their operators, were probably ignorant that they had caused the briefing, but they did. For some reason, the briefings did not take place in secret, but as soon as they were over, the contents were carefully leaked, meaning that the in-camera sessions were not as in-camera as they were supposed to be….
…And there was an attempt on Hojatol Eslam Rashid Akbar Niwani, whose being an MNA does not depend, as it did umpteen times before, on his being voted in by the voters of Bhakkar, but on the sanad granted by the Jamia Al-Muntazir of Lahore, which joined many institutions in making Chief Secretary Hafeez Akhtar Randhawa, their joint Registrar and empowered him to grant degrees from them. It is because of that sanad that not just Rasheed Akbar became an MNA, but Saeed Akbar became an MPA, and a minister in the last Cabinet. Saeed Akbar has left Shahbaz Sharif to be elected unopposed to his seat to become Chief Minister this time around, but it is he who enjoys the title of Hojatol Eslam as a result of the activities of ‘Registrar’ Randhawa back in 1993. The attempt on the Hojatol Eslam was probably carried out by activists from the Lashkar-i-Jhangvi, who see no difference between Al-Muntazir grads, no matter the Registrar or the purpose, and think that killing them is the same as getting rid of Americans or their agents. But the real point to be noted is that the briefing did not stop this attempt, just as it did not stop the one on Asfand Yar Wali. It’s also amazing how the main men are nowhere near the blast, but the number of victims is above 15.
As for the greatest secret of all. Didn’t you already know? Well, perhaps you shouldn’t then, but the reality is that The War on Terror was started by the Americans, not anyone already here, or any Pakistani. So why are we also fighting it? And in the front line at that? You tell me. Otherwise I won’t know. Not answered at the briefing you see.