Daily Times

‘Reining in the army’ or rubbing the army and ISI the wrong way? Imran Khan: all noise and fury but not without significance. Why must he pick on the army and its associated institutions more than any other single institution in his pre-electoral campaigning? The question leaves one wondering, in its uncanny congruence, at the generally negative and rather offensive western (European and American) media onslaught against the Pakistani military establishment.

With so much being written, aired and filmed against the national sword arm, must Imran Khan — Pakistan’s shadow prime minister in his own reckoning — lend his shoulder to the international juggernaut attempting to run Pakistan’s military over? Imran’s tirade could affect the military’s strategic orientation and structural homogeneity. Does he not realise that his criticism of the military leadership erodes the faith of the rank and file in the integrity of their commanders and their ability to lead? Besides being highly demoralising, this might as well be an unintended move to instigate men against their commanders. At least hypothetically so! He would do well to get his party’s research cell, if any, to assess the impact of his critique of the army on the soldiers’ morale up and down the ladder.

He ‘vowed’ to bring the army and the ISI under his ‘command’ if voted into power. Where Imran seems to adopt the line of least resistance, ill-fitting his bold proclamations, is to acknowledge what he would do should the army refuse to tow his line. He states that if the directives of his elected government were not followed he would opt to resign instead of staying in power. In other words, abandon the game rather than play it to the finish.

He re-affirmed that in his interview with Karan Thapar on CNN-IBN’s ‘Devil’s Advocate’. He would not talk of the violation of the constitution itself resulting from such deliberate obduracy on the part of the army, if ever, to accept the writ of his democratically elected government. Would he not invoke Article 6 depending on the severity of military intransigence?

Must Imran Khan always personalise every issue without involving his party, the PTI, and his shadow cabinet, which is saddled with collective responsibility for his and the party’s actions? Should they not also pack up and quit all at the same time?

In his CNN-IBN interview, he said that under him as the prime minister, whatever policy would be made by cabinet would be “enforced with every institution”. The question remains: who would enforce his policy? Could he, or anyone else in his place, ensure the ‘enforcement’ of the policy and the writ of his government without the required intervention of the law-enforcing agencies — the police in the first instance, and thereafter the military if the situation so demands? The ISI could not dare influence his government bereft of the ‘moral courage’ once he is in power.

What sort of a perception is that? For better or worse, the army remains the nation’s most organised institution. Viewed as a hostile force, where else would his shadow government find another force to ensure the security of his government and the defence of the country?

Rather than questioning the loyalty of the army, it might have been wiser on his part to leave the army alone during these critical times that are about the worst in the nation’s and the military’s history. The nation stands on the verge of shifting from its generally viewed status as a ‘failing state’ to the odious label of a ‘failed state’.

The army, in the language of the foreign media, might as well be a ‘rogue’ force in cahoots with al Qaeda and the Taliban. All the sacrifices in terms of men and materials notwithstanding, the army continues to suffer in this essentially American war on terror. All this is bad enough to hurt the army. Imran Khan threatening to sort the army out or resign once he comes to power accentuates the military’s dilemma. He speaks of the army’s perceived threat to the civilian government of the day at a time even when the Indian prime minister ‘believes’ that the Pakistan Army is ‘on board’ with the government of the day in the peace process.

Could there be a better testimony to civil-military harmony on an issue as intricate as the Indo-Pak peace process? Is Imran Khan not isolating himself from the nation’s vital security institution even before assuming supreme command?

The writer is a retired brigadier and can be reached at brigsiddiqi@yahoo.co.uk