Daily Times

General Raheel has acquired quite a varied reputation. He talks infrequently but means exactly what he says. Conscious of the speculation that was rife about whether he would be offered an extension and, if one were offered, whether he would accept it, he decided to make public the fact that he would not. Unsurprisingly, this has given rise to further speculation from all corners. Why so early, does he have ulterior motives, and what will happen in the next 10 months of his tenure? These and many more questions have been raised. Two articles come particularly to mind: Humayun Gauhar’s ‘Am I a Fish? But then, maybe not’ and Cyril Almeida’s ‘Three men, three questions’. I can merely suggest that Raheel Sharif is not capable of the duplicity suggested by Gauhar in the bulk of the possibilities he suggests. Almeida seems to have understood Raheel a little better.

He is no angel, by any standards. And, while traits like duplicity, guile and wile are considered Machiavellian by some, I find nothing wrong with them per se; they can be used for good ends as well as bad ones. But none of these traits are a part of Raheel’s chemistry. I do not think Raheel ever consciously thought of “not being a Kayani”, as Almeida suggests, but he must have been strongly influenced by Ashfaq’s example in this context. Perhaps if he is offered what Ashfaq is rumoured to have been seeking at the end of his extended tenure, the chief of defence staff, he might be persuaded to accept — perhaps. While unwilling to consider an extension, he might be willing to consider a promotion.

The ‘why’, therefore, is simplest to explain. He decided to publicly clarify his position and, yes, this makes it easier for him to go full speed ahead in the 10 months he has left. Why so early is also simple. It was supposed to put speculations to rest, which it has not and, while giving enough time to the powers-that-be to select his replacement, it was intended to liberate him from all the shackles that the public debate might impose on him for the time he has left. Finally, I do not think there are any ulterior motives in his announcement and I am fairly certain it will be full steam ahead, all engines firing for his remaining period. However, I am more worried about the other negative consequences of his decision.

The first politician to extol his decision was Asif Ali Zardari. To me his praise sounded close to gloating. Not so long ago, having sought refuge overseas, he was seen wailing against the “persecution on charges of corruption” that he claimed his party was being subjected to by the army. And his first point in that speech was that generals have limited tenures, while politicians are forever, or words to that effect. His extolling Raheel’s announcement reminded me of that.

After the arrest of Uzair Baloch, media reports indicate that the Prime Minister (PM) Nawaz Sharif has expressed some concern over politicians being targeted for corruption by the Rangers, which he feels the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) and Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) are capable of handling. More importantly, these concerns seem to have been voiced in a cabinet meeting on security wherein, for the first time, neither the military leadership nor the newly appointed National Security Advisor (NSA) were present. This virtually echoes the contention of the PPP leadership since the arrest of Dr Asim Hussain. This was exactly the reason for the disagreement on extending powers to the Rangers. The disagreement was actually between the central and provincial governments but was being debated as one between the army and Sindh government.

So, what suddenly changed the mind of the PM? Is it possible that Raheel’s announcement has liberated him from his shackles too? Does he now believe, like Zardari, that if they see through Raheel’s period, he will appoint a less intractable army chief to undo Raheel’s legacy? In the meantime, the PPP-heavy Senate has already approved an amendment in the National Accountability Act, curtailing its powers to pursue corruption in the provinces. Does the PM’s change of mind imply that the PML-N will now support this amendment in the National Assembly? Can one fail to connect these dots and find a conspiracy? If that is so, it is the most dangerous development for the country.

Some time ago, I had reached the conclusion that however reluctantly the PM might have joined Raheel’s crusade against corruption, he has realised that for his own political future it must be pursued vigorously. But maybe I was merely hoping. Like Arthur Conan Doyle’s most famous detective, Sherlock Holmes, I too believe: “When you eliminate all possibilities, the only one left, however impossible, is the truth.” And I fear that having eliminated all possibilities, this seems to me to be the only one left to explain the sudden change of heart by the PM.

However, if Raheel Sharif has chosen to make this announcement, he is not so naïve as to be unaware of this possibility. And, if he is aware of it, he will take measures to safeguard his legacy. His reputation is certainly precious to him but not more than his country, as he has demonstrated. I am sure he will not leave us, his countrymen, at the mercy of our unscrupulous, pusillanimous and gutless political leaders who, despite evidence, lack the guts to take on Islamic State (IS) in Islamabad — Abdul Aziz of Lal Masjid, whom I refuse to address as Maulana, as an example — until the army makes them.

I can make one prediction with some certainty: the next 10 months will be far from uneventful.

The writer is a retired brigadier. He is also former vice president and founder of the Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI)