ISPR’s political semantics - I

Nothing can be understood in isolation. So is the case with three recent press releases of the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR), which acts as the voice of Pakistan Army. However, any attempt to understand them without putting them in their proper context is misleading. Actually, words and sentences are packets of explosives or envelopes of goodwill. It is the situation in which words and sentences are expressed which determines the nature of their destructive or constructive character.

So let’s indulge in a bit of political semantics: Here is the text of the 1^st press release (N0.184/2014-ISPR), which was issued on August 31^st: “(1) Corps Commander Conference was held at General Headquarters tonight. (2) Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Raheel Sharif presided over the conference. (3) While affirming support to democracy, the conference reviewed with serious concern, the existing political crisis and the violent turn it has taken, resulting in large scale injuries and loss of lives. (4) Further use of force will only aggravate the problem. (5) It was once again reiterated that the situation should be resolved politically without wasting any time and without recourse to violent means. (6) Army remains committed to playing its part in ensuring security of the state and will never fall short of meeting national aspirations.”

As far as the sentence 3 is concerned, though the PR reaffirms Army’s support to democracy, but in the same breath it shows its serious concern not only on the existing political crisis, but on its turning violent and resulting in large scale injuries and loss of lives also. The question is why it’s so much concerned about the existing political crisis. The Army is an institution which is sub-ordinate to the country’s civil power, then how come that it stepping beyond its constitutional duties expresses its concern on the violence entering the crisis and large scale injuries. It may also be questioned why it’s so much serious about the violence, injuries and loss of life, which was the result of law-forcing agencies’ efforts to protect the state buildings. Did other institutions such as Rangers, Capital Police and other police officers express any such concerns? Then, it must be asked how such a sub-ordinate institution can judge the policy of the government and its aftermath, whatever it is!

The next sentence 4 reinforces the impression that the earlier sentence gives rise to, i.e. it clearly censures the further use of force. In that, not only does it publicly criticize the government’s policy, but advises it to avoid using force. That amounts to depriving the state and the government of its monopoly of violence, and thus makes it vulnerable to those elements which are creating a worst law and order situation in the capital city. Implicitly it may mean to be understood as carving out a niche for the protesting parties, PTI and PAT. Another angle of understanding 3 and 4 is that in the capacity of a constitutionally sub-ordinate institution, the Army may not advise or exhort any elements which are not part of the government to desist from violence; though they did the same earlier when a PR talked about the sanctity of the state buildings. It be noticed here that the word “force” is generally used for organized (governmental) force, and not for the above-mentioned elements, for which the word “violence” is used usually. It means that the advice exclusively stood for the government!

The sentence 5 reveals the whole stance of the PR. It reiterates political resolution of the crisis, and gives a time frame, affording no wasting of time. More to it, it advises once again no recourse to violent means. Obviously in accordance with the dictates of the constitution, the lawful authority rests with the government, and it is for it to see and decide whether to go for a political resolution, or delay it, or to go for the use of force, or delay it. Here it may be objected that, as argued above, it is justified for the PR to advise or exhort the government to do this or that. But that misdirects the argument, which indirectly tries to make sense of the PR of the ISPR. First, the Army as a state institution may tell or advise only a government institution, not a non-state actor. Second, as it is a sub-ordinate institution, it may not tell or advise the government to which it is subservient.

Finally, the last sentence 6 may be termed paradoxical. While it is said, ‘Army remains committed to playing its part in ensuring security of the state,’ it may at once be asked why that assurance was required to be made. Does it address that mistrust that a long history of military rule in Pakistan has created and strengthened? Or, does it address the doubts lurking around regarding the Army’s role? Be that as it may, the constitution makes the Army to protect the geographical boundaries of the country as well as to come to the aid of the civil power; whenever it is directed to play both of its roles (A-245)! That’s the rationale of its existence.

The second part of the same sentence is rather fatally amenable to various interpretations since the choice of words in it is quite sentimental and problematic. It states: ‘Army will never fall short of meeting national aspirations.’ It is relevant here to note that the constitution consists of twelve parts, and it is in the last part XII and its chapter 2 that the 3 articles relating to the Armed Forces are contained. There are no such words or expression in these 3 articles which may be taken to mean that the Army should not fall short of meeting “national aspirations.” How to understand the meaning of this expression? I would suggest it’s quite a political and partisan expression. How can one know: What the national aspirations are at this moment? That’s something politically subjective, and political leaders use this expression so often to their purposes that it is only in elections that the national aspirations may come to fore and to our knowledge in the form of votes only.

Hence, particularly this PR of the ISPR, which may be said badly or meaningfully worded, does not have only one meaning that the Corps Commanders may have been meaning to say; it may be interpreted in many ways, all of which cannot make part of a short piece of writing. In conclusion, it may said that the spirit and the message of this PR is ominous for the incumbent government, and may be taken to mean something akin to what goes beyond the ambit of the constitution. In short, it’s yielding to the Realpolitik of the moment!

Note: This article was completed on September 2 and was originally posted in September 2014.

Hopeless in Pakistan

The cities and suburbs of Pakistan are bursting with millions of teeming citizens, old and young, men and women and children alike. They earn their livelihood by small selling of goods or services which unimaginably involves hard labor with meager income. Or they are employed by private entrepreneurs who have to incessantly struggle against the vagaries of state’s regulators and tax officials. They form the larger chunk of a population of 18 million plus. It is they who cast vote to send a political party in the parliament, but cherish no hope this will ameliorate their life conditions they know from their past experience. This is one side of the picture.

The other side reveals itself in the headlines of the daily newspapers and news channels. One newspaper’s headline reads as: army chief pays morale boosting visit to ISI HQ (Inter-Services Intelligence Headqarters). Another headline says: defense ministry seeks cancellation of Geo’s license. It’s in the wake of a murderous attack on a prominent journalist and Geo News’ popular talk show host, Hamid Mir. He has survived despite six bullets injured him seriously and is under treatment in a hospital. His brother, Amir Mir, a known journalist, allegedly put the blame on the ISI and its head Lieutenant General Zaheer-ul-Islam saying Mir told him he feared they would kill him. One breaking headline news tells ‘Pakistan successfully test fires Hatf-III, a short range ballistic missile.’ Another newspaper highlights Chief of Army Staff, General Raheel Sharif’s visit to the ISI HQ and his statement that ISI is a “strategic institution” and its role is crucial in national security. The murmurs of a martial law are once again making rounds.

This side of the picture presents a state mired in its own internal fights with various institutions at each other’s throats. The same Pakistan Muslim League (Nawaz) which supported the cause of the restoration of the deposed judges is trying to rein in the Supreme Court by trimming the powers of the judicial commission which has an edge in the appointment of judges of the apex and high courts. Then there is Pakistan Army and the ISI which claim to be the uncontested savior of Pakistan. Though, India is no more number one enemy, and has been replaced by Taliban; however, it seems the security institutions are more occupied with the anti-Pakistan elements which in their perception abundantly populate media and civil society, two bastion of public opinion. It may be mentioned that not lately an Urdu feature film, Waar (War) was shot and released with the collaboration of the ISPR, public relations wing of the Army. Also, there is talk of an exclusive television channel for the use of Army to counter the Indian propaganda.

In this picture where do the politicians stand, whom the citizens bring into power? Pertinently this picture lacks the lines and shades of governance, and is blank so far as public provision of justice and basic social services is concerned. Hungry of energy, not only the entrepreneurship is desperate, ordinary life is disturbed. Electricity availability has somewhat improved under this government as compared to the previous one; but the core issues such as circular debt, a stifled market and state’s monopoly over the distribution of electricity are not going to be addressed soon. The scarce natural gas proves to be an apple of discord for which textile, fertilizer and other lobbies vie fiercely.

The present forecasted growth rate is lurking in the range of 3 to 4 %; but IMF puts it at 3.1 %. The average rate of inflation is hovering between 8.5 and 9.5 %. And the budget deficit for the current fiscal year is in the range of 6 to 7 %. As for the infrastructural priorities, the present government is hitting the wrong notes, and its urban sensibility is questionable; the cities are getting huge amounts of money being spent on un-needed projects, such as flyovers in Lahore. The roads in cities and their peripheries and especially in rural areas are in quite bad shape, or there is none at all. Potable water is a dream for most of the people. Healthcare is almost non-existent or do not match the number of patients it targets.

Another area of the picture represents the dismal state of the public transport, which has over the years deteriorated steeply. Not only can be seen crowds of commuters waiting at the bus-stops and buses tightly packed, there are as many traffic jams which consume sufficient number of hours of their life daily. To this must be added the statistics of road accidents killing countless citizens for which ultimate responsibility rests with the government, since rules and laws regulating driving license and traffic on the roads, though written in the books, are never implemented. According to Rescue 1122 service, just within one day 572 accidents were reported from 36 districts of Punjab last year. In this regard, the death statistics is too horrible to see: this April 20, in Sukkur district a collision between a bus carrying about 60 passengers and a trailer took 42 lives, and out of 27 dead 14 were children and 13 women, with 17 others injured.

Additionally, there is terror of the Taliban and other violent groups which on their own contribute to the disfiguration of the state of Pakistan. The government’s recent talks with the Thereek-e-Taliban brought a relief to the ordinary citizens; the frequency of the suicide blasts and indiscriminate killings saw a substantial reduction. But the issue stands unresolved and there is a long war ahead to fight the brunt of which is for the ordinary citizens to bear.

Constitutionally a civilian political government is in driving seat which came to power last year after the first elected civilian set-up completed its five-year stint. However, it appears that the state of Pakistan is not being run by the civil rulers; other encroachers of their constitutional powers, such as security institutions and agencies, are obstructing the way they may want to govern and it is with them that the citizens pin hopes. But the state of Pakistan is entangled in its own fights and this cancer is eating up the resources which may otherwise be utilized to provide the ordinary citizens with protection of life and property, justice and basic social services. That’s the story of the last 67 years. The story is going to be retold if the politicians do not take heart to challenge the actors be they state, i.e. security establishment, or non-state, i.e. Taliban and other violent groups. And if the ruling politicians let the security establishment do what it like, and do not subdue it to play its constitutional duty, they will once again betray the millions of teeming citizens who are living a hopeless life in Pakistan.

Note: This article was completed on April 26, and was originally posted in June, 2014.