Same Page, Different Paragraphs — I
The military’s view of the Army chief’s role as a troubleshooter in Pakistan’s ongoing political imbroglio does track with PM Sharif’s version after all
This is the first in a series of posts on the current political imbroglio. The second post can be read here.
WERE IT NOT for the impression that there is discord between Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and the Chief of the Army Staff General Raheel Sharif over who set the ball rolling on the Army Chief’s role as a troubleshooter, Pakistan’s political crisis would be over by now. But what if this impression of discord is false, if the PM and the military are really presenting the same narrative?
This indeed appears to be the case if we take a close look at the two narratives.
Here’s a quote of the PM’s address today to the Parliament, from a Reuters’ report:
“The army did not ask to play the role of mediator, neither have we requested them to play such a role”.
So what is the PM saying here? One, that the army has not been assigned the role of a mediator. And two, that this was neither the Army’s desire nor the PM’s for the army to be the mediator.
Please not the PM is ruling out mediation by the military. He is not saying he did not assign them any role.
In fact, he hints at having assigned them a certain role at the previous day’s meeting. The audio clip uploaded to the Dawn website has the PM saying (my translation):
“Even if we did not have this meeting with the Army chief, with his team, even then I think they would play this role because the protection of this place is the military’s responsibility — under section 245, they are obliged to protect this place.”
Now let us take a look at the military spokesman’s statement that was seen as ‘contradicting’ and ‘undermining’ the Prime Minister. Tweeted from the personal account of Major General Asim Saleem Bajwa, the Director General of ISPR (Inter-Services Public Relations), the statement said:
ISPR Release:#COAS was asked by the Govt to play facilitative role for resolution of current impasse, in yesterday’s meeting, at #PM House
What does it mean? One, that the PM did assign the Army chief a role, but that the role was not of a mediator but of a facilitator. Two, the Army did not seek any role. And three, that the assignment of the role by the PM came at the previous day’s meeting.
So where is the discord? Where is the contradiction? As Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, the Interior Minister, later claimed, the two versions track perfectly.
All right, the telephone call the PM spoke of? That could be the tactical greenlight, the strategic authorization having been given previously at the meeting. Also, the PM did never explicitly say the call Chaudhry Nisar received was from the Army. For all we know, it could have been from the Interior Minister’s staff coordinating the effort.
Image credits: Both images used are ISPR (Inter-Services Public Relations) handout photos
