• Home
• Video
• Books by Ikram Sehgal
• About

Head-Hunting and the President

Acting on the advice of the Federal Government, President Farooq Khan Leghari suspended the Punjab Government for a period of two months, asking the Governor to assume all powers. A day earlier, all the PPP ministers in CM Manzoor Wattoo’s Provincial Cabinet had resigned as an orchestrated move to create “suitable” conditions to justify Presidential action. While no tears can be shed (without resorting to hypocrisy) for the Wattoo Coalition which was unnatural in the first place and overdue for demise, democracy could have been better served by asking Wattoo to take a “vote of confidence” route or better still, to have moved a vote of no-confidence against him while he was in power. Twice now, the President has used his powers to intercede and interfere in the principle of provincial autonomy by causing the demise of the NWFP and Punjab Governments to facilitate the entry of a PPP-led Coalition Government. Technically within Constitutional parameters, as far as the norms of democracy he is constitutionally pledged to uphold the President stands on rather shaky moral grounds. Another round of manipulation and horse-trading by both major political groupings was set in motion, this shameless exercise denigrates the entire democratic system. While his partiality and judgement can be called into question, the President is a decent human being and he should have adopted a more neutral stance so as not to call his partiality and judgement into question. The President must not forget he was a victim of “Mehrangate”, the scam perpetrated by Mehran Bank’s unscrupulous Younus Habib (remember him?) and others to maliciously defame his character. Haji Nawaz Khokhar, the then PML (N) MNA, was most vociferous in demanding an “egg and tomato” assault on the President in the NA during his address. It was only when he jumped ship and went across to the PPP that it became clear his this “more loyal than the king” cheerleading, ostensibly on behalf of Mian Nawaz Sharif, was part of a master scam devised to dupe (and ensure) that the Opposition remained in confrontation with the President lest his known upright nature lead him to “positive neutrality” as per his Constitutional role. Who was behind this conspiracy? Before those of us led astray by the scam could render an apology of sorts, we were rudely awakened to reality by the Punjab Blitzkrieg led by the Governor, Lt Gen (Retd) Raja (Von) Saroop. Those of us who had seen (and maybe fantasised) about the President becoming independent for the good of Pakistan, have to live with the fact that the widely awaited transition of Leghari from PPP stalwart to being the President of all the peoples of Pakistan has suffered a setback.

The PML (N) and the PPP indulged in the usual numbers game in the race to make a government in the Punjab. Governor’s rule, albeit temporarily, gave an important edge to the PPP’s head-hunters who, armed with bags full of money and the official stamp of authority (not averse to using the fair name of the Army), swung the swing-vote of 25-30 MPAs quite efficiently. The Punjab legislators cannot become an unpurchasable commodity overnight (about as unlikely a possibility as the sun rising in the west). Having dithered over principles in accepting Wattoo back into the PML (N) fold for over 2 years, the PML(N) had earlier made a 180 degree turn-around and principles notwithstanding symbolically embraced him, causing anguish among those loyalists who had suffered at Wattoo’s hands. Mian Nawaz Sharif has to be commended for finally displaying political horse-sense in learning that the art of pragmatism and compromise is inherent in politics, albeit maybe too late this time around in closing the barn door after the horse had bolted. The tantalizing question is, will this convince Chattha to come to Muslim League senses? Such is the concept of loyalty and commitment in this democracy of ours that legislators have to be kept under sequestration and in hiding lest they be wooed away by the other party. This forcible captivity to coerce an individual to vote against the will of the electorate is an insult to the integrity of the individuals, more particularly it is an insult to democracy and to the Constitution that enshrines it. Parliamentarians the world over in similar situations would ascertain the mood of the electorate and synchronising that with their own judgement in the best interest of their country, not their pockets. The desires of the people who make up the electorate in the Pakistani version of democracy seem to count for nothing either to the political parties or the elected legislators.
The present system is a constitutional farce contributing to the disintegration of the nation. Among the factors cited by the President were “bad law and order situation” and “corruption” whereas the real danger to PPP was that the CM Punjab would have requested dissolution of the Assembly thereby automatically triggering off an election in three months. As anyone (and her uncles) know Mian Nawaz Sharif would sweep the polls, therefore the reluctance of PPP to test their “popularity” at the altar of the peoples’ will. A vote of no confidence in the NWFP may well be in the offing. Ms Bhutto may have won the Punjab battle and may well also win in the NWFP if tested but she stands to lose the war with respect to Federal power, Nawabzada Nasrullah may yet become PM. Rather than Punjab or NWFP, Sindh should be a prime candidate for Governor’s rule, primarily for “law and order” as well as “corruption”, for the past three years the Federal Government has been assisting the Provincial Government to stay afloat only with the help of law enforcement agencies (as well as the Army till they withdrew unilaterally on Nov 30, 1995). The entire urban area of Sindh is represented in the National Assembly by legislators who could never have been voted into the National Assembly if the MQM had not (in a moment of sheer political madness) insensibly boycotted the NA elections. Unrepresented at the national level, the urban electorate’s representatives at the Provincial level are either in jail, in exile or underground, physically made incapable of representing their constituencies. The MQM have repeatedly brought their problems to the attention of the President whom they voted for en bloc and there is reason to believe that all may not have fallen on deaf ears. It is true that militants within MQM have resorted to terrorism but it is also true that militants in all political parties have taken to criminal activity.

The head-hunting for MPAs in the Punjab may be a major event, it pales against the crucial decision in the next few weeks that the President will have to make, albeit with advice from the PM but not bound by it constitutionally, about the successor to the COAS, Gen Waheed, who retires on 10 January 1996 and has reportedly declined an extension. The President (a keen Shikari himself) therefore becomes the Chief Head-Hunter on whom rests Pakistan’s future because the Army is one institution that has not been subjected to “privatisation” in the manner that others have been. Since the Pakistan Army is famous for its blind subservience to whoever is the Chief the possibility of it becoming a loyal “Praetorian Guard” has obvious connotations for the rulers. Since anyone who rises to Lieutenant General’s rank must be taken to be professionally competent, for the post of COAS we must tick off against a checklist of positive and negative qualities, to find out whether the COAS aspirant has (1) honesty, integrity, competence and professionalism in the eyes of his colleagues as well as the rank and file of the Army, (2) seen any action in the many operations during the past 35 years or so i.e. heard a shot being fired in anger, in either (a) Dir-Bajaur operations 1959 (b) Feni River – Asalong Mouza Operations 1962 (c) Rann of Kutch (d) 1965 war (d) 1971 war (e) Balochistan Operations 1973-5 and (f) Siachin 1985-ongoing, (3) links or inclination towards any political party or involvement in any political (or electoral) manipulation, (4) been involved in any “dirty tricks” targeting his colleagues or in any “grey areas” with respect to misusing his office for personal benefit, personal projection etc, (5) hint of involvement with (and support of) a foreign power and (6) a good reputation among the people of Pakistan (or at least those who know of him). The benefit of doubt for these factors should go to the country rather than the individual. The level of professionalism for the apex appointment demands that a person should have commanded (on promotion) an infantry and/or Armour Brigade, Infantry and/or Armour Division and a Corps for at least one year, sufficient to receive at least one Annual Confidential Report (at least one year) in each appointment. The man should never have been passed over at any rank, particularly Brigadier upwards as that reveals a quirk in his professionalism or worse, in his character. The prized appointment of Chief of General Staff must be considered a bonus but is not a must. Of the four candidates in order of seniority, two from infantry, one from armour and one from artillery, three have clearly gone the route, only the one from artillery has been recently pushed into the command of a Corps to make up that requirement in the form of force-feed manipulation, he was also been twice passed over for promotion to Major General’s rank. As regards war experience is concerned, the same three individuals (two infantry and one armour) stand out as having served their country well, both in 1965 and 1971 wars, having commanded respectively infantry companies and an armour squadron in battle. In contrast the gunner aspirant saw through both 1965 and 1971 wars in “safe” staff/instructional appointments far from the cauldron of war, discretion being the better part of valour. In fact almost all of our Lt Gens (with the exception of the gunner) have not only seen action but some have been decorated for bravery while some have been wounded in action, one of the present Corps Commanders even took part in Operation Gibraltar in 1965 as a Captain and was seriously wounded in 1971 as a Major. In contrast the gunner scores heavily in all the negative factors and as such should not even be considered, the most serious doubt being about his foreign connections from the time he went on a particular foreign course as a Major. Despite his obvious de-merits rumours indicate that, this gentleman may be the ruling Party’s first choice as he not only “delivered” in 1993 but is seen to be “loyal” and “malleable”, remember Ziaul Haq? It would be a sad commentary on the sincerity to the nation of our rulers if they are looking for less rather than more as leadership qualities for this most vital institution. This is in fact a litmus test of the patriotism and commitment of the rulers for this nation since this nation’s survival depends almost wholly upon the integrity and professionalism of the Army (and thus it’s Chief)? A wrong choice must be taken clearly as vengeful intent meant to destroy the Army. The President must veto any controversial and undeserving person, for once exercising his authority solely in the interest of the nation and not acting blind, deaf and dumb. As a public school product and former civil servant, the President should be acutely sensitive to the fact that there is a long list of deserving professional soldiers with war experience and basic integrity to choose from. One exhorts him to make the right decision and choose an honourable man, to rise above political considerations and opt for professionalism in the ultimate and supreme interest of the Army and the nation.

Did you enjoy this post? Why not leave a comment below and continue the conversation, or subscribe to my feed and get articles like this delivered automatically to your feed reader.