Complying with the army leadership's demand Prime Minister Gilani has clarified his media comment on the legality of the replies sent to the Supreme Court by Army Chief General Kayani and the ISI chief Lieutenant General Pasha in the Memogate case, saying he did not mean what he had said. Though wording of his retraction is not as unambiguous as it could be, but the fact remains that he has gone back on his stand, which is very suggestive of the direction in which the wind is blowing. One would like to hope this retraction would thaw some ice, now besetting our overwhelmingly gloomy national scene, but given that Prime Minister Gilani does not let go an opportunity to express himself, recurrence of such embarrassing situations cannot be ruled out. Only the other day, he lent a clearly partisan colour to the Khurram Rasool fraud case by his outlandish comment - inviting comment by the Supreme Court that it knew that the government would appoint the thanedar "but the probe should also be transparent". His comment on the generals' replies was all the more puzzling as it was made to a Chinese reporter at the very time that CoAS General Kayani was in China on an official invitation, and was bound to attract a stiff response - as it did. In no time the GHQ reacted by asking the prime minister either to retract his statement or clarify it. PM Gilani has done both, but again not as unreservedly as could be. The plea that the remarks were made "in a different context...made in a unique situation when things were overlapping and there was no clarity" is too abstract to merit serious consideration. But it would, he believes, and is good enough, for the military is as much committed to a democratic system as any other institution - a very different narrative than in the past when in much less critical situations the army packed up civilian dispensations. As regards the survival of the democratic order, the ball is clearly in the court of the civilians. For the time being one would think all is well that ends well, provided repetition of such adventurism is avoided - indeed a tough challenge in the obtaining political ambience? Prudent choice of words and adequately circumspect phrases by the leadership has acquired great importance given the ubiquitous presence of the media. The old-time provisos like 'off-the-record' and 'briefing by an unidentified source' are no more respected in the heat of Breaking News. So leaders have to be careful in their statements; if those at a higher level read from a written text it would be better. Spoken before the media, words are like arrows shot from the bow that never come back. It is a well-recognised postulate of the science of mass communication that no amount of clarification can erase the impact that the original reported accounts of a statement makes on the mind of the reader/listener. It also takes some toll on the credibility of the source. Prime Minister Gilani accused the army leadership of behaving like a state within a state and then took back that assertion. He again said that General Kayani and Lieutenant General Pasha had run afoul of their constitutional mandate by bypassing the government while directly submitting their replies to the apex court in the Memogate case. He has now retracted on that statement. One wonders what more he is going to say before he completes his full term and then say he didn't mean it. Reports that some 'sane' elements interceded with President Zardari and the prime minister, resulting in the latter's retraction may be true. But beyond that behind-the-scene moves, there are the people of Pakistan who would like a fuller account of what happened and why is it being hushed up now. When the prime minister tells the world from the floor of the National Assembly that there was something fishy about Osama bin Laden's undetected stay in Pakistan, he in fact questions the credibility of the military leadership. These are weighty questions and must be answered. Copyright Business Recorder, 2012
Comments
Comments are closed.