[Most analysts here say they believe that a coup is unlikely. The army is thought to be reluctant to shoulder the blame for ousting another civilian government and unwilling to take responsibility for running the country at a time when the economy is in shambles, extremism is rampant and foreign relations are in turmoil.]
By Simon Denyer
 |
| Anjum Naveed/AP) - Pakistan’s military is on a collision course with the government, led by Pakistan's President Asif Ali Zardari, after clashes over a call for U.S. help to avert a coup. |
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan’s powerful army was on a collision course Friday with the beleaguered civilian government after it presented conflicting evidence to a Supreme Court inquiry into a scandal dubbed “Memogate.”
The army is said to be furious about an unsigned memo that surfaced last month, supposedly soliciting Washington’s help to rein in the military and prevent a possible coup in the aftermath of the U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden in May. The memo was sent by a Pakistani American businessman, Mansoor Ijaz, who alleged that he was following instructions from Pakistan’s ambassador to Washington to convey a message that came from President Asif Ali Zardari himself.
The government denies having anything to do with the memo, but the ambassador, Husain Haqqani, has been dismissed and could face a treason charge. As the storm clouds darkened, Zardari left the country for Dubai for urgent medical tests last week and has yet to return. Officials said he is resting, on doctor’s orders, after a brief illness.
Any hopes that the two sides could have patched things up during Zardari’s absence were dashed after Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, the army chief, provided an uncompromising and emotionally charged deposition to the Supreme Court inquiry.
“The Memo episode has an impact on national security,” he wrote. He added that it “unsuccessfully attempts to lower the morale of the Pakistan Army whose young officers and soldiers are laying down their lives for the security and defense of territorial integrity.”
Pakistan’s military intelligence chief, Lt. Gen. Ahmed Shuja Pasha, testified that, having examined the evidence, he was satisfied that the memo was not only genuine but also led back to Haqqani. Both men called for a full inquiry.
The government, in its deposition, said it had nothing “in any manner” to do with the memo. It argued that the entire affair should be handled by an already-established parliamentary committee, without involvement by the Supreme Court.
Zardari had been asked to give a deposition by Thursday but failed to do so.
“The very fact military leaders want an inquiry into the depths of the allegations shows they want to confront the civilian leadership,” said retired general and political commentator Talat Masood.
Zardari’s future in question
The question now being asked here is whether Zardari’s enemies are closing in for the kill.
Opposition leader Nawaz Sharif petitioned the Supreme Court to get involved in the case. He has long been campaigning for Zardari to go and may see early elections as being in his interest.
Supreme Court Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry, another bitter foe of Zardari’s, set the tone for the inquiry with a pointed reference to the Watergate scandal that brought down President Richard M. Nixon.
But whether the army wants Zardari out, or just so weakened that he cannot threaten its hegemony over foreign policy and national security, is far from clear.
Most analysts here say they believe that a coup is unlikely. The army is thought to be reluctant to shoulder the blame for ousting another civilian government and unwilling to take responsibility for running the country at a time when the economy is in shambles, extremism is rampant and foreign relations are in turmoil.
“They can’t get rid of this government,” said political analyst Hasan-Askari Rizvi in Lahore. “They need a civilian front to deal with the United States and also to create the impression they are working within the framework of the constitution. The president will survive, at least for another two or three months.”
Other analysts argue that there is such bad blood between Zardari and Kayani that the military might be happy to see the president fall and elections called, especially under the cover of a Supreme Court decision.
Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani this week called the Memogate scandal a conspiracy against Parliament and warned that Parliament, the media, civil society and the world would not accept dictatorship in Pakistan. “We want democracy in the country,” he told the Senate.
On Friday, Gilani and Kayani met for three hours and “underscored the significance of national unity,” according to a statement from the prime minister’s office.
Gilani strongly rejected “rumors regarding a confrontation over the Memo issue,” while the two men said the military’s court depositions “should not be misconstrued as a standoff between the Army and the government.”
The Supreme Court is scheduled to start hearings Monday, but it is not yet clear whether Zardari will be in the country should he be called to testify.
“I don’t think this is an attempt to force Zardari out, but it can snowball from here,” said Cyril Almeida, an editor at Dawn, an influential English-language newspaper. “It’s hard for any of them to walk it back. A lot depends on how Zardari responds and the state of his health.”
Center of the storm
Under even more pressure than Zardari is Haqqani, the former ambassador to the United States.
A longtime critic of Pakistan’s military and its ties with radical Islam, Haqqani sits at the center of the storm — a victim, in his supporters’ eyes at least, of the civil-military divide and the deterioration in relations with the United States.
Former U.S. national security adviser James L. Jones came to Haqqani’s defense late Friday, declaring in an affidavit that Ijaz had approached him about the proposal outlined in the memo but had never mentioned the ambassador.
Questioning Ijaz’s testimony, Jones also said the businessman had first contacted him about the subject “a few days before May 9,” the date on which Ijaz claims Haqqani had first telephoned him to make the proposal.
The Supreme Court barred Haqqani from leaving Pakistan. His lawyer, human rights activist Asma Jahangir, said the case appears to have been “pre-judged,” despite the fact that no police investigation has been initiated and no formal charges have been brought.
“You have to hear from someone before you start restricting their movements,” she said. “An investigation has to start with some legal process, but there is no case against him.”
@ The Washington Post
@ The Washington Post
AT PAKISTANI EMBASSY, OFFICIALS DECRY NATO AIRSTRIKE
[The incident, which caused a public uproar across Pakistan, deepened the rift between the U.S. and Pakistani governments. As a result of the November airstrike, Pakistan cut off NATO supply routes to Afghanistan and boycotted a recent conference on Afghanistan in Bonn, Germany. It also declined to cooperate in the U.S. investigation of the incident.]
By Pamela Constable
Pakistani officials in Washington vehemently asserted Thursday that a deadly NATO airstrike on two Pakistani border posts near Afghanistan last month was unprovoked and inexplicable. They also said that U.S. military officials in the region had given “inaccurate and incomplete” information to their Pakistani counterparts as the attack, which killed 24 Pakistani troops, got underway.
Their comments, at a Pakistani Embassy news conference, came one week before U.S. military officials are expected to release the results of their investigation of the incident. NATO and Afghan officials have described the late-night assault as a response to gunfire from the vicinity of the Pakistani border posts, where they suspected militants had taken cover.
The incident, which caused a public uproar across Pakistan, deepened the rift between the U.S. and Pakistani governments. As a result of the November airstrike, Pakistan cut off NATO supply routes to Afghanistan and boycotted a recent conference on Afghanistan in Bonn, Germany. It also declined to cooperate in the U.S. investigation of the incident.
Afghan military officials have said that coalition forces in Afghanistan came under fire from militants, who retreated to an area near the Pakistani military posts. American military officials have declined to release a detailed account of the incident pending their investigation, but they have expressed regret for the loss of life.
Pakistani officials Thursday referred to U.S. and NATO forces as “our friends” and stopped short of saying that the air attack had been deliberately aimed at Pakistani forces. But they repeatedly asserted that it could not have been a case of mistaken identity, and they said NATO forces in the area had multiple channels to communicate and coordinate with their Pakistani counterparts. The officials declined to be named for the record.
They also insisted that the attack, which began shortly after midnight, had continued for more than two hours, well after senior NATO officials had been told that they were killing Pakistani forces. By 1:05 a.m., a Pakistani military official said, “the entire chain of command knew something had gone wrong. If there was any doubt before, there was none after.” But he said the attack continued until well after 2 a.m.
Some key details of the apparent miscommunication, however, remained unclear. The official said Pakistani military officials, stationed at a joint border control center in Afghanistan with NATO officials, were told that a military operation was being launched but were given partial and incorrect information about the location. He said the NATO officials apologized for the errors, but he did not say when the apologies were made.
In previous interviews and statements, military officials in Pakistan have given varying accounts of the incident. One official has said that Pakistani forces also suspected there were militants in the area, sent up flares and fired at them. The officials on Thursday did not comment on these reports, but they said the area had been cleared of militant activity by a major army operation in September.
@ The Washington Post
@ The Washington Post
