Nilesh Kunwar
How did the news regarding the sacking of some senior officers of Pakistan army found guilty on charges of corruption reached the media is unclear. As per initial reports the number of army officers sacked stood at twelve but last Thursday, citing an “authoritative’ source, The Dawn confirmed that only six officers had been dismissed from service by army chief Gen Raheel Sharif. The Express Tribune too quoted “a senior officer based in military headquarters” confirming the sacking of “at least six senior officers which include a Lieutenant General.”
Pakistan is a country where the army is known to be extremely sensitive when it comes to its dirty linen being washed in public. It also has an over-zealous media setup in the form of the Inter Services Public Relations (ISPR) that sometimes even beats the government when it comes to announcing crucial govenment decisions like commencement of the offensive against terrorists in North Waziristan. Therefore the media and not ISPR breaking the news of the sacking of senior officers is quite puzzling as it does not conform to the ‘standard operating procedure’ (SOP) in Pakistan that one is accustomed to.
It is widely believed that coming immediately after Gen Sharif’s statement that “across the board accountability is necessary for the solidarity, integrity and prosperity of Pakistan” the news of these sackings cannot be just a coincidence. Many analysts feel that with names of the Prime Minister’s family members’ appearing in Panama papers this newsbreak was intentional as the army chief wanted to convey a clear-cut message to his namesake that corruption cannot be swept under the carpet. This reasoning makes sense as it explains why the otherwise proactive ISPR has maintained a stoic silence on the sacking of senior army officers.
By not becoming the official ‘source’ of this unpleasant news the ISPR has reminded the media in Pakistan that the army does not relish the idea of undue publicity and debate on the issue of corruption within its midst. When the media initially reported that a dozen army officers were sacked for corruption, the error was quickly rectified by “a senior officer based in military headquarters” who came up and set the record straight. Here again the ISPR ensured requisite ambiguity to avoid accusations of being behind this news leak or in any way connected with it. While The Dawn’s “authoritative” source confirmed that six officers had been sacked, a “senior (army) officer” told The Express Tribune that “at least six senior officers” had been dismissed from service. But there could be other reasons for the silence of the ISPR on the sacking of corrupt army officers.
Corruption in high places within Pakistan army is quite common and the sacking of the six army officers is just a tip of the iceberg. In her book titled ‘Military Inc: Inside Pakistan’s Military Economy’ published in 2007, Ms Ayesha Siddiqa has revealed shocking details about the Pakistan army’s economic empire claiming that the military has a capital (which she refers to as “Milibus”) about $20 billion “that is used for the personal benefit of the military fraternity, especially the officer cadre, but is neither recorded nor part of the defense budget.” What is interesting to note is that though the ISPR countered the facts and figures presented by Ms Siddiqa by publishing an ‘Information Brief’, it did not contest her claims regarding the existence of what she terms ‘Milibus”!
In a recent news report the Deutsche Welle (DW), an international broadcaster of Germany has quoted US based security analyst Arif Jamal as saying that “The corruption in Pakistani military is as rampant as in any other state institution” and he has given several examples like oil and narcotic smuggling through the Western Balochistan border to buttress his claim. Awami Workers Party General secretary Farooq Tariq has also told DW that “The Pakistani army is involved in all spheres of the economy. It is running businesses all across the country, from marriage halls to factories, and from banks and insurance companies to dairy farms” and asked a pointed question, “Does the constitution allow this?”
If Nawaz Sharif no longer enjoys the complete confidence of his army chief it is because in a country where the army dictates foreign policy towards India, he tried to tone down its immensely aggressive outlook and attempted brokering peace with New Delhi. To aggravate matters, after the Pathankot terror attack Nawaz Sharif assured the international community of Islamabad’s “effective action” against terror groups operating from Pakistani soil and boasted that the “world would see our effectiveness and sincerity in this regard”! Islamabad has been making such promises in the past but has never walked its talk because what the world sees as terrorists are “strategic assets” for the Pakistan army. Obviously the army would not have appreciated Nawaz Sharif’s over enthusiasm on this issue.
