Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Thanks for the links:

ISI in the doghouse | Pakistan Today | Latest news | Breaking news | Pakistan News | World news | Business | Sport and Multimedia

By:Aziz-ud-Din AhmadFriday, 2 Mar 2012 9:48 pm | Comments (9)

http://cache.pakistantoday.com.pk/userphoto/aziz-ud-dinahmad.jpg

Transgression should not go unchecked

The SC is fed up with unending transgressions on the part of the agencies. On Thursday, the apex court referred to the rising hue and cry over the increasing incidents of missing persons in Balochistan. The CJ regretted that fingers were being pointed at the intelligence agencies. “If we do not follow the laws, warlords would get benefit out of the situation so created,” the bench said, adding that the court could not be oblivious of the protest camp of families of the missing persons.

Politicians, including those once patronised by the ISI, refer to their past connections apologetically while condemning the agency of continued interference in politics. Ch Nisar Ali told a TV host the same day that the PML(N) had broken off all ties with the spy agency in 1992. He accused Gen Pasha of continuing to meddle in politics. Politicians from all major parties attending a seminar in Islamabad agreed to formulate new laws to curb the “unlimited and unchecked” powers of spy agencies and recommended major amendments to the constitution and relevant laws to tackle the issue. Air Martial (rtd) Asghar Khan’s counsel in SC has called the distribution of money to politicians by the ISI in 1990 ‘ a subversion of the democratic system’.

Secular Baloch nationalists and sympathisers of religious parties are all on the same page in condemning the agencies’ transgressions.

**Those brainwashed, trained and pushed into jihad “in supreme national interest” are fighting against the Pakistan army in the tribal areas. They consider the army and ISI personnel and installations as their legitimate target.

The media is exposing the excesses of the agencies as never before. TV talk shows and stories and editorials in newspapers have made the issue a common subject in households.

The agencies are being legitimately criticised on two scores. First, for acting in blatant violation of law and constitution and transgressing their scope by indulging in political engineering. Second, grossly neglecting their real duties and thus being responsible for the big losses to life and property that could have been avoided through better intelligence gathering. At times, their acts of commission or omission have caused embarrassment to the country.
**
Hundreds of unarmed citizens have been picked up in violation of law who remain untraced in Balochistan and elsewhere. The agencies avoided the difficult task of collecting the necessary information that could lead to the prosecution of the suspects. They instead went for the easy but cruel practice of picking up suspects and making them confess through torture. There is a perception that some of the missing died as a result of torture and were subsequently thrown on the roadside. Those who did this are responsible for creating hatred against the state in Balochistan.

Equally reprehensible is the agencies’ indulgence in politics by funding politicians, creating splits in parties and making and breaking political alliances. This has hindered the natural growth of the institutions needed to sustain democracy

**During the last three years, gross negligence on the part of the ISI has led to colossal intelligence failures. This has caused avoidable disasters that include the attack on the GHQ, Parade Lane Askri Mosque tragedy, unnoticed presence of Osama Bin Laden in Abbottabad, leading to the military operation by US.
**
**Both types of blunders are interconnected. The agencies waste energy and resources on missions that do not come under the purview. When it comes to doing their real duties, they have little time or manpower to meet the challenge.
**
Civilian governments in the past have been too weak to rein in the agencies even when they were convinced of the task’s urgency. Among other things the agencies thrived on the rivalry between the parties. If the government tried to cut them to their size, the opposition was sure to blame the administration of weakening the country and playing into the hands of India, seen by it as the eternal enemy.

There is a countrywide realisation now that the failures on the part of the agencies can cause irretrievable losses to the country and could even lead to a national tragedy. This is the right time to take important decisions. The agencies have to be given a charter that precisely defines the scope and limitations of the security agencies and provides for a civilian oversight needed to keep check on the unruly bodies. Many think the Supreme Court is the right forum to take the first step in the direction.

The writer is a former academic and a political analyst.

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Don’t undermine the military, warns Kayani

          [http://cache.pakistantoday.com.pk/2012/10/General-Ashfaq-Kayani-2-440x213.jpg](http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2012/11/06/news/national/dont-undermine-the-military-warns-kayani/)

We have taught you lesson many times , Bloody Civilians !

           **[Parliament or SC to decide COAS’s statements according to constitution: Rana Sanaullah](http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2012/11/06/news/national/parliament-or-sc-to-decide-coass-statements-according-to-constitution-rana-sanaullah/)**

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Why dont baycharay take CJ and COAS statements like they take statements of their party... not seriously and move on.
And you are posting Rana Sanaullah's statement because once he was a baychara?

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Instead of wasting time by CJ on non-issues, he should decide the case on missing persons involving army and ISI. There are other more than 4000 cases of heinous crimes and corruption NRO cases are pending in different courts of Pakistan. He should pay more attention on PML(N) corruption cases and cases against politicians who took moneys from ISI to form IJI to stop PPP to win the elections of 1990. Another corruption case is pending against 3 generals for selling railway land in peanuts since last more than one year. Last but not the least, his own son’s corruption case is still sitting in his chambers for decision.

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

kyani dindt congratulate nation on abotabad operation by americans, but PM gilani and President zardari did. Make your position clear first.

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Case of missing persons
Osama Ben LadenAbbottabad Commission:
Headed byJustice Javed Iqbal’

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

http://sphotos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/c0.0.400.400/p403x403/12738_10151214932982114_440967011_n.jpg

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Obama Wins
He is saying thank you to his voters .
Obama said actually
Thank you Osama and Kiani
It was not possible without this all .

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

I am sure Pasha and Kiyani are also responsible for Dinamo Zagreb's recent defeat against Paris Saint-Germain....

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

آج میڈیا والے اپنے آپ کو بڑا طرم خان ثابت کرنے کے لیے عدالت کو بھی گالیاں دیتے ہیں اور فوج کو بھی گالیاں دیتے ہیں - عدالت کے پاس تو راستہ ہے وہ توہین عدالت بنا دیتی ہے پر فوج کیا کرے ؟

ریاست پاکستان اور افواج پاکستان اس وقت حالت جنگ میں ہیں اور جب دنیا کے کسی بھی ملک کی فوج حالت جنگ میں چلی جاتی ہے تو اس کے باقی تمام ادارے اس کی سپورٹ کرتے ہیں - یہ پاک فوج کی تاریخ کی سب سے لمبی جنگ ہے اور آج تک 7 سے 8 ہزار فوجی شہید ہو چکے ہیں یعنی 65 کی جنگ سے بھی دگنا - لیکن یہاں کے سیاستدان اپنی سیاست چمکا رہے ہیں اور میڈیا کے کچھ حصے صرف اور صرف اپنی ریٹنگ بڑھانے کے لیے اوچھے ہتھکنڈے استمعال کر رہے ہیں - ڈاکٹر فرخ سلیم

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

So in his latest statement Nawaz Sharif has said

“politicians, judges and army, mazi main sub sai ghaltiaan hoie hain” (everyone has made mistake in the past)

couple of observations

  1. First thing first, those were “crimes” and not “ghaltiaan” and there should be punishment for the crime instead of “acha aab ainda nahi karoon ga”

  2. NS is trying to be smart, he waited to accept these “ghaltiaan” till today when he saw judges and army squaring off, he thought he should also accept his “ghaltiaan” aur Army-Judiciary tussle main koi khaas notice bhi nahi lai ga. In his statement he tried to makhan-laga both Army and Judiciary at the same time.

  3. and finally how is “mazi ko choreen aur aagay ki taraf daikheen” (forget the past and look towards future) different than NRO? Its even worst than NRO as NRO was at-least a “law” (even though it was struck down).

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Bravo! This should shut up those idiots who claim it was directed towards the CJ

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

He may be afraid ,
Look at his period

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Looks like external forces are not satisfied enough with the division among the different institutions, thanks to media for pitting COAS vs CJ.

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

(Few) People here believe that pakistan army is the obstacle to peace, but they wont talk to their own elected lords. In fact believing something does not require any fact.

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Continuity or change? - Babar Sattar

Continuity or change? - Babar Sattar

Legal eye

The writer is a lawyer based in Islamabad.

Why did the army chief need to issue the enigmatic statement on our state of institutional affairs with an attempt to draw some red lines for those asking awkward questions? Was he simply sharing his resolve to foster progressive change while acknowledging the past mistakes of the khakis? Was he projecting a changed khaki mindset, convinced of the need to abide by rule of law and strengthen all national institutions and not just the military as the author and preserver of national interest? Or was it a warning shot for those getting carried away with the concept of accountability of generals, a shut up call for the exuberant media and free counsel for the courts to slow things down?

The confusion in the army chief’s statement probably stems from the elements of continuity and change that coexist in the khaki mindset at the moment. The elements of change are most obvious in the concluding questions that Gen Kayani has invited us to ponder: One, are we promoting the rule of law and the constitution? And two, are we strengthening or weakening the institutions? The army chief is spot on in framing these questions. Given our history of martial laws and subversion of the constitution by army chiefs in the past, Gen Kayani’s emphasis on rule of law is a breath of fresh air.

Over the last few years we have witnessed the emergence of a consensus in favour of rule of law and sanctity of the constitution. And who will dispute the need to strengthen the institutions of Pakistan? But that is not what the debate is about. It is about what actions would strengthen institutions, including the army, and who decides whether or not rule of law is being upheld. Being a bright man, General Kayani probably understands this better than most. And that is why the ISPR press release can only be rationalised or explained – but not justified – as a hangover of the extra-legal and political role that the khakis have played during a predominant part of our history.

The most charitable view of the army chief’s statement can be that he felt the need to reiterate his commitment to rule of law at a time when the democracy-doesn’t-work-for-us voices are again itching for the intervention of saviours, while also exhibiting his esprit de corps and identifying the red lines that ought not be crossed in critiquing the generals. In other words, the army chief is acknowledging that, as a polity, Pakistan has become multi-polar with a wider distribution of power between state institutions. At the same time, he is reminding all and sundry that the army is still a locus of power and that, while incremental rebalancing of power might be acceptable, let there be no haste.

The wisdom of such counsel cannot be disputed. But the fact that a serving army chief believes he has the right and authority to manage the pace of change and do so publicly is what makes it wrong and the content of his message self-contradictory.

The army is a subset of the executive arm of the state subject to effective civilian control according to the constitution. Gen Kayani has no legal authority to determine inter-institutional boundaries or wag his finger and warn that, “trying to assume more than one’s due role will set us back.” So why the statement was issued becomes the first gauge of the army chief’s professed allegiance to rule of law. As a public servant where does he derive the authority to pontificate about the due role and limits of constitutional institutions?

There are at least four aspects of the army chief’s statement that suggest that the pro-status quo sentiment is still potent in the khaki mindset. The statement starts out by emphasising the very agreeable and desirable truth – which also multiplies by zero the rationale of all past military interventions – “no individual or institution has the monopoly to decide what is right or wrong in defining the ultimate national interest.” But, almost as if the army chief cannot help himself, he goes on to state that, “any effort that wittingly or unwittingly draws a wedge between the people and the armed forces of Pakistan undermines the larger national interest.”

The general asserts that, “while constructive criticism is well understood, conspiracy theories based on rumors which create doubts about the very intent, are unacceptable.” Would this critique of the leadership provided by General Kayani or the policies, decisions and actions of the military high command or retired generals “unwittingly” draw a wedge between khakis and people? Who decides what criticism is constructive and what isn’t? And how will khakis exhibit ‘unacceptability’ of the wrong kind of criticism? Will there be counter-arguments presented? Will critics be picked up and sorted out khaki-style?

Proceeding further in a shoot-the-messenger mode, the army chief declares that, “equally important is the trust between the leader and the led of the armed forces…any effort to create a distinction between the two, undermines the very basis of this concept and is not tolerated…” By identifying the leaders and the led distinctly, has the army chief contradicted the logic of his own argument? It is an acknowledged historical fact that generals have intervened in politics directly and played a role from beyond the curtain. Their actions, choices and conduct, not backed by law, have hurt this country just like the actions of individuals leading other institutions.

The other fact is that there is nothing but gratitude expressed, even by the staunchest critics of the army’s role in politics, for the soldiers and officers who risk their lives to make this country safer. There is all around agreement that the army is a well-disciplined and well-oiled institution and it is in our best interest to keep it that way. But none of this undermines the fact that the power vested in generals who lead this institution comes with responsibility. As public office holders, these generals are accountable for the manner in which they discharge state power and their duties.

When called to account for their actions, whether in relation to the Abbottabad, GHQ and PNS Mehran attacks, the Asghar Khan and missing persons’ case or the NLC and Royal Palm inquiries, they must not hide behind morale of troops or projected division between the leaders and the led to shun accountability. President Obama fired General Stanley McChrystal (just as President Truman fired General MacArthur) during a war and no one questioned what it might do to the troops’ morale. So who created this us-versus-them distinction? Why should inquiry into alleged impropriety of public servants who are or have been general officers affect the morale of troops if the army is a part of the executive and subject to civilian control?

Gen Kayani is right about the undesirability of media trials. Innocent until proven guilty is a cardinal principle of law, but it must apply across the board. Did a deliberate media campaign not publicly try and convict Husain Haqqani in the Memo case not long ago? Should the presumption of innocence not benefit the missing persons? Let generals offended by media trials file defamation suits against journalists and media outlets instead of the army chief standing up for them in what will be seen as protection of holy cows. It is the facilitation of fair and transparent inquiry into allegations against generals that would exhibit the army chief’s commitment to equality and rule of law.

Let us hope that in the tug of war between proponents of status quo and those of change within the khakis the latter prevail. The leadership challenge for the army as well as all other state institutions lies not in fiercely defending their perceived turfs but in exhibiting humility in accepting criticism for past wrongs and showing courage in fostering introspection and behavioural change in the interest of a better future.

Email: [email protected]

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

Today Geo is showing clips about statement of General Aslam Beg ,claiming that MMA was made by ISI . It is not a normal thing . This is something like Asghar Khan case. I am sure that PNA was too a combind product of CIA and establishment .
Have a look on demand of Bangla Desh
Bangladesh seeks Pakistan apology for 1971 war crimes – The Express Tribune

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

I could not see that program but I am sure that that that part of Aslam Beg should have BEEN EDITED BECAUSE I find it no where now .
The statement is still under discussion in Pakistan .
General Kayani’s statement continues to make waves

Re: Kayani speaks his mind (Merged)

No need of any comment