When the press stops questioning

A thoughtful article in the Pakistani newspaper Dawn (http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/27/a-half-chance.html) called for 2013, i.e. two years from the present date, to be the year of positive change for Pakistan.

> "Why 2013? In March 2013, parliament`s term ends. In September, the president`s term ends. In November, the army chief`s extension ends. In December, the Supreme Court chief justice will retire."

Surely we can't have opinion formers throw in the towel like this? What about 2011 and 2012? What about the lost opportunities and lives? (Remember that Pakistan is currently facing an extreme terrorism crisis, with democracy, and hence entrepreneurism, under threat.)

Part of the problem, if one considers the problem, in this case, being the Pakistani military hijacking the Pakistani state, is that this vassal-like relationship appears to be taken for granted by Pakistani intelligentsia. Foreign writers on Pakistan follow suit, unfortunately.

Not merely a stating of the status quo, but an affirmation of it, is what one encounters in opinion pieces in the newspapers (sample size is limited to the online editions of the English language Pakistani dailys: The Dawn and The News).

This is what also Mr. Cyril Almeida, the writer of the article quoted above, demonstrates.

Here's a scenario: what would happen if President Zardari were to fire the Army Chief today, add a Defence Ministerial veto to all postings and promotions for the rank of Brigadier and above, dissolve the spy organization ISI, and announce that all meetings with foreign representatives and press conferences of the army are to be held only when approved by the government? (Remember, according to most online resources, the ISI appears to be almost certainly involved with illegal dealings with terrorists and covert operations against Pakistanis, and has managed to keep itself outside the elected government's control.)

Would that engender a military coup? Possibly, given the history of this troubled relationship. However, I don't think that the army is in a position to do the whole tired operation once again, repeat the hoary mantras of "saving Pakistan" and "defending Islam" (the Pakistani Taliban et al are already defending Islam). And this is a post-Arab-Spring world. I'm not sure the West will view yet another military dictator with joy. If they support him, they will lose the moral high-ground, as far as regime change and the supporting of democracy, the holy cow of our times, is concerned.

As Kafka said, there is a point beyond which no turning back is possible. That point must be reached.

Surely, irrespective of the consequences, that would be better than allowing a few good men, the officers of the Pakistani army, impose their will on the many, the people of Pakistan.

The implication is that if a coup does take place, the resulting international pressure will be so great and unambiguous that the army just might be sent back to doing regular army stuff for a hundred years.

Ironically, perhaps, it is only recently that parts of the Pakistani press have started condemning terrorism in all its forms. And only recently that they have stopped using the shameful argument "terrorism is wrong because not just infidels, but also Muslims are being murdered". (Apologize for the unattributed, paraphrased quote - I read it in either The Dawn or The News, a couple of years ago, but do not have a link)

The press also needs to watch itself, and must be uncompromising in its brief, and ask the hard questions.