HAIDER
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- May 21, 2006
- Messages
- 33,771
- Reaction score
- 14
- Country
- Location
RAWALPINDI: This is with reference to Farrukh Khan Pitafi’s article of December 21 titled “A TV channel for the army?”
I have not read the paper referred to by Mr Pitafi in the Army’s Green Book but I am sure that the writer of the paper would have some arguments for his proposal. The fact that the Pakistan Army dabbled in the country’s political system has put it on very fragile grounds in the public mindset. Even an academic and apparently harmless suggestion by a military general seems to threaten the system. During Nawaz Sharif’s previous government, an army chief was sacked for suggesting a higher forum for defence planning. It was an academic suggestion offered in a talk to the students of the Naval Staff College.
The present suggestion for the military to have its own TV channel has also been offered in a military publication, which provides opportunity to military men to project their ideas. These ideas are not necessarily reflective of any military policy nor do they indicate that such steps are in place for execution.
For the past 14 years, the Pakistan Army is involved in a fight against an enemy that has no defined demarcations. Fighting a counter-insurgency war is a complex task as the lines between friend and foe get blurred. The military is always vulnerable and tends to suffer more than the adversary since it is conspicuously recognisable. The past years have shown that it has sustained huge losses in its fight against the militants and insurgents. Despite these losses in men and material, there was a recent uproar in the media on whether the army men killed in actions against the militants were martyrs or just killed in an unjust war. The debate involved media, prominent political leaders, opinion makers and the ISPR. When an army is actively involved in a fight for the survival of the country it is sworn to defend internally and externally, such debates set demoralising forces in motion that adversely affect the military.
When an army is fighting to defend the country and is suffering losses, it needs recognition from its country and people. In Pakistan, this recognition is erratic at best; the past national conduct demonstrates this elaborately. The army was the nation’s darling after the 1965 conflict with India; it became a national villain after the 1971 war, despite the fact that its involvement had the full backing of the national political leaders.
The military does not embark on a military excursion on its own; it needs a political decision for that; Kargil may be the only exception though both sides offer conflicting arguments. The present combat involvement of the army in the fight against militancy has the backing of successive military and political governments. It is fighting the war to the best of its ability with the resources that it has at its disposal and is suffering huge losses in men and material. Yet, the strong message is being conveyed to the military that it is fighting an unjust cause. The ‘Aman ki Asha’ media campaign indicates that the cultural values on which this country was established and the military is sworn to defend is a thing of the past and no longer sustainable.
In this politico-social environment, the military is seemingly losing its direction. In the absence of any political guidance, some minds in the army will strive to have their ideas heard. The suggestion of an exclusive army TV channel is one such idea. In an environment where everyone is bent upon maligning the military, there may be a real need for the military to have its views and voice heard by those it is tasked to defend from the visible and invisible enemy.
Brigadier (retd) Abdur Rahman Jerral
Published in The Express Tribune, December 27th, 2013.
I have not read the paper referred to by Mr Pitafi in the Army’s Green Book but I am sure that the writer of the paper would have some arguments for his proposal. The fact that the Pakistan Army dabbled in the country’s political system has put it on very fragile grounds in the public mindset. Even an academic and apparently harmless suggestion by a military general seems to threaten the system. During Nawaz Sharif’s previous government, an army chief was sacked for suggesting a higher forum for defence planning. It was an academic suggestion offered in a talk to the students of the Naval Staff College.
The present suggestion for the military to have its own TV channel has also been offered in a military publication, which provides opportunity to military men to project their ideas. These ideas are not necessarily reflective of any military policy nor do they indicate that such steps are in place for execution.
For the past 14 years, the Pakistan Army is involved in a fight against an enemy that has no defined demarcations. Fighting a counter-insurgency war is a complex task as the lines between friend and foe get blurred. The military is always vulnerable and tends to suffer more than the adversary since it is conspicuously recognisable. The past years have shown that it has sustained huge losses in its fight against the militants and insurgents. Despite these losses in men and material, there was a recent uproar in the media on whether the army men killed in actions against the militants were martyrs or just killed in an unjust war. The debate involved media, prominent political leaders, opinion makers and the ISPR. When an army is actively involved in a fight for the survival of the country it is sworn to defend internally and externally, such debates set demoralising forces in motion that adversely affect the military.
When an army is fighting to defend the country and is suffering losses, it needs recognition from its country and people. In Pakistan, this recognition is erratic at best; the past national conduct demonstrates this elaborately. The army was the nation’s darling after the 1965 conflict with India; it became a national villain after the 1971 war, despite the fact that its involvement had the full backing of the national political leaders.
The military does not embark on a military excursion on its own; it needs a political decision for that; Kargil may be the only exception though both sides offer conflicting arguments. The present combat involvement of the army in the fight against militancy has the backing of successive military and political governments. It is fighting the war to the best of its ability with the resources that it has at its disposal and is suffering huge losses in men and material. Yet, the strong message is being conveyed to the military that it is fighting an unjust cause. The ‘Aman ki Asha’ media campaign indicates that the cultural values on which this country was established and the military is sworn to defend is a thing of the past and no longer sustainable.
In this politico-social environment, the military is seemingly losing its direction. In the absence of any political guidance, some minds in the army will strive to have their ideas heard. The suggestion of an exclusive army TV channel is one such idea. In an environment where everyone is bent upon maligning the military, there may be a real need for the military to have its views and voice heard by those it is tasked to defend from the visible and invisible enemy.
Brigadier (retd) Abdur Rahman Jerral
Published in The Express Tribune, December 27th, 2013.
)
![MuZammiL Dr. s[1]n](/data/avatars/m/32/32258.jpg?1370382459){kind=avatar}
... 
