KERRY _LUGAR BILL

[mustafa]

KERRY-LUGAR BILL; AN EXTERIOR MANOUVRE TO INTERFERE IN PAKISTAN ARMY CHAIN OF COMMAND
By; Maj Gen (Retd) Sultan Habib
  In Washington DC, perhaps Pakistani taxpayer’s dollars were spent to include clauses in the bill which will ensure political control of the Army. The objective was clear in the minds of Pakistani insecure politicians and the equally insecure foreign office bureaucrats. In spite of visible efforts by GHQ (Pakistan Army General Headquarters)  to keep the Army role limited to professional pursuits; a situation has erupted in  which the Pakistani  Government had to be formally conveyed Army’s reservations on few clauses of the Kerry-Lugar bill which, according to the Army are a threat to National Security. The reservations of the Army were conveyed through a press release by the I.S.P.R) followed by a letter.
  The objectionable clauses deal with civilian control of chain of command and promotion system in the Army, cessation of alleged assistance to militant groups by the Army and ISI (Inter Services Intelligence)and control on nuclear proliferation etc.
  Historically the political civilian governments’ mistrusted the powerful Army  and the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI). In my two tenures with the foreign office as Ambassador in Pyongyang and earlier as Defense Attaché in Moscow; I was convinced that foreign office and its foreign missions doubted ISI for running the foreign policy of Pakistan. There was always a sense of insecurity amongst the bureaucrats and viewed military officers working in the embassies with suspicion. I also had an experience when a very renowned head of the mission wanted to report against an officer in the mission via Directorate General of Inter Services instead of his own chain of command.
 Control over GHQ and ISI had always been bothering politicians. Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto instituted the office of Chairman of Joint Staff Committee and Muhtharama Benazir Bhutto appointed a retired general as director general of ISI. Lt Gen Zia ud Din , DG ISI in Nawaz Shareef’s government who was selected as chief of army staff in October 1999 to replace General Pervaiz Musharraf, was very loyal to the Civilian Government.
  Insecurities of politicians are understandable due to poor law & order,high inflation, non availability of basic food items at affordable rate, power shortage, unemployment and corruption. They are threatened that GHQ and DG ISI may sound them a caution at the time of crisis, like Chief of Army Staff intervened at a very critical time of civil unrest in support of restoration of judiciary. The politicians are also conscious of their” files” in the ISI which are full of their acts and deeds. To address their apprehensions, clausesin the  Kerry Lugar certainly not going to help them..
American probably asses the civilian control of Pakistan Army on their model of Pentagon in which the Secretary of Defense has executive authority and formulation of Defense Strategy is in the domain of civilian control. Our culture is different, a control of the chain of command will result into interference of politicians in the promotions , postings and transfer of officers like it is being done in the Establishment Division of Civil bureaucracy. Officers will look up to their political connections instead of concentrating on their professional attributes. Those without political connection will suffer and the efficiency of a very fine fighting machine will be degraded.
  The officer’s career planning in Pakistan Army is amongst the best in the World leading Armies. I have an experience of attending US Army Command &General Staff College in addition to Pakistan Army War and Staff Colleges. There is no doubt that US Army officer’s evaluation and training system is excellent but ours is no less with the resource constraints and our general education environment. Our officer’s corps comes from middle class background that have been educated in Pakistani schools and US Army gets its officer’s  from amongst those boys and girls who had been educated in American schools and Colleges.
 Our career planning is strictly related to officer’s ability, character traits, performance in the unit, performance on courses of instructions especially Staff Course and War Course. The reports of the later two courses are highly confidential. I worked as DS in the Staff College and couldn’t read my course report even if I wanted to do so.
  Promotion boards are highly institutionalized. A lieutenant/colonel is evaluated by three independent boards in different location before he/she is considered by the central board in the GHQ. A brigadier can only rise to the rank of a major general if he has a very solid record of service and impeccable commitment, leadership qualities and experience of top of the line command, instructional and staff assignments. Chief of Army Staff selects his team of Corps Commanders and principal Staff officer. All promotions are approved by the Government. Chief of Army staff is selected and appointed by the President.
  In this system if the federal government is on board then why need has been felt by the US legislation by asking for a certificate from the State Department to the effect that the Army chain of command is under civilian control? And why our mission in Washington DC collaborated or lobbied or didn’t highlight such a clause(s) in the legislation?
  Civilian control on the Pakistan Army hierarchy in general and ISI in particular had been a matter of concern for the US a well for the Pakistani civil government for quite some time. Indian lobby had been busy in Washington too. On this one point agenda, perhaps the interests of the US, Pakistani Government and its mission in Washington and Indian lobby coincided. Kerry Lugar Legislation was therefore considered to be one of the vehicle to empower the civilian Government against its own institution which is the only stable institution in Pakistan, without realizing that such a control on the Army chain of command will lower its efficiency and morale. After few years it will be no better than  para military force.
  The US as influenced by Indian mindset that ISI with a nod from GHQ (Pakistan Army General Headquarters) harbor, train, and infiltrate terrorist in the Indian occupied Kashmir. This mindset can only be changed by confidence building measures on both sides. Similar concerns are expressed by Pakistan about Indian involvement in Baluchistan.
  Pakistan civilian Government, instead of getting deep into Army chain of command and destroying its well tested system, it should find indigenous measures to have civilian control over the Army instead of a legislation of an Allied Country.
     
The author is aretired general and former Ambassador of Pakistan. He is a graduate of Quaide Azam university Islamabad,US Army command &Gen Staff College Ft Leavenworth’s and Command &Staff College Quetta.