Reuters Handbook of Journalism says: Take no side, tell all sides As Reuters journalists, we never identify with any side in an issue, a conflict or a dispute. Our text and visual stories need to reflect all sides, not just one. This leads to better journalism because it requires us to stop at each stage of newsgathering and ask ourselves "What do I know?" and "What do I need to know?" In reporting a takeover bid, for example, it should be obvious that the target company must be given an opportunity to state their position. Similarly in a political dispute or military conflict, there are always at least two sides to consider and we risk being perceived as biased if we fail to give adequate space to the various parties. This objectivity does not always come down to giving equal space to all sides. The perpetrator of an atrocity or the leader of a fringe political group arguably warrants less space than the victims or mainstream political parties. We must, however, always strive to be scrupulously fair and balanced. Allegations should not be portrayed as fact; charges should not be conveyed as a sign of guilt. We have a duty of fairness to give the subjects of such stories the opportunity to put their side. We must also be on guard against bias in our choice of words. Words like "claimed" or "according to" can suggest we doubt what is being said. Words like "fears" or "hopes" might suggest we are taking sides. Verbs like rebut or refute (which means to disprove) or like fail (as in failed to comment) can imply an editorial judgment and are best avoided. Thinking about language can only improve our writing and our journalism. REFERENCE: Reuters Handbook of Journalism http://www.trust.org/contentAsset/raw-data/652966ab-c90b-4252-b4a5-db8ed1d438ce/fileNajam Sethi on Media Ethics (Aapas Ki Baat - 9 May 2014)
Najam Sethi on Media Ethics (Aapas Ki Baat - 9... by SalimJanMazari
Army thinks govt’s Taliban policy has failed, says Sethi Aapas Ki Baat on Friday News Desk Saturday, May 10, 2014 To a question on a treason plea filed in the Supreme Court, Sethi said the petition was filed before the then SC CJ iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry but he had rejected it. “Most people in the petition belong to Geo. Some people have managed its admission in the court which included people who oppose Geo. Some newspapers and two secret agencies are also behind it. ISI is against Geo for its severe criticism. I believe the SC will hear it to reach a conclusion whether these people are traitors or not. I hope the court will dispose of the man with the red cap after admonishing him. If this case continues, many people will reach the court with similar cases. I think the court will rubbish the case and the mover,” he observed. To another question on the rules and regulations for the media, he said the media would not accept any code of conduct. “However, the media itself should evolve a regulatory authority. I think Geo and Jang, being the biggest group, should lead from the front. If you insult others, they will pay you in the same coin. We will have to present the truth, not mix our thoughts with the reality and not make news out of our wishes,” he added.Some newspapers and two secret agencies are also behind it. ISI is against Geo for its severe criticism. I believe the SC will hear it to reach a conclusion whether these people are traitors or not. I hope the court will dispose of the man with the red cap after admonishing him. If this case continues, many people will reach the court with similar cases. I think the court will rubbish the case and the mover,” he observed. To another question on the rules and regulations for the media, he said the media would not accept any code of conduct. “However, the media itself should evolve a regulatory authority. I think Geo and Jang, being the biggest group, should lead from the front. If you insult others, they will pay you in the same coin. We will have to present the truth, not mix our thoughts with the reality and not make news out of our wishes,” he added. REFERENCE: Army thinks govt’s Taliban policy has failed, says Sethi Aapas Ki Baat on Friday News Desk Saturday, May 10, 2014 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-2-249293-Army-thinks-govts-Taliban-policy-has-failed-says-Sethi Princess and the Playboy BBC 1996 http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xubf0i_princess-and-the-playboy-bbc-1996_news
Princess and the Playboy BBC 1996 by f1499110548
In a TV Show of GEO TV "Aaj Kamran Khan Kay Sath dated 18 Nov 2011", and also on Bolta Pakistan of AAJ TV dated 16 Nov 2011, the resident editor of The News International, Mr. Mohammad Malick opined that raising objection on Mansoor Ijaz' credibility is of no use! Very well as Mr. Malick suggest we should apply Mansoor Ijaz "Rant" as a cardinal truth and Mr. Mohammad Malick should plead case against Pakistan in the world community particularly in UN by quoting from Mr. Mansoor Ijaz "Excellent Pieces" on Pakistan. Some members of the Pakistani establishment and especially those agencies (nowadays this role has been taken over by the Jang Group of Newspapers), which have assumed the role of determining what is ‘national interest of Pakistan’, and who is loyal, and who is anti Pakistan, have perhaps done more damage to Pakistan than known enemies of Pakistan. It is unfortunate that every blunder, be it at national level or in foreign affairs, is made in the name of ‘national interest of Pakistan’. People of Pakistan are perplexed as they fail to understand what is ’national interest of Pakistan. People are further bewildered when some of these leaders, perceived and declared as ‘anti Pakistan’ or ‘security risk’ are sworn in to hold some kind of office in Pakistan. There are many examples where people declared as an ‘Indian agent’ or ‘traitor’ had taken high public office; even those who had no Pakistani nationality or rescinded it, had an opportunity to become Prime Minister of Pakistan. Once these people have decided that something is in the ‘national interest of Pakistan’, they will pursue that agenda without having any system of check and balance and appraisal. If any one dares to criticize what they do in the name of ‘national interest of Pakistan’, he/she is declared as ‘anti Pakistan’. Similarly if a Pakistani person criticizes Pakistan government, or holds demonstration against the government policy, he is declared as ‘anti Pakistan’. Now closely read (which I would quote from Jang Group's The News) what the Nincompoops (even the Senior Diplomatic Correspondents and Group Editors didn't have slightest idea as to what they were talking about what to talk of Ansar Abbasi) in the Jang Group of Newspapers had been filing in their Rag called The News International. Pakistan is one of those unfortunate countries where the Sanctimonious Intellectuals discuss the blame on speculations and assumptions even if it is at the cost of the integrity and sovereignty of the country. Differing with PPP or any other government is one thing and putting country's fate at the stake for settling some political score is quite another and that is the usual story with the Jang Group of newspaper and their Journalists/TV Anchors particularly Shaheen Sehbai, Kamran Khan, Mohammad Malick and Ansar Abbasi despite knowing an established fact (with reference, history and footage) that Mansoor Ijaz and his Neocon Lobby had destroyed Iraq by raising False Alarm of Weapons of Mass Destruction and Mansoor Ijaz tried exactly did the same again and Jang Group of Newspapers was part and parcel in this ugly game. We must keep one thing in mind that Mohammad Malick (Resident Editor, The News International) also has several blot on his character e.g. Muhammad Malick (List of journalists given plots in Islamabad Published: November 1, 2010 http://tribune.com.pk/story/70940/list-of-journalists-given-plots-in-islamabad/ Journalist Corruption Scandal – Mohammad Malick JUNE 3, 2009 http://pkpolitics.com/2009/06/03/journalist-corruption-scandal-mohammad-malick/. Jang Group often invoke Quran and Sunnah and Fatwa to serve selfish motives therefore they must know about the “Burden of Proof” - “The burden of proof is upon the plaintiff and the taking of oath is upon the defendant.” (Al-Bayhaqi)” - Guilty by Suspicion is against the Spirit of Islamic Law because when you raise finger then it’s the responsibility of those who allege to produce witness. Benefit of doubt is always given to those who is under trial. "QUOTE" - Updated Nov 18, 2011 Ansar Abbasi, a newspaper editor often said to be a proxy for the military establishment, said if Haqqani is involved in the affair, he should be tried for treason. ‘Memogate’ scandal reveals civil-military splits "UNQUOTE http://www.dawn.com/news/674146/memogate-scandal-reveals-civil-military-splits
الْبَيِّنَةُ عَلَى الْمُدَّعِى وَالْيَمِينُ عَلَى الْمُدَّعَى عَلَيْهِ
The burden of proof is upon the plaintiff, and the oath is upon the one who is accused (Tirmidhi) - Therefore the ruler is forbidden from imposing a penalty on anyone, unless they perpetrate a crime which Shari’ah considers to be a crime, and the perpetration of the crime has been proven before a competent judge in a judiciary court, because the evidence could not be admissible unless it is established before a competent judge and in a judiciary court.
ZURICH: Mansoor Ijaz, the US business tycoon who has become the centre of a huge controversy over the reported memorandum sent through him by President Zardari to Admiral Mike Mullen, on Sunday night issued a rejoinder from Zurich, responding to the statements issued by presidential spokesman Farhatullah Babar, the Foreign Office and Ambassador Husain Haqqani on the issue.
His statement came hours after PTI leader Imran Khan told the huge Lahore rally that Ambassador Haqqani had sent the memo to Admiral Mike Mullen requesting the US army to help against Pakistan Army. After Imran Khan’s allegations in his speech, Ambassador Haqqani had challenged the PTI leader on Sunday night to produce any evidence, if he had one, in the Supreme Court of Pakistan. REFERENCE: A dangerous path for Pakistan, says Mansoor Ijaz News Desk Monday, October 31, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-9981-A-dangerous-path-for-Pakistan-says-Mansoor-Ijaz
Jang Group Role in Memogate by SalimJanMazari
The PML-N Friday, through a Civil Miscellaneous Application (CMA), requested the Supreme Court that Pakistan’s High Commissioner to UK, Wajid Shamsul Hassan; Shaheen Sehbai, Group Editor, The News, and Muhammad Malick, Editor, The News, Islamabad, also be made respondents in the memo case being taken up for hearing from December 19. ISLAMABAD: The PML-N Friday, through a Civil Miscellaneous Application (CMA), requested the Supreme Court that Pakistan’s High Commissioner to UK, Wajid Shamsul Hassan; Shaheen Sehbai, Group Editor, The News, and Muhammad Malick, Editor, The News, Islamabad, also be made respondents in the memo case being taken up for hearing from December 19.
In their petition, PML-N leader Ishaq Dar and Khwaja Asif contended that an impression was created by the civil authorities that Pakistan knew nothing about the Abbottabad operation in advance.
However, they stated that Shaheen Sehbai, Group Editor of The News, in his story on December 8, 2011, while quoting interviews of Pakistan’s High Commissioner in UK, Wajid Shamsul Hassan, with CNN, BBC and NDTV revealed that Pakistan had known about the May 2 raid at least 8 to 10 days in advance.
The report further revealed that Pakistan knew the operation was going to happen and assisted in terms of authorisation of the helicopter flights in our space. Similarly, the report, while quoting the ambassador’s interview, also stated that Pakistan knew about bin Laden’s location and helped the US reach him.
The petitioners further submitted that another report of December 8, 2011, submitted by Ms Mehreen Zahra-Malik also quoted Mansoor Ijaz alleging that Pakistan’s former Ambassador to the US, Hussain Haqqani, and President Asif Ali Zardari had prior knowledge of the United States stealth mission to eliminate Osama bin Laden.
The PML-N leaders also informed the apex court that another senior journalist. Mohamamd Malick, Editor of daily The News, had authored numerous informative reports on the subject and two reports dated November 18 and November 20, 2011, were co-authored along with Sehbai.
The petitioners requested that the court ensure Wajid Shamsul Hassan’s appearance through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which may be directed to ensure that the ambassador, once in Pakistan, not be permitted to proceed abroad unless exonerated by this court or any commission so appointed for the said purpose by this court. They contended that Wajid, being the person who had admitted on May 2, 2011, to having prior knowledge of the May 2, 2011, Abbottabad operation was a necessary party.
The PML-N leaders prayed to the apex court that their application be allowed, and the three persons, including Pakistan’s High Commissioner in UK Wajid Shamsul Hassan, Shaheen Sehbai, Group Editor, The News, and Mohammad Malick, Editor, The News, Islamabad, be added as respondents in the noted petition and be summoned for assisting this court for the effective adjudication of the matter in issue.
They prayed that the apex court direct the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to ensure the presence of Wajid Shamsul Hassan in the court. It is pertinent to mention here that a larger bench of the apex court headed by the chief justice is resuming from hearing from December 19 petitions filed by PML-N Chief Mian Nawaz Sharif.
In compliance with the court’s earlier order of December 1, 2011, Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), DG ISI, Secretary Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Secretary Ministry of Interior, Defence, Cabint Division and Federation have submitted their replies in the memo case while President Asif Ali Zaradari, another respondent in the case, has not yet filed his reply. Likewise, the administration of the Supreme Court has ordered extra security measures for December 19 as the memo case is being taken up by the larger bench of the apex court. REFERENCE: PML-N wants Wajid summoned by SC in memo case BY Sohail Khan Saturday, December 17, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-2-82798-PML-N-wants-Wajid-summoned-by-SC-in-memo-case
Memogate row: Will Mansoor Ijaz testify at all?
Memogate row: Will Mansoor Ijaz testify at all? by tvnportal
The Author was Resident Editor of The News and now he is MD Pakistan Television Corporation The memo Epicentre Between the lines - II BY Mohammad Malick Wednesday, October 26, 2011 Big storms sometimes begin deceptively small and then in no time become monsters, ruthlessly devouring the unprepared, the unsuspecting. Are Mansoor Ijaz’s revelations in the Financial Times something similar? He claims to have delivered an SOS message from President Zardari to President Obama at the behest of a top diplomat and says that he was specifically asked to approach Admiral Mike Mullen because Mullen could influence both Obama and Gen Kayani. “The memo was delivered to Admiral Mullen at 14.00 hrs on May 10”, wrote Mansoor, saying the very next day in Washington, Mullen had a meeting with “Pakistani national security officials” who had no clue at the time that their meeting had been spawned by a secret presidential memo. Rawalpindi too learnt of the memo months later when Mansoor went cautiously public in the FT.
For its part, political Islamabad kept pretending all these months as if it had done nothing out of the ordinary. Even the explosive FT disclosure was dismissed as a “blatant lie by a self-promoting individual”, as put by an important federal minister. Rawalpindi also pretended as if it had not noticed anything unusual but on the quiet, the system went into overdrive to ferret out facts. Washington was mum, as nobody had asked it for an explanation. And just when things misleadingly appeared to be settling into an inconsequential political groove, Hillary Clinton came calling.
And a lot has happened since my column last week. When asked bluntly about the memo, Secretary Clinton manoeuvred evasively by neither denying nor confirming the memo. And we all know what that really means in case of a critical question at such a diplomatic level. Within the last week the memo issue is also no longer confined to two messengers. Heavyweights have entered the fray and the buzz is that in a lovely European capital, relevant people huddled for hours in meetings, which may well irreversibly influence the political landscape back home. There seem to be no more doubts about the veracity of the memo. All suspicions and apprehensions seem to have been removed. The FT people would be laughing.
With the basics settled, the focus would shift to the memo’s contents. If the details trickling out are to be believed, we apparently do not have a gun but a smoking bazooka on our hands. The contents are so toxic that they could well float into the realm of treason. The memo supposedly has it all, including the promised change of security establishment (read: sacking of Kayani & Co). Even speculations about allowing nuclear security retooling, or American boots on the ground, are tantamount to political blasphemy, so imagine the devastating consequences when such offers are found written in black and white. “It’s an impossibly desperate dream menu rather than a memo,” says someone credible in Islamabad. Everything appears to be real, everything is now on the record. The problem, and the beauty of today’s digital existence, is that every little scrap of data gets preserved with the simple click of a key, instantly transforming seemingly inconsequential exchanges into key-evidence. One click and BlackBerries can turn into poison berries.
What happens in the larger context will perhaps languidly manifest itself, and over a stretched period of time, but what does appear imminent is that those aspiring for grander future roles could soon end up losing even their current lofty perches. And judging from the severity of circumstances, Islamabad should feel exceptionally relieved if the demanded ‘corrective measures’ stopped at this. But it remains a highly unlikely eventuality. It’s not as if the original ‘official’ messenger hasn’t been in the midst of some really dangerous situations in the past as well, but this time around he appears to have made the cardinal mistake of choosing the wrong ‘unofficial messenger’ for conveying his master’s potentially self-destructive message. And therefore penance will be his to pay, the cross for him to carry.
Meanwhile, all fact-finding is over. The Big ones will now sit to eventually reshape the contours of the country’s future ruling structure. Of course, institutional queries will be made, questions posed, but it will be more of a formality as the answers to the yet unasked questions are already known. So what happens next, is the real question here.
In a related development, the office of National Security Advisor in each country was being perceived as the perfect focal point to coordinate strategy between India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the US. Where needed, the office would have been created, or resurrected. With the four NSAs coordinating matters and even bypassing certain institutions and offices protocol-wise higher than their own, matters were expected to move at a much faster pace and in the desired direction. In the envisaged scheme of things, the NSA’s office would have been second in power only to that of the president and hence the desperate attempt to secure this all-important office. But for now at least, the concept appears a dead horse.
Exhaustive background interviews with those in the know reveal that a clear understanding now exists on what really needs to be done to put brakes on this runaway mandated autocracy passing itself off as elected democracy. The prevailing geopolitical situation however is momentarily staying the increasingly edgy hand. But for how long such international considerations will thwart domestic compulsions, is anybody’s guess. It was also shared that the public stance notwithstanding, privately the superpower’s interlocutors had been indicating their “ease” with dealing with “someone with real authority being directly in charge of things”. But the Mullen blow up has forced a mindset of extreme caution in Rawalpindi’s dealings with Washington even though the US political policy in the region is being dictated by its military and intelligence organs, both being areas of relative comfort for Rawalpindi.
The earlier professed desire of allowing democrats unfettered freedom to run things is also no longer being expressed by those who truly matter. Is the change of views being caused primarily by the growing pressure of increasingly restless colleagues, or is it based on a realistic reassessment of ground realities and complete disenchantment with the political masters? I asked someone extremely close to the alpha general, and he responded, “He is not someone who rigidly remains wedded to any notion without merit. He also does not leave things to chance or fate, or scores unsettled, and will not move a step on anything till he has carefully thought his way through, factored in all consequences of both, moving forward too fast, or even staying still for too long”.
There remains an institutional apprehension about political Islamabad rolling a desperate dice and causing a change at the top if too many questions are asked at this point about the memo. While there may be a few differing voices on this count, an institutional consensus appears to be in place that a change will definitely be caused post-March 2012 Senate elections, were the ruling political dispensation allowed to have its marauding ways till then. “If change in top command is brought in now, it would be for mala fide reasons and the institutional reaction will be as decisive, but come March it will be a different story,” was the assessment of a concerned three-star.
The potent mix to justify the hitherto unjustifiable appears to be in place. There is no governance per se anymore, anywhere. Law and order is conspicuous by its very absence. The economy is bankrupt. Corruption has touched unimaginable heights. Incompetence is the sole requirement for landing important government posts. The executive mocks judges. Court verdicts are not worth the paper they are typed on. Thousands of people are being pushed below the poverty line every day, while the ruling elite churns out new millionaires and billionaires by the week. Desperate circumstances have transformed ordinary masses into raving, raging mobs. The disconnect between the rulers and the ruled is absolute, and naked. We are hurtling towards being a failed State. So what is holding the natural ‘unnatural’ consequence from occurring? Concerns about international reactions, or the obligatory weight of a three-year extension? Should it not happen, no matter what? Is this criminalised democracy still the only or the better option available? I do not know, but we may get the answers sooner than we expect. REFERENCES: The memo Epicentre Between the lines - II BY Mohammad Malick Wednesday, October 26, 2011 The writer is editor The News, Islamabad. http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-74433-The-memo-Epicentre Now what?
Epicentre
Mohammad Malick
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 The writer was editor The News, Islamabad and now he is Managing Director of Pakistan Television Corporation http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-78908-Now-what No memo martyrs, please
Epicentre
Mohammad Malick ... The writer is editor The News, Islamabad.
Friday, December 23, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-83647-No-memo-martyrs-please
The memo returns Epicentre by Mohammad Malick Wednesday, November 16, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-77746-The-memo-returns Gilded cage? Epicentre by Mohammad Malick Wednesday, December 14, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-82474-Gilded-cage Sitting on blisters Epicentre by Mohammad Malick Friday, January 13, 2012 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-87326-Sitting-on-blisters
Memogate: Will the Mansoor Ijaz story shake Pakistan?
The memo returns Epicentre by Mohammad Malick Wednesday, November 16, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-77746-The-memo-returns Gilded cage? Epicentre by Mohammad Malick Wednesday, December 14, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-82474-Gilded-cage Sitting on blisters Epicentre by Mohammad Malick Friday, January 13, 2012 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-87326-Sitting-on-blisters
Memogate: Will the Mansoor Ijaz story shake Pakistan?
Memogate: Will the Mansoor Ijaz story shake... by tvnportal
The memo that saved Zardari — at what cost? A full inquiry needed into grave matter BY Shaheen Sehbai...News Analysis Saturday, October 15, 2011 DUBAI: The sensational Financial Times revelation about a secret memo from President Asif Ali Zardari to President Obama, through Admiral Mike Mullen, has exploded on the Pakistani political scene, with Opposition Leader Chaudhry Nisar Ali raising it in the National Assembly and TV channels speculating on its credibility. But some key facts are being ignored.
The first is the critical decision by the Financial Times, a newspaper of the highest repute and standing, to go ahead with the article written by Mansoor Ijaz, a US businessman of Pakistani origin who has a long history of interactions with the top Pakistani military and civilian leaders on key security issues, including governments of Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif in the 90s.
The FT is not likely to publish something which it cannot substantiate if it was so required, so any number of denials and clarifications by our diplomats or the presidency will only be for domestic consumption and would mean nothing. The US would, obviously not comment on any of this as policy.
The second, and larger issue, however, is what else was contained in the memorandum as reported in the FT Comment Page. The real facts would come out if and when the full text of that memo ever gets out. In my view, such memos are not a one-point declaration but contain a full case, argued on the basis of assumptions, promises and commitments in return for actions, assistance and public affirmations along particular policy lines.
If this is the case in this memo, then it is quite possible that for a huge favour like stopping the Pakistan Army from staging a coup against the civilian government, a lot more may have been offered and promised.
Some points raised in the FT article hint at these additional commitments. For example, what did Ijaz mean to tell us by writing about “a new national security team”. Could President Zardari have promised to remove the entire present leadership of the Pakistan Army, including General Kayani and General Pasha, and to bring in his own team, which would not be so resistant to the US demands of helping out the Americans in Afghanistan.
If evidence comes to light that this memo was sent through a top Pakistani diplomat, then there would be many questions about how our foreign office and foreign service are being run, because anything of this sort cannot simply pass through the normal Foreign Office channels and must have been done by bypassing all the established SOPs. In that case, a full and thorough probe needs to be carried out as to how and through which way this message was conveyed and what it contained.
The third key issue is the credibility of the writer, Mansoor Ijaz, a man once dubbed by our ambassador to Washington as the “silent billionaire”, a self-made man as one of the world’s top investment minds and with friends in the highest defence, national security and political echelons of many governments around the world, a man who surely doesn’t need the headache of dealing with our incestuous politics while he jets around the French Riviera.
Ijaz, it may be recalled, was involved in mediating in Sudan during the Clinton presidency, where he secured critical counter-terrorism assistance for the US authorities. He was also the man who worked behind the scenes to get a statement issued by the then Vice President Al Gore against a possible military coup during Benazir’s second tenure. In fact, I personally attended the event where Gore came to join Pakistani activists at a fundraiser and out of the blue ended his speech with the warning that no military coups would be tolerated in Pakistan.
Wajid Shamsul Hassan, the then Pakistan High Commissioner to UK, had specially flown to Washington to attend the event, knowing that such a statement would be made by Gore.
Again, during the Benazir government when Nawaz Sharif was the opposition leader, it was Mansoor Ijaz who arranged quietly for Sharif to meet with senior US national security officials at the White House when he could not get a phone call answered in Washington. He was deeply involved in bringing Sharif to a seminar held by the Carnegie Endowment on Pakistan’s nuclear programme to make Nawaz appear more rational when after an earlier statement had been made by Nawaz that Pakistan could explode the bomb. That was at least two or three years before Nawaz came back to power and officially made Pakistan a nuclear power.
In that event, when Maleeha Lodhi was the Pakistan Ambassador in US, a host of speakers took part in the seminar, including Lt Gen KM Arif and the then Editor Najam Sethi. Robin Raphael was the then Assistant Secretary of State. Mansoor Ijaz also made a speech in the seminar.
Nawaz Sharif spoke on the sensitive subject but refused to take any questions from the audience as this was his condition to participate in the seminar.
In 1999, just weeks after the bloodless coup that brought Pervez Musharraf to power, Mansoor Ijaz got involved in a much publicised effort to bring Pakistani and Indian sides closer to a solution on Kashmir and I know it for a fact that he had contacts with the ISI and the Indian intelligence leadership to go ahead with his effort. The summit between Musharraf and India’s Atal Behari Vajpayee in Agra came about much because of this ceasefire that was declared in the summer months of 2000.
Given this background, there cannot be any doubt that a senior Pakistani diplomat contacted Mansoor Ijaz with the message for the US leadership in the way the FT article revealed. Surely, the text of the memo to which Ijaz refers, which was finally sent on to Admiral Mike Mullen, must have been revised and written many times over, with each word carefully considered.
With such intense interactions, which must have taken place, there has to be a record of some kind, some telephone calls, some emails or SMS messages or other communication to prove that all this was going on before this memo was agreed to and then finally sent to the US. Whatever happened will come out, but the effect this memo had was astonishing, not for us but even for General Kayani as he reportedly went on record to express surprise that in Spain Admiral Mullen had a very cordial meeting with them and then two days later he came out with a charge against Pakistan Army. This matter appears to be much deeper than it looks and needs to be properly investigated by the Pakistani authorities. REFERENCE: The memo that saved Zardari — at what cost? A full inquiry needed into grave matter BY Shaheen Sehbai...News Analysis Saturday, October 15, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-9564-The-memo-that-saved-Zardari-%E2%80%94-at-what-cost Zardari feared military coup after Osama attack: report News Desk Wednesday, October 12, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-13-9493-Zardari-feared--military-coup-after-Osama-attack-report
No comments:
Post a Comment