In defence of the army!

It took 25 years longer than George Orwell thought for the slogans of 1984 to be reality. “War is Peace,” “Freedom is Slavery,” “Ignorance is Strength.” I would add: “Lie (or rather lying) is Truth” (Paul Craig Roberts; Former Assistant Secretary in the Reagan Administration).
Many analysts and columnists have endlessly advocated strong and stringent constitutional restrictions on the Pakistani Army’s role in the political affairs of the country. Undoubtedly, the army should stay out of political intervention and interference in the governing process and leave the running of the state to the democratic dispensation.
In my article titled Re-inventing the Role (The Nation, December 12, 2007) I issued a warning against any kind of political adventurism by the army generals, however, it is vitally important and absolutely imperative in the national interests of Pakistan to defend the statement issued in the Corps Commanders Conference chaired by General Kayani expressing “serious concern” on the Kerry-Lugar Bill passed by the US Congress.
In the first place, the expression of “concern” on the said bill is not an intervention in the political process of the country. It is simply institutional “input” by the military high command in the making of a state policy in which the institution of the army, itself, is most likely to be intentionally targeted and adversely hit by a foreign country. Indeed, the army has a constitutional obligation to express its disapproval of an interstate policy that is directly infringing on the internal structural and management dynamics of a vitally important national institution. The army cannot allow this kind of interference in its internal affairs by a foreign power. The question is: Would the US permit a foreign country to meddle in the affairs of its own armed forces? No, definitely not. Then why should the Pakistani army be subjected to US interference?