The ‘Digital Terrorists’ Of Pakistan – OpEd

An army with a state

In her seminal piece titled “Pakistan-from hybrid-democracy to hybrid-martial law” published in the 2019 Journal of South Asian and Middle Eastern Studies, Ayesha Siddiqa, a Pakistan born and UK based leading expert on the Pakistan armed forces made some very pertinent and precise observations of how the all-powerful Pakistan army was continuing its subtle subversion of the country’s constitution with renewed vigour. One of her prognostications was – “The military is keen to generate a new national discourse in which the army’s position is considered synonymous to the state.” [Emphasis added].

During his farewell address in November 2022, the then Pakistan army chief Gen Qamar Javed Bajwa’s not only announced that “the military has decided they will not interfere in any political matter,” but also gave the reassurance that “we are strictly committed to the pledge and will continue to be so.” [Emphasis added]. With such an emphatic guarantee coming from none other than the man ranked 68th in the 2018 Forbes list of the World’s Most Powerful People for having “established himself as a mediator and proponent of democracy,” it seemed that Siddiqa’s hitherto fore unblemished record of accurately predicting Rawalpindi’s future course of action would finally come to an end, or so it seemed.

However, by making it clear in his 2024 Independence Day speech that “Any effort to weaken our armed forces is akin to weakening the state,” [Emphasis added], Pakistan army chief Gen Syed Asim Munir has not only added greater credibility to the commonly used description of Pakistan being an army with a state but also made Siddiqa’s half-a-decade old prophecy that “The military is keen to generate a new national discourse in which the army’s position is considered synonymous to the state” come true!

Digital terrorism

By equating the military with the state and introducing “digital terrorism” in Pakistan’s lexicon, Rawalpindi has craftily imposed the “emperor’s new clothes” situation on the hapless people of Pakistan. The term ‘digital terrorism’ was first mentioned during the 83rd Formation Commanders Conference at General Headquarters [GHQ] in May and its contours were exhaustively elaborated by Pakistan army’s media wing Inter Services Public Relations [ISPR] in its press release.

This ISPR statement read- “The [corps commanders conference] forum underscored that politically motivated and vested digital terrorism, unleashed by conspirators duly abetted by their foreign cohorts, against State institutions is clearly meant to try to induce despondency in the Pakistani nation, to sow discord among national institutions, especially the armed forces, and the people of Pakistan by peddling blatant lies, fake news, and propaganda.”[Emphasis added].

While the aim of digital terrorism to “sow discord among national institutions” is understandable, singling out Rawalpindi as the prime target of this social media attack by specifically mentioning “especially the armed forces,”further validates Siddiqa’s prediction that “The military is keen to generate a new national discourse in which the army’s position is considered synonymous to the state.”

Identifying digital terrorists

If one goes by ISPR’s all-encompassing interpretation of digital terrorism, then the list of domestic ‘digital terrorists’ is endless as not only individuals and organisations, but even national institutions are guilty of sowing “discord” between the armed forces of Pakistan and the public.

As far as individuals are concerned, names of military analysts like Ayesha Siddiqa would certainly figure in the list of ‘digital terrorists’. After all, didn’t she talk about the “military’s opposition to organic movements that question the Army’s role in the control and the war on terror.”

So, even though public unrest triggered by recent announcement of anti terrorist campaign codenamed Operation Azm-i-Ishtekam and massive protests by Khyber Pakhtunkhwa policemen against the army’s anti-terrorism operations validate her observation, Siddiqa nevertheless would [in Rawalpindi’s view] be guilty of sowing seeds of discord between the army and the people.

Similarly, based on the contents of its 2023 report, Human Rights Commission of Pakistan [HRPC] would also qualify as a ‘digital terrorist’ as it contains the following uncomfortable [but factual] truths directly/indirectly related to the army that Rawalpindi would perceive as statements fuelling discord between the army and the people:

· “The practice of appointing serving and retired military officials to civilian posts showed no sign of abating,” and that “The PDM-led government did little to curb the role of unelected forces in manipulating the system.” [Emphasis added].

· “Military trials do not meet the standard of fair trial.” [Emphasis added].

· “The grip of the military establishmentwas seen mirrored in the appointment of Anwaar-ul-Haq Kakar as caretaker prime minister in August. [Emphasis added].

· “AJK [Pakistan occupied Jammu and Kashmir] experienced severe human rights violations amid widespread protests against the government’s decision to withdraw subsidies on wheat flour and increase electricity prices.” [Emphasis added].

· “In a case of land grabbing, residents of Guro Jiglote sent an application to the chief minister and other authorities in January, alleging that the FWO [Frontier Works Organisation which is a military organisation] had seized a piece of community land that had been rented to it earlier. However, the FWO had neither paid rent nor vacated the land” [Emphasis added].

However, the most serious issue raised by HRCP was its criticism of “the slew of hastily passed legislation” that has the unmistakable signature of Rawalpindi’s covert sponsorship. It “noted with concern… that the Pakistan Army [Amendment] Act 2023 [which] criminalised defamation of the armed forces… violated the freedom of expression of retired military personnel as well as their right to participate in public life [and] sanctioned the armed forces’ engagement in the national development and advancement of national or strategic interest.” [Emphasis added].

HRCP also called the Official Secrets [Amendment] Act“draconian in scope, giving intelligence agencies sweeping powers to enter and search any person or place without a warrant, violating people’s right to privacy.” It also noted that“the act may be used to indiscriminately charge people who have no intent of committing an offence, and it also broadened the scope for targeting dissidents and political rivals in the future.” [Emphasis added].

Coming to state institutions, the judiciary too fits Rawalpindi’s ‘digital terrorist’ bill as a host of its judgments highlighting the handedness and cavalier ways of the Pakistan army have the potential to “sow discord” among the armed forces and the people of Pakistan.

A few examples:

In 2019, while ordering an end to all commercial activities being carried out by Pakistan army on military land in Karachi, Justice Gulzar Ahmed made the following observations:

“They [Pakistan army’s Defence Housing Authority or DHA] have encroached so far into the sea that if they had their way, they would build another city on the sea itself.”
“The owners of DHA [Pakistan army] will then encroach on the entire sea all the way to America and plant their flags there… [and is] currently wondering how they can make inroads into India as well.”
Commenting on a commercial wedding hall being run by the Pakistan army in close proximity to the Central Ordnance Depot that stockpiles huge quantities of ammunition, Justice Ahmed advised the army to “Have some fear of God.”

In 2020, while scrapping a government housing scheme allotment, Justice Qazi Faez Isa of Pakistan’s Supreme Court made the following scathing observations against the Pakistan army-

He noted with concern that even though “The laws governing civil and armed forces personnel do not entitle them to receive residential plots, commercial plots or agricultural land… Nevertheless, senior members of the armed forces get plots and agricultural lands and continue to be given additional plots and agricultural lands as they rise up the ranks.” [Emphasis added].
“If lands are given to only one category like the members of the armed forces and the civilians in the service of Pakistan are disregarded, it constitutes discrimination and offends the fundamental right of equality.” [Emphasis added].
“In addition to receiving pensions, public lands are taken [by defence officers] which is eminently unfair.” [Emphasis added].

Just a year later, Lahore High Court Chief Justice Mohammad Qasim Khan stated that:

“The army seems to have become the biggest land grabber in the country.” [Emphasis added].
“The way the army occupies the properties of people is nothing but land grabbing.” [Emphasis added].
“The uniform of the army is for service and not to rule as a King …” [Emphasis added].

Finally, with the ISPR chief publicly complaining that “the law is not taking its course against [digital terrorism] the way it should,” isn’t the Government of Pakistan itself complicit in indirectly promoting ‘digital terrorism’ through its inaction in bringing the guilty to book?

From the aforesaid, it emerges, that either the Pakistan armed forces are the only patriots in a land teeming with ‘digital terrorists’ of all colours and hue, or that it’s the questionable actions of the country’s armed forces itself that are sowing seeds of discord amongst the people and the Pakistan army.

So, while it doesn’t require rocket science to discern who exactly is responsible for promoting “digital terrorism” in Pakistan, the jury is still out because as Siddiqa has appropriately opined that “[in Pakistan,] silence is the hallmark of media, academia, and activism!”