Pakistan puts spy agency under civilian control

[Neo]

No Sir, not a murder but a rescue operation.

If removing a bad tumor results into amputation of a limb to safe life its considered nessesity. Zardari has developped into a very bad cancer that will destroy whole country if he's no removed any time soon.

Kill it before it kills us!

 

[araz]

No Sir, not a murder but a rescue operation.

If removing a bad tumor results into amputation of a limb to safe life its considered nessesity. Zardari has developped into a very bad cancer that will destroy whole country if he's no removed any time soon.

Kill it before it kills us!

Neo Sahib
Chori aur Seena Zori!!!! You must know some politician very well By the way there is a limit to how much of resection would cure a tumour. Sometimes a cancer becomes incurable.Then the final count down begins!! Mr Zardari will face the music himself in good time. Do not soil your hands and even the mind by trying to kill that vermin. Have faith in the Big Man Above.He works in mysterious ways.
WaSalam
Araz

 

[asaad-ul-islam]

Weakening ISI: A PPP Gift To America


It is and it has always been Pakistan's first line of defense, and we, as Pakistani nationalists, owe a lot to it. We all now have the understanding that the People's Party at present is working pretty much on American directives. It is also a possibility that Benazir Bhutto might have been assassinated by foreign elements for 'deviating' from what she had promised to the international community. On October 26, 2007, hardly a week after her return to Pakistan, the former premier and chief of the PPP had called for a complete restructuring of the ISI.


By AMMAR FAHEEM

Sunday, 27 July 2008.

Ahmed Quraishi-Pakistan/Middle East politics, Iraq war, lebanon war, India Pakistan relations



ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—The Inter Services Intelligence agency of Pakistan, the ISI, through a notification issued by the Cabinet Division, was placed under the direct control of the Ministry of Interior Affairs. This was done on July 26, sometime in the evening. The ISI has worked under the control of the chief executive (Prime Minister) of the country in the past through the Ministry of Defense.


The nation observed this news with silence at first and from then on the reactions have been mixed, with a large majority opposing the decision. But it is not what the people think that counts.


The ISI, in essence is not an agency dealing with security threats 'inside' Pakistan. It is and it has always been Pakistan's first line of defense, and we, as Pakistani nationalists, owe a lot to it. The ISI also deals with external threats to Pakistan, so putting it under the direct control of the interior ministry was absolutely unjustified.

We all now have the understanding that the People's Party at present is working pretty much on American directives. It is also a possibility that Benazir Bhutto might have been assassinated by foreign elements for 'deviating' from what she had promised to the international community. But that is an entirely different debate.

On October 26, 2007, hardly a week after her return to Pakistan, the former premier and chief of the PPP had called for a complete restructuring of the ISI:

PPP chief calls for restructuring of ISI

KARACHI, Oct 26: Pakistan People’s Party chairperson Benazir Bhutto on Friday called for concerted efforts to eradicate terrorism and extremism. Talking to newsmen at Bilawal House, she demanded restructuring of the Inter-Services Intelligence and said that it was the responsibility of the government to discourage elements who had used their powers for vested interests and promoted religious extremism.
PPP chief calls for restructuring of ISI -DAWN - Top Stories; October 27, 2007


It might be reasonable to believe that Mohtarma might not have implemented what she said; she was too intelligent to commit a mistake such as this. But her assassination allowed for a 'hijack' of her political party (in Makhdoom Amin Fahim's words).

The ISI is a very sound, professional and strong intelligence agency capable of pulling off miracles for the safety, security and integrity of Pakistan. The United States and its 'real' allies in India have remained perplexed at the ISI's ability to counter their threats amicably.

The ISI has often been dubbed as a 'state within a state' or a 'parallel government' in Pakistan, but believe me, had it not been for the ISI our corrupt politicians would have sold out every inch of our land and every remaining bit of our sovereignty and dignity as a nation. The ISI has maintained a strong check on these feudal politicians who have plundered national wealth over the past several decades.

The timing of this unjustified decision is important: What could be the motive behind announcing such a critical decision when the top government representatives had already left Pakistan and were en-route to the United States of America?

It was a gift, wrapped up with a lot of loyalty by our politicians to the United States of America.

The fun began when the government proved to the masses that it is clumsier than what most people considered it to be. Notification after notification followed and the ISI was placed back under the control of the chief executive of the country, the Prime Minister, like it always has been.

The excuse made was a 'misunderstanding' or 'misinterpretation' of the first notification. The press information department of the Information Ministry claimed that only the IB had been placed under the interior division, however, the notice issued earlier had clearly mentioned in straightforward words that the administrative, financial and operational control of the ISI and the IB both were being put under the interior division.

Former DG ISI, Lt. Gen. (Retd.) Hameed Gul said that putting the ISI under the interior division should never even be thought of.

I would agree with Mr. Hameed Gul that indeed a conspiracy to weaken Pakistan's defense system has been thwarted by taking back the decision.

In an interesting twist, the advisor to the Prime Minister on Interior Affairs, Rehman Malik said that he was absolutely unaware of any such decision or notification.

Concluding my analysis, this decision appears to be based on ill-intentions and seems to be an attempt to undermine Pakistan's national security and integrity. I am also bewildered at how the present government is willing to give away so many concessions to India.

Tell me why the government decided to put the agency under so-called 'civilian control'? Is the Prime Minister not a civilian? Tell me why the RAW operates directly under the Prime Minister of India while our government wanted the ISI to operate under the interior ministry? Do they not understand the fundamental domains of 'interior' and 'exterior' affairs?

Pakistan is threatened by this very government and this could be due to two possible reasons:


(i) Either the government is actually very clumsy and really incapable of handling the crises at hand.

OR

(ii) The government at present is deliberately serving U.S. and Indian interests.


I am pleased at the dramatic reversal of this bad decision which happened at 3:00 AM in the morning. A gift to the United States has been denied and our defense agency works like it used to operate before.


Ammar Faheem is a Pakistani blogger at Ammar-3Sixty!

He can be reached at ammar.faheem@gmail.com.

 

[asaad-ul-islam]

Gilani’s Gamble: The Coming Coup?

The decision to bring ISI under the interior ministry does not only weaken Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency, but it could also backfire. the ensuing reaction in the military and intelligence community has been one of uproar. Overnight meetings have been held while frantic and outraged phone calls continue between military officials as we speak. The military will not accept the cabinet decision lying down. Insider Brief sources further report that many ranking military officials have indicated that there will be a coup if Gilani does not back down from his decision.


By SHAAN AKBAR
Sunday, 27 July 2008.
Ahmed Quraishi-Pakistan/Middle East politics, Iraq war, lebanon war, India Pakistan relations

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan— On the eve of his first visit to the United States, Prime Minister Yousaf Gilani and his cabinet made the decision to place Pakistan’s premier intelligence agency, the ISI, under the jurisdiction of the the Interior Ministry alongside the Intelligence Bureau. As a result, the Interior Ministry, headed by Rehman Malik, will have administrative, financial and operational control over the ISI. Insider Brief sources report that the ensuing reaction in the military and intelligence community has been one of uproar. Overnight meetings have been held while frantic and outraged phone calls continue between military officials as we speak.


The decision is one that is bold, unprecedented and controversial. The ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence) has traditionally fallen under the purview of the military, with Army officers rotating through the agency for two year stints. Many have labeled the ISI as a “state within a state” for its pervasiveness and ability to influence state matters with near complete autonomy. Today’s decision by Gilani and his cabinet marks a major move by the nascent civilian government in the long standing struggle by Pakistan’s civilian/political forces to bring the military establishment under their control. This news also likely corroborates our last post as the move may be in response to military/intelligence discussions over the ouster of his PPP government.


The military will not accept the cabinet decision lying down. Insider Brief sources further report that many ranking military officials have indicated that there will be a coup if Gilani does not back down from his decision. Such a move would not be unprecedented. Many may remember that the last time a civilian government attempted to meddle in military affairs, it ultimately resulted in the coup that brought President Musharraf to power. Much of the anger in the military is being directed towards Interior Minister Rehman Malik, who is widely believed by Pakistan’s intelligence community to have had some affiliation with the CIA. In the eyes of Pakistan intelligence, Malik’s access may severely compromise ISI operational security.


The government’s move has also placed Pakistan’s Chief of Army Staff (COAS), Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, in an awkward position. Since his appointment to COAS, he has been an advocate of extricating the military from overt interference in government affairs and has made a very public effort to support the new government. As opposed to engaging Kayani in a process to alter the balance of power between Rawalpindi and Islamabad, Gilani’s government has acted brashly and resultantly forced Kayani into a corner. If Kayani does not respond forcefully, he will appear weak and lose credibility with his subordinates. The Army Chief will also likely want to respond — after all, the ISI was under his command.


If there is a coup, it will likely be a politically engineered, “soft coup.” This would include the possibility of President Musharraf dismissing the government through powers granted to him in the constitution. An overt military coup is unlikely as it would trigger sanctions, isolate Pakistan internationally and result in a further weakening of already shaky relationship.


The PPP has taken a risky gamble — Prime Minister Gilani may return to Pakistan only to find himself out of a job.


Shaan Akbar is a Pakistani commentator and editor of The Insider Brief, an online blog on Pakistani affairs, where this report first appeared.. He can be reached at akbar.shaan@gmail.com

 

[Xeric]

Credible sources believe by doing this there will be an enhanced coordination between the ISI and the government of Pakistan and its military.

So it is a good thing. The role of ISI will only be enhanced, and it doesn't and will not effect its role and its commitments for the national security of Pakistan.

Enhanced role....???? how would that happen. Probably, now ISI will help people like zardari and other lords to over come their domestic/personal issues.
Well, i supposed this "help" would be the only capability left to ISI as it would stop working on its primary/national tasks.

 

[muse]

Governance by stealth?
Ejaz Haider



Here’s a government that takes a major decision fraught with consequences without any debate and announces it just as its head, the prime minister, has left the country on his first official tour of the United States. Then, early morning Sunday, after the media has reported its first decision, it reverses it by calling the earlier one a misunderstanding.

If this is a joke, it’s in poor taste and no one is laughing.

Late Saturday night the Press Information Department pushed out a five-line memorandum which said that the country’s two premier intelligence agencies, the Inter-Services Intelligence and the Intelligence Bureau, have been placed under the Interior Ministry. Period.

The PM was not available for comment; neither was his advisor on interior, both being 35000 feet over the Atlantic winging their way along with other junketeers to Washington DC.

But Mr Asif Ali Zardari was and he spake, correctly guessed, from Dubai. His explanation: the move is made to save the army from controversies and a bad name. Mr Zardari also hoped that “positive results will come out from [sic!] this historic decision”.

Historic the decision might be, but let it be said that history is full of historic follies and bad decisions. Historic and positive are not synonyms.

Mr Zardari also said that “Nobody will say that this agency is not under the control of an elected government as the Interior Ministry will be responsible for responding to allegations against the ISI.”

The scene changes: The “historic” decision, another press release tells us at 4 am, could not even survive the night. Far from being historic it was not even a one-full-night stand.

While we should rest easy that a hurried and ill-thought decision has been reversed, the inefficiency of this government raises troubling questions — especially at a time when this country needs solid men, not frolicking boys.

There are two issues here: one relates to the problem of decision-making; the other to the logic behind this decision. Consider.

Who takes decisions in this country; how are decisions taken; at what level(s) are they debated; where does input come from; what are the mechanics and mechanisms for taking decisions that have far-reaching consequences et cetera?

Different policies require different inputs. Policy levels are different, as is the nature of policies. By implication, the consequences can be, and are, different. Some bad policies can be less harmful; others can have disastrous consequences.

The reversed decision, according to the PID press release invoked Rule 3 (3) of the Rules of Business, 1973 as the justification for the PM to approve “the placement of Intelligence Bureau and Inter-Services Intelligence under the administrative, financial and operation control of the Interior Division with immediate effect...”.

Clearly, Rule 3 (3) cannot be invoked to justify a decision that needed to be reversed within hours. The power to take decisions, in a modern setting, cannot be assumed to be monarchical in nature. It has to be infused with legitimacy and turned into “authority” through various mechanisms, including the right and necessity by concerned experts and organisations, both within and outside the government, to debate an issue. Once such debate has taken place, the top man has the choice to make the final decision based on the debate and the consequences of various possibilities and choices.

Now to the reversal order which reads: “Notification regarding control of ISI is being misinterpreted. ISI will continue to perform its functions under the Prime Minister. The said Notification only re-emphasizes more coordination between Ministry of Interior and ISI in relation to war on terror and internal security. Details will be clarified in a comprehensive notification.”

What audacity to say that the earlier notification was being “misinterpreted”; did the Colossus from Dubai also “misinterpret” it when he called it a “historic” decision and spoke at length over how it will do this and that?

Now to the dissembling behind the earlier decision. Putting ISI under the control of Interior Division and calling it civilian control is naïve at best. In theory, the ISI has always been under civilian control, as opposed to Military, Air and Naval Intelligence agencies which are under the GHQ, Air HQ, and Naval HQ, respectively.

The anomaly lies in civil-military relations — i.e. when there is either no prime minister and a general sits atop the pyramid of power or when there is a quasi-civilian rule and the PM is too weak and the show is run by a General-President. That is a structural problem. Also, even if the ISI were placed under the Interior Division, if the army were to strike, it would still come under the overall control of a military dispensation or one of its many hybrid incarnations.

Two, the ISI’s main brief is external intelligence. Why would anyone place such an organisation under the Interior Division? The CIA does not report to Homeland Security; neither does MI6 report to the Home Office. True, the ISI has, over the years, indulged in shaping politics. But for that the agency has to be purged; plus, and this is important, every government, civilian ones included, has used it as a dirty tricks brigade. The governments are as much responsible for exploiting the IB and the ISI as these agencies are to blame for excesses. In fact, placing them under the Interior Division will exacerbate the problem rather than solving it.

Let it also be said that intelligence agencies across the world tend to be rascally and roguish. It is the flipside of the kind of work they are required to do. But steps have to be taken to create mechanisms (parliamentary oversight, for instance) which can exercise effective control over these agencies without making them lose their professional edge.

There is most definitely the need to ensure that no intelligence agency (or any other government organisation) can jump its brief. But that requires an honest appraisal of what these agencies have been doing, why, and at whose behest. Such an appraisal will require expert input from various quarters, and the debate will need to be held at multiple levels.

Decisions involving national security cannot be taken so lightly; nor can they be a function of what Dr Maleeha Lodhi aptly called “governance by stealth”.

Ejaz Haider is Consulting Editor of The Friday Times and Op-Ed Editor of Daily Times. He can be reached at sapper@dailytimes.com.pk

 

[asaad-ul-islam]

phew... alhamdulillah. now that's been taken care of.

Govt forced to withdraw ISI decision

By Syed Irfan Raza

ISLAMABAD, July 27: There were red faces all around when the government reversed its decision to place the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) under the direct control of the interior division.

The retraction came in less 24 hours following reports of extreme tension between various sections of the government and establishment and as a result of intense back-channel efforts.

Sources told Dawn that the reversal of Saturday’s decision was the result of “immense pressure from defence circles” on the civilian set-up.

Just a day after placing the ISI under control of the interior ministry, the government issued another notification which said that the earlier notification had been ‘misunderstood’ and the ISI would “continue to function under the prime minister”.“The said notification (issued on Saturday) only re-emphasises more coordination between ministry of interior and the ISI in relation to the war on terror and internal security.” It said a detailed notification would be issued later to clarify the situation.

The original notification had placed the ISI and the Intelligence Bureau under the interior division’s control but the new one reverses the decision only about the ISI and there is no mention of the IB, creating confusion whether it would continue to work under the prime minister or under the intelligence division.

The development, according to political observers, revealed civilian set up’s lack of vision about national strategic affairs because the earlier decision appears to be a move to make the prime minister’s adviser on interior Reham Malik the ‘most powerful’ head of the interior division ever.

Asif Ali Zardari, Pakistan People’s Party co-chairman, is reported to have hailed the decision and termed it a step to save the army from controversies and accusations.

Mr Zardari said: “No one will now be able to say that this agency is not under the elected government’s control. The interior ministry will now be able to respond to allegations against the ISI.”

According to sources, the decision was not taken in consultation with defence authorities, which caused “great concern among the army and other defence organs”.

They said the back-channel discussions had continued throughout Saturday night, compelling the civilian set-up to reverse the decision.

Director-General of the Inter Services Pubic Relation (ISPR) Maj-Gen Athar Abbas said the army chief and other defence authorities had not been taken into confidence on the issue.

“Although there is an ongoing debate that there should be close coordination between all intelligence agencies, placing ISI under the direct control of the interior division was never discussed.

“When we realised that the decision had been taken, we discussed the issue with the government and are thankful that there was a realisation of ground realities and our position was accepted,” the ISPR chief said.

He said the ISI was a “huge organisation” and the interior ministry could not have handled its financial, administrative and operational affairs. The ISPR spokesman cited examples of various global intelligence systems, including the agency working in the United Kingdom, and said: “In Britain, MI-5 looks after domestic intelligence gathering while MI-6 looks after external affairs. Similarly, India’s Research and Analysis Wing (Raw) is responsible for external intelligence while the Central Bureau of Intelligence (CBI) looks after domestic security matters, but in both the models, the spy agencies report to the chief executives (prime ministers).” Like the British and the Indian models, the ISI also had a mandate to provide intelligence on domestic and strategic, external and defence-oriented affairs.

Meanwhile, Gen (retd) Hamid Gul, a former chief of ISI, said the earlier decision was merely a bid to please the superpowers without realising that it would only serve the interests of the enemies. He praised the government’s move to keep the ISI under the prime minister’s control.

He said that in 1990, the first PPP government had made a similar attempt but when the then prime minister Benazir Bhutto was informed about the “ground realities” she agreed that the agency should be allowed to continue to work under its previous command.

Gen Gul, however, stressed the need for establishing a “proper secretariat … to collect information and ensure coordination among all spy agencies”. Former ISI DG Lt-Gen (retd) Asad Durrani said the decision’s reversal showed that the authorities concerned had not been taken into confidence. He advocated greater autonomy for ISI and said it should work as a “separate and completely autonomous body, answerable only to the prime minister”.

PPP spokesman Farhatullah Babar said he did not know at what level the earlier decision had been taken. “I think a miscommunication had led to the mess.”

Warning that the government’s credibility was at stake, he said it should clarify at what level the earlier decision had been taken and why it had been withdrawn.

Former information minister Senator Nisar A. Memon expressed surprise over the sudden decision and said the government should explain the rationale and circumstances that had led to such a decision.

He recalled that during the 70s, ISI was mandated only to look after the country’s external security but former Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had included internal security in its mission with a focus on politicians. Later, successive governments mandated ISI with external security.

“Today, the country is apparently governed by whims of leaders who do not take even their coalition partners into confidence,” he said.

AHMED HASSAN ADDS: Secretary-General of the Pakistan Muslim League-Q Senator Mushahid Hussain blamed the PPP government of making an abortive attempt to “to convert ISI into a partisan political instrument” and termed it yet another example of “PPP’s incompetence and ill-intentioned moves”. Talking to reporters here, Mr Hussain claimed that the government’s retraction on the ISI issue clearly indicated how serious the tussle for power between the prime minister and ‘extra-parliamentary forces’ had turned.

He called it “a fundamentally flawed decision … on all counts, political, administrative and national and from the national security point of view”.

“ISI and IB are already under civilian control since they report to the prime minister, and the move was an attempt to weaken the PM by handing both the intelligence agencies over to the interior ministry, whose head enjoys a PM-level protocol.”

Meanwhile, federal Information Minister Sherry Rehman told a TV channel that ISI was already under the civilian control.

“ISI is already under civilian control. It is overseen by establishment and cabinet divisions which work under the prime minister,” she said on phone from London.Ms Rehman said it was the government’s endeavour to provide smooth working conditions to all institutions functioning within a civilian set-up and to avoid any miscommunication.

Govt forced to withdraw ISI decision -DAWN - Top Stories; July 28, 2008

 

[araz]

phew... alhamdulillah. now that's been taken care of.

Govt forced to withdraw ISI decision

By Syed Irfan Raza

ISLAMABAD, July 27: There were red faces all around when the government reversed its decision to place the Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) under the direct control of the interior division.

The retraction came in less 24 hours following reports of extreme tension between various sections of the government and establishment and as a result of intense back-channel efforts.

Sources told Dawn that the reversal of Saturday’s decision was the result of “immense pressure from defence circles” on the civilian set-up.

Just a day after placing the ISI under control of the interior ministry, the government issued another notification which said that the earlier notification had been ‘misunderstood’ and the ISI would “continue to function under the prime minister”.“The said notification (issued on Saturday) only re-emphasises more coordination between ministry of interior and the ISI in relation to the war on terror and internal security.” It said a detailed notification would be issued later to clarify the situation.

The original notification had placed the ISI and the Intelligence Bureau under the interior division’s control but the new one reverses the decision only about the ISI and there is no mention of the IB, creating confusion whether it would continue to work under the prime minister or under the intelligence division.

The development, according to political observers, revealed civilian set up’s lack of vision about national strategic affairs because the earlier decision appears to be a move to make the prime minister’s adviser on interior Reham Malik the ‘most powerful’ head of the interior division ever.

Asif Ali Zardari, Pakistan People’s Party co-chairman, is reported to have hailed the decision and termed it a step to save the army from controversies and accusations.

Mr Zardari said: “No one will now be able to say that this agency is not under the elected government’s control. The interior ministry will now be able to respond to allegations against the ISI.”

According to sources, the decision was not taken in consultation with defence authorities, which caused “great concern among the army and other defence organs”.

They said the back-channel discussions had continued throughout Saturday night, compelling the civilian set-up to reverse the decision.

Director-General of the Inter Services Pubic Relation (ISPR) Maj-Gen Athar Abbas said the army chief and other defence authorities had not been taken into confidence on the issue.

“Although there is an ongoing debate that there should be close coordination between all intelligence agencies, placing ISI under the direct control of the interior division was never discussed.

“When we realised that the decision had been taken, we discussed the issue with the government and are thankful that there was a realisation of ground realities and our position was accepted,” the ISPR chief said.

He said the ISI was a “huge organisation” and the interior ministry could not have handled its financial, administrative and operational affairs. The ISPR spokesman cited examples of various global intelligence systems, including the agency working in the United Kingdom, and said: “In Britain, MI-5 looks after domestic intelligence gathering while MI-6 looks after external affairs. Similarly, India’s Research and Analysis Wing (Raw) is responsible for external intelligence while the Central Bureau of Intelligence (CBI) looks after domestic security matters, but in both the models, the spy agencies report to the chief executives (prime ministers).” Like the British and the Indian models, the ISI also had a mandate to provide intelligence on domestic and strategic, external and defence-oriented affairs.

Meanwhile, Gen (retd) Hamid Gul, a former chief of ISI, said the earlier decision was merely a bid to please the superpowers without realising that it would only serve the interests of the enemies. He praised the government’s move to keep the ISI under the prime minister’s control.

He said that in 1990, the first PPP government had made a similar attempt but when the then prime minister Benazir Bhutto was informed about the “ground realities” she agreed that the agency should be allowed to continue to work under its previous command.

Gen Gul, however, stressed the need for establishing a “proper secretariat … to collect information and ensure coordination among all spy agencies”. Former ISI DG Lt-Gen (retd) Asad Durrani said the decision’s reversal showed that the authorities concerned had not been taken into confidence. He advocated greater autonomy for ISI and said it should work as a “separate and completely autonomous body, answerable only to the prime minister”.

PPP spokesman Farhatullah Babar said he did not know at what level the earlier decision had been taken. “I think a miscommunication had led to the mess.”

Warning that the government’s credibility was at stake, he said it should clarify at what level the earlier decision had been taken and why it had been withdrawn.

Former information minister Senator Nisar A. Memon expressed surprise over the sudden decision and said the government should explain the rationale and circumstances that had led to such a decision.

He recalled that during the 70s, ISI was mandated only to look after the country’s external security but former Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had included internal security in its mission with a focus on politicians. Later, successive governments mandated ISI with external security.

“Today, the country is apparently governed by whims of leaders who do not take even their coalition partners into confidence,” he said.

AHMED HASSAN ADDS: Secretary-General of the Pakistan Muslim League-Q Senator Mushahid Hussain blamed the PPP government of making an abortive attempt to “to convert ISI into a partisan political instrument” and termed it yet another example of “PPP’s incompetence and ill-intentioned moves”. Talking to reporters here, Mr Hussain claimed that the government’s retraction on the ISI issue clearly indicated how serious the tussle for power between the prime minister and ‘extra-parliamentary forces’ had turned.

He called it “a fundamentally flawed decision … on all counts, political, administrative and national and from the national security point of view”.

“ISI and IB are already under civilian control since they report to the prime minister, and the move was an attempt to weaken the PM by handing both the intelligence agencies over to the interior ministry, whose head enjoys a PM-level protocol.”

Meanwhile, federal Information Minister Sherry Rehman told a TV channel that ISI was already under the civilian control.

“ISI is already under civilian control. It is overseen by establishment and cabinet divisions which work under the prime minister,” she said on phone from London.Ms Rehman said it was the government’s endeavour to provide smooth working conditions to all institutions functioning within a civilian set-up and to avoid any miscommunication.

Govt forced to withdraw ISI decision -DAWN - Top Stories; July 28, 2008

As they say in tweety bird language, See I told ya!!! they might fool the masses, but it does not take a rocket scientist to see the futility of such a move given the weakness of the Government. in a country where might is right, awqeak fledge ling of a Government cannot swalloew as bitter a pill as the ISI.Their honesty has been laid bare to the whole world, on the judges issue, so the initial ferver that was in the nation has now gone and they cant count on public support on this isssue either. The other case maybe to spill the dirt on ISI, but they dont have the moral fortitude to take the retaliatory onslought
I still am one of those fools who believe that eventually the system will rectify itself, but at the moment things are not going well.
Araz

 

[Spring Onion]

Is ISI still under Rehman Malik?

By Ansar Abbasi

ISLAMABAD: The Cabinet Division has not formally withdrawn the controversial order on transferring the ISI’s control from the Defence Ministry to the Interior Ministry, raising the question whether the government has again changed its mind and decided to keep the agency under the Interior Ministry.

Within hours of the issuance of the July 26 Cabinet Division notification announcing the placement of the ISI and the IB under the Interior Ministry, the government issued a clarification that the ISI would continue to perform its functions under the prime minister and that the Cabinet Division’s notification was misinterpreted.

Almost, all newspapers and television channels announced that the government had stepped

back on the issue of the ISI’s control amid reports that the decision was reversed by Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani after he had received two emergency calls from Rawalpindi.

However, on government files, the situation is just the same as it was on Saturday last, i.e. the ISI and the IB stand transferred to the Interior Ministry. No formal order for the reversal of the same notification has been issued so far by the Cabinet Division.

Although, an Interior Ministry source told this correspondent a few days back that some authorities concerned had been verbally conveyed to maintain the pre-July 26 notification status, and unless the said notification was formally cancelled, the confusion would not go.

A journalist who is known for his close association with Asif Ali Zardari wrote in his column on Thursday that it seemed that the PPP had decided to take a stand on the ISI issue. PPP spokesman Farhatullah Babar when contacted, however, connected the reversal of the order issue with Adviser to the Prime Minister on Interior Rehman Malik’s statement that he would look into the matter to fix the responsibility.

The Cabinet Division on Saturday last formally notified “the prime minister’s approval for the placement of the Intelligence Bureau and the Inter-Services Intelligence under the administrative, financial and operational control of the Interior Division with immediate effect”.

Late night on July 26, the government through the PID issued a clarification that the ISI will continue to perform its functions under the prime minister, adding the notification regarding the control of the ISI was being misinterpreted.

After the verbal reversal of the order, it was expected that the formal annulment of the notification would be done upon the return of Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani from his US visit. The prime minister is leaving for Colombo on Saturday but no cancellation order was issued by the Cabinet Division till the filing of this report.

The decision to shift the ISI under the Interior Ministry has been generally criticised for the reason that it was not only ill-timed but also done without proper consultation with all the stakeholders.

The objection was mainly to make the prime intelligence agencies of the country to report to the prime minister’s unelected adviser on interior. While at home, the ISI was the focus of discussion for different reasons, the US administration and the American media at the same time, during Gilani’s visit to Washington, resorted to ISI bashing.

The US administration seeks the blind following of its dictates, particularly with regard to the so-called war on terror, by the government of Pakistan, the Pak-Army and the ISI no matter what price Islamabad has to pay for it. The US administration and the American media have launched scathing attacks on the ISI for not doing what the US desires from it.

Is ISI still under Rehman Malik?