Published on, Aug. 24 -- August 24, 2025 2:45 AM
Pakistan is a country whose geographical position, defence policy, and internal stability have always remained the focus of global attention. Its greatest strength is its armed forces, who are not only the guardians of the borders but also stand alongside the people in every moment of crisis. Whether it is natural disasters or the war against terrorism, the devastation of floods or conspiracies of hostile forces, the Pakistan Army has always stood at the front line. To criticise such an institution without reason, or to publish fabricated statements attributed to its leadership, is in fact equivalent to damaging the nation's trust. The prestige of the Pakistan Army and the reputation of its Commander are directly linked to the country's trust and the morale of its people. In such a situation, if a journalist or analyst attributes fabricated remarks to the Army Chief, it is not just irresponsible conduct but also regarded as a serious allegation.
Recently, well-known columnist Suhail Warraich, in one of his articles, mentioned an alleged meeting with Army Chief General Asim Munir and attributed certain statements to him. The nature of those statements was such that immediately, a particular political party's supporters began using them as a basis for accusations. However, the reality is that in Pakistan, the arrest, punishment, or release of any political leader falls strictly under the jurisdiction of the judiciary. The Army Chief or the military has no connection with such matters. This conduct is not only irresponsible but also spreads mistrust about institutions among the people. Subsequently, the DG ISPR had to clarify that no such conversation took place with the Army Chief and that Suhail Warraich's report was baseless. This clarification was necessary because leaving such allegations unanswered would only fuel negative propaganda. The so-called "special meeting" that Suhail Warraich described was, in reality, a public event. The Army Chief was attending a gathering of overseas Pakistanis in Brussels, where several citizens, journalists, and notable personalities were present-including Suhail Warraich.
On that occasion, the Army Chief met the participants in a general and open manner. Presenting it as a private or one-on-one meeting is equivalent to distorting facts. This behaviour indicates that some
journalists twist reality in their writings merely to create sensationalism, in order to attract public attention or to portray themselves as "well-informed." But the question arises: does such fame bring temporary benefit or lasting harm? Journalism is considered the eyes and ears of society. Its role is to present the truth and provide the public with accurate information. If journalists make baseless allegations or attribute fabricated statements to institutions merely to make their writings appealing, it is not only a violation of journalistic principles but also against national interest.
Around the world, journalism is considered the fourth pillar of the state. But this pillar can only remain strong when it stands upon honesty, impartiality, and the principles of investigation. If journalism falls prey to sensationalism and personal interests, it creates rifts between institutions and the people. In a sensitive country like Pakistan, where hostile elements are always attempting to destabilise the nation, such irresponsible journalism can prove to be even more damaging. The Constitution of Pakistan defines a clear mandate for every institution. The judiciary's duty is to provide justice, the parliament makes laws, the administration implements policies, and the military's primary duty is to defend the country and ensure security. When a journalist or political leader links the military to judicial decisions or political processes, it is essentially a violation of the constitutional framework.
The arrest or punishment of the PTI founder is directly linked to the judiciary. If, in the future, any pardon or relief is granted, it will also come from the courts. The Army or the Army Chief cannot intervene in this process. This fact needs to be reiterated so that misconceptions do not spread among the people. It is also worth noting that some political parties or their supporters deliberately accuse the military in order to strengthen their political narrative. They want to convince the people that the judicial or legal proceedings against them are being carried out under military pressure. This narrative is not only against the facts but also an attempt to drag the military into politics. Columnists like Suhail Warraich, knowingly or unknowingly, strengthen this narrative. On the other hand, in addition to journalists, some individuals in politics-such as Faisal Vawda-also present themselves as spokesmen for the military. They try to create the impression in every matter that the military is on their side or supports them. This approach, too, has contributed to the defamation of institutions. The real spokesman for the Army is the DG ISPR; all other individuals either speak for personal interests or political gain. Eliminating such elements is the need of the hour so that institutions can maintain their credibility.
The bond between the Pakistani people and the Army has always remained strong. In the war against terrorism, thousands of soldiers and officers sacrificed their lives to establish peace in the country. In times of natural calamities, the Army has always helped the people. Any attempt to weaken this strong bond is tantamount to serving the enemy's agenda. Therefore, the public should also avoid believing in any news or column without proper verification.
In conclusion, I must say that Suhail Warraich's column was an irresponsible attempt that created unnecessary controversy in the country. The DG ISPR's clarification was timely and accurate, which made the facts clear. Journalists must realise their responsibilities and should not make institutions controversial without reason. The Army, judiciary, and parliament must function within their respective domains. Defaming institutions is, in fact, defaming the country, and no such attempt should be allowed to succeed. Pakistan's progress and security are only possible when institutions are strong and the people have trust in them. The role of journalism is not to weaken institutions but to further strengthen the trust between the people and those institutions. Suhail Warraich's fabricated claim of a "special meeting" gives us the lesson that while sensationalism may provide temporary fame, its long-term damage is only borne by the country and the nation.