DND Report: Media craft requires certain skills—knowing when, how, and where to respond, when to avoid responding, and when to respond with a delay to certain news, articles, content, or reports that are considered untrue, a mix of truth and falsehood, or a combination of truth and exaggeration. The response of the DGISPR to Suhail Warraich’s claims of an exclusive meeting with Field Marshal Asim Munir is a classic example of this practice.
DG ISPR Lt-Gen Ahmed Sharif, while talking to students in Islamabad on August 21, explained the reality of the interaction between COAS Field Marshal Asim Munir and senior journalist Suhail Warraich. Warraich had claimed that he held a one-to-one meeting with the Field Marshal in Brussels, where, according to him, the Army Chief opened his heart about critical issues being faced by the country. In reality, no such one-to-one meeting ever took place. The Field Marshal’s interaction in Brussels was with more than 600 participants at an event organized by overseas Pakistanis, among whom Warraich was also present.
Since Warraich is a senior journalist, columnist, and book author, the response to his claims required a mature and thoughtful approach. The delay in response might have been due to this consideration. Nevertheless, the matter could not be left unattended. Eventually, ISPR responded in an effective manner that clarified the facts, put an end to rumors, and avoided unnecessary controversy.
In his article published on August 16, Suhail Warraich mentioned his supposed meeting with the Army Chief in Brussels, praising Field Marshal Asim Munir in various ways. However, he also inserted certain points that were “between the lines” and out of context, though presented in a polite and seemingly praising manner. Since those points were not directly attributed as statements from the Field Marshal, ISPR saw no need to respond at that stage.
The very next day, however, Warraich wrote another article titled Passenger vs. Prisoner No. 804, in which he discussed Imran Khan’s apology and expedient advice. He drew a parallel with former Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who was hanged, suggesting that failure to apologize could have dire consequences. This created the strong impression that Warraich was hinting at a warning supposedly conveyed to him during his “meeting” with the Army Chief. This was a dangerous situation because it implied that threats were coming from the Army Chief himself. Such attribution required immediate clarification.
On August 21, DG ISPR addressed the issue effectively, explaining to journalists that most of the points raised by Warraich were taken out of context. He categorically stated that there was no discussion about an apology, no talk of reconciliation, and no one-to-one meeting whatsoever.
ISPR handled the matter well by presenting the facts and clarifying Warraich’s story. It also made a significant point: there is no question of PTI apologizing to the army over May 9 because May 9 is not the army’s case—it is the case of the people of Pakistan. If PTI has to apologize, it should do so to the people and the nation for its political conduct. At the same time, PTI leaders will face punishments and legal trials for the crimes they committed, in accordance with the law.
There is no doubt that journalism is changing and that journalistic norms are often being compromised. However, it is expected that professional journalists such as Suhail Warraich uphold journalistic standards and understand the difference between informal talks, interactions, formal conversations, and interviews.
To further clarify the matter, Sardar Zahoor, the host of the Brussels event, also issued a video statement. He confirmed that the Army Chief did not hold any one-on-one meeting with journalists in Brussels. Instead, the COAS addressed a convention of overseas Pakistanis and met participants collectively. Naturally, the Army Chief may have had informal conversations with various individuals, but attempts to portray these as exclusive or secretive meetings are misleading. In reality, nothing of the sort happened.
