| From
Tehelka Magazine, Vol 5, Issue 31, Dated Aug 09, 2008 |
|
| CURRENT
AFFAIRS |
|
in
cold blood |
|
‘The
US wants the ISI to win its war’
Former ISI chief Lt Gen Hamid Gul
tells HARINDER BAWEJA that the
government attempted to please the
US but ended up with egg on its face
 |
| Photo:
AP |
The government
tried to bring the ISI under civilian control. Was it their way of saying,
no more proxy wars?
No. They were trying to take a gift to the Americans because they had
nothing to offer. They have no control over the tribal areas and were
trying to strike deals with the militia, which the US did not like. Under
pressure from the Americans, they now have to backtrack on these deals
and so the problems have redoubled. You can’t play such games with
the tribesmen in the Frontier. You either stick to the deal or you pay
a price. The PM wanted to win the goodwill of the Americans. I don’t
know why you Indians are also getting into a strategic pact with the US.
You will pay a price, I can assure you.
If they wanted to please the US,
then why was the notification cancelled within a few hours?
It was a bit of a gimmick. The internal pressure was too much.
The army was up in arms. Even Pervez Musharraf said this is
not on and I’m sure the DG ISI must have spoken to the president.
Let me tell you, as a former ISI chief, that the agency is already
under civilian control. The bulk of the manpower is
drawn from the three forces. It is a very unique organisation and
I remember that when I was heading it in 1989, all the three
service chiefs in India went to Rajiv Gandhi to request him to
have something like the ISI. There is a political cell, under the
charter of the ISI. That political cell was included under Zulfikar
Ali Bhutto’s order. The ISI has always been saying, please take
this away from us. But Benazir shot it down. If they had
scrapped that cell, nobody would have objected, but they tried
to place it under the ministry of interior — a police force — and
that would have been tantamount to politicising the ISI.
Why should the ISI be a law unto itself? It is seen as being
more powerful than a civilian government.
No. The army is more powerful than the civilian government.
There is a problem only when the government starts making
mistakes because whether you like it or not, the military is a very
strong institution. The ISI is the most disciplined organisation.
Not many will agree with you on the ISI being disciplined. It
is known for its proxy wars.
Proxy wars yes, because it did
fight a proxy war. But now the
proxy war is being fought for
America. Earlier, it was against the
Soviets and that was a great
achievement. I can assure you that
at that time, even the army chief did not know what was going
on. I was heading the ISI and it was kept under wraps because
we didn’t want the Russians to get alarmed. But now the Americans
want the ISI to win the war for them again in Afghanistan
but they don’t realise that the conditions are totally different.
Why would it then not be in the interest of the Americans
to have the ISI under civilian control? President Musharraf
is surviving with American help.
How can it be a strategic intelligence-gathering agency for the
defence services if you place it under the interior ministry? The
ISI provides the first line of defence and if you allow it to degenerate,
where will you create another organisation like this? The
government learnt not to mess with the ISI. Childish and impetuous
as they are, they went ahead and within hours, had to
cancel the notification. They ended up with egg on their face. |