By: Dr. Abdul Ghani
E. Mail: ghanillm@yahoo.com
Published By:ANI News Agency
Islamabad belongs to every Pakistani. Its streets should reflect the confidence of a democratic nation, where political differences are addressed responsibly and public institutions serve the people. When confrontation threatens that confidence, words carry consequences. An unverified accusation can deepen suspicion, inflame emotions and damage the relationship between citizens and those entrusted with their defence.
The present situation demands careful judgment. Reuters reported a planned march towards Islamabad on 27 September and the interior minister’s determination to prevent it. Political arrests ahead of the demonstration have intensified the dispute between the government and opposition supporters. These developments require responsible reporting and credible answers from the authorities concerned. On 23 September, police announced closures affecting major routes into Islamabad ahead of the planned protest.
However, these developments do not, by themselves, establish that the Pakistan Army ordered every arrest, road closure or administrative restriction. Such responsibility must be demonstrated through evidence. Turning suspicion into certainty and then presenting it as established truth is precisely how misleading narratives gain strength.
Those who accuse the Army must answer a straightforward question: what verifiable evidence supports the specific allegation? A political speech cannot substitute for an authenticated document. An anonymous account cannot automatically become a reliable witness. Repeating a claim thousands of times does not remove the obligation to prove it.
Equally, defending the Army requires intellectual honesty. We should reject allegations shown to be false, challenge unsupported claims and acknowledge what remains unresolved. A credible defence of an institution rests on accuracy. Sweeping denials without investigation can weaken public confidence just as sweeping accusations can damage it.
The attempt to portray the Army solely through the bitterness of political confrontation also overlooks the dangers faced by its personnel. On 18 September, the Associated Press reported that six soldiers had been killed in a roadside bombing in Hangu the previous day. Their deaths are a painful reminder that security threats continue while political arguments dominate public attention.
On 20 September, the Associated Press also reported the military’s account of an operation near Kalat in which security forces freed 23 hostages and killed five militants. Such reporting deserves attention alongside the political headlines. The protection of civilians is central to any fair assessment of the forces’ service.
Behind every fallen soldier is a family whose loss cannot be measured by a news cycle. Behind every rescued civilian is a life that might otherwise have been destroyed. Political disagreement should never make us indifferent to those realities. Recognising sacrifice is a matter of fairness and humanity.
Another damaging suggestion is that citizens must choose between supporting the Army and valuing democratic freedoms. Pakistan needs both professional national defence and a public life in which people can raise concerns peacefully. Respect for soldiers and respect for citizens strengthen the same country.
Political leaders, commentators and online activists therefore carry a serious responsibility. They should identify specific decisions, name the authority responsible when evidence permits and pursue their arguments through peaceful means. Collective blame directed at an entire institution obscures responsibility and encourages resentment against people who had no part in the disputed decision.
The government also has responsibilities. Restrictions should be explained, public inconvenience minimised and allegations of wrongdoing examined credibly. Protest organisers should discourage violence, protect public property and avoid circulating unverified material. Every side should help prevent political disagreement from becoming a lasting rupture in national trust.
We stand with the Pakistan Army, with its soldiers, its bereaved families and its duty to protect Pakistan. That support is strongest when expressed through truth, fairness and commitment to lawful service.
Islamabad needs restraint and dialogue. Pakistan needs citizens who check before sharing, leaders who speak responsibly and institutions that answer concerns with clarity. Our answer to misleading propaganda must remain firm: produce the evidence, correct the falsehood and never allow political anger to erase the service and sacrifice of those who defend our country.
