Haqqani's confident pushback begins as Ijaz falters
18 March, 2012
ISLAMABAD: The memogate saga that started on the basis of purported BlackBerry messages (BBM) exchanged between former ambassador to the US Husain Haqqani and a US-based Pakistani businessman, Mansoor Ijaz, now seems to be heading to some closure with BBM messages appearing to have almost no relevance to the case.
During the second day of his cross-examination by Haqqani's legal team, Ijaz admitted that he could not produce in the BBM messages any material that could show that Haqqani instructed him to write the disputed memorandum.
Ijaz's claims relating to the memo now depend solely on his account of the telephone conversation he says he had with Haqqani while the latter was in London on May 9, 2011.
Ijaz has also acknowledged that before that phone call, he had last met Haqqani in May 2009, which does little to advance his claim that he got involved in the matter simply out of friendship with Haqqani.
Since the issue erupted in October last year, most of the anti-government media commentators had focused on BBMs as the ultimate proof of Haqqani's complicity with Ijaz in conceiving and getting the memo delivered to the then US armed forces chief, Mike Mullen.
The outgoing ISI DG, Lt General Ahmed Shuja Pasha, also based his finding of Haqqani's likely involvement on Ijaz's BBM claims.
The manufacturer of BlackBerry devices – Research in Motion (RIM) – has informed various respondents in the memo commission that it cannot provide the requisite data due to various technical and legal issues, primarily the fact that they do not retain wordings of chat.
Ijaz is also proving unable to show how the BBMs relate to the disputed memo, making it difficult for the commission to base its findings on these unverified messages.
Haqqani's counsel, Zahid Bukhari, by pinning down Ijaz on very specific answers to his questions instead of unusual long-winded answers of the self-styled tycoon has started to show the holes in the story of Ijaz before the commission. Many of these holes have already been pointed out in reporting in this newspaper.
Ijaz has relied a great deal in his testimony on his account of telephone calls and his own explanations of different words used during the exchange of BBMs. The evidence thus could at best be able to show contact between Haqqani and Ijaz but what was the content of their communication will remain subject to explanations from both sides, making it hard for the judicial commission to reach a definitive conclusion.
Now it seems that even forensics on Ijaz's BlackBerry handsets may not establish beyond doubt that the data has not been tampered with and edited.
The Pakistani High Commission in the UK has been informed by forensic experts about the technicalities and huge expense and time involved in conducting forensic examination of a handset. Experts would have to see whether some software exists on the handset for manipulation of data but they would still not be able to say with certainty whether certain data has been modified or tampered with.
Also these experts have expressed limitation in conducting such forensics if the handsets are to be tested outside their labs. In his now well-known arrogance, Ijaz has repeatedly said that he will not hand over his handsets for verification and any such process must be done in his presence. He has even informed the high commission that he will only agree to forensic examination by a company on whose security protocol he agrees.
The memo commission thus has its work cut out as framing a reference for forensic testing will become a contentious issue if Ijaz starts to choose the forensic company for the purpose.
Already sensing that the commission's work is likely to remain inconclusive, Haqqani has broken his silence and is present in the commissions' proceedings from London, oozing confidence. He has started to speak to the media also and appears ready to take a few pot shots at his detractors.
"My patriotism cannot be judged by shodas and sheedas," Haqqani quipped to the journalists who were asking him why had he been picked on for criticism by certain lobbies in Pakistan. Asked why he was even in contact with an unreliable man like Ijaz, the former ambassador joked, "Those on duty in Thana Tibbi (the Lahore's red light district police station) sometimes come into contact with unsavoury characters."
Haqqani also explained why he had himself kept a low media profile all through these months by saying that he wanted the people to see for themselves the difference between facts and fiction. "In a hostile environment generated by those claiming to have a monopoly over patriotism, anything I said would have been drowned out," he observed.
The point that was missed by many people since the beginning of this whole investigation has been that the investigation hinged upon the claims of an individual, who has serious credibility issues. A little research would have revealed that Ijaz is known to mix facts and analysis and to rely on weak sources when it comes to dealing with issues of high importance. He also has a reputation for bragging, bullying and bluffing.
Even during the cross-examination when he was asked to verify his various claims in his articles published over time, he simply said that he just wrote them and it was up to the readers to make their own conclusions. But when someone makes up facts or presents speculation as hard facts, his credibility comes under serious question.
In 2004, the US-based media watch group Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) raised serious questions about Ijaz's credibility. The watch group was reporting on Fox News, a conservative media outlet in the US; where Ijaz made frequent appearances post September 11 as an expert on terrorism.
The group pointed out, "Rarely naming his sources or even identifying them by nationality or occupation, Ijaz insists on their reliability. When asked by Hume about the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden (11/20/03), Ijaz replied, 'Well, Brit, tonight I can report from my intelligence sources, I consider unimpeachable intelligence sources, that we have eyewitness accounts that both Osama bin Laden, in a modified, disguised form, as well as Ayman al-Zawahiri, the number two in al Qaeda, are, in fact, in Iran."
This is less than airtight evidence, but Hume apparently needs little convincing; that night, as on many segments featuring Ijaz, the anchor introduced him with lavish praise for his connections, "He is an American businessman by trade, but few people on earth have better connections and sources in the Mideast than Mansoor Ijaz."
FAIR reportedly pointed out that many of Ijaz's claims are so vaguely sourced as to be un-checkable while some have been questioned by other reporters. According to the New York Times (2/4/02), Ijaz once "confirmed" for Fox (February 3, 2002) an inaccurate report that the body of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl had been found. While Pearl's body wouldn't turn up for another three months, and the erroneous story was
called a hoax by US and Pakistani officials, Fox News invited Ijaz back less than a week later (On the Record , February 8, 2002) to speculate again about Pearl's condition and kidnappers.
With Ijaz's financial issues and credit defaults already widely reported now and his credibility issues surfacing the interest in the outcome of the memogate investigation for most of the Pakistani media outlets as well as different stakeholders in Pakistani politics and state institutions is waning.
Ijaz is also realising that his star status with some of the Pakistani media was about to come to an end and he is now trying to shift the focus away from his claims about the memo to other issues. His statement about Swiss accounts of President Asif Ali Zardari and the late Benazir Bhutto seems yet another attempt to stay in the limelight.
Though Ijaz has not revealed the names of various intelligence agencies of the world with whom he maintains contact, even as he is seemingly very proud of those associations, those agencies may be about to lose an asset if Ijaz ever was an asset. He has been exposed like never before and as his story loses steam, Haqqani seems poised to stage yet another comeback in the face of his (now mainly) pro-establishment detractors.
End.
|
