We noted a few years ago that Mr Sehgal had been praising US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and emphasising the need for Pakistan to accept the $7.5 billion US aid package known as ‘Kerry Lugar’ without informing the public that he had business relations with the American private security and logistics company G4S, formerly known as Wackenhut Corporation, which has contracts in Pakistan.

Actually, Mr Sehgal’s business interests go far beyond a simple association with an American private security company. He is Chairman of Pathfinder G4S, a company that owns defence and logistics businesses across Pakistan including the two largest private security G4S companies in Pakistan Security & Management Services (Private) Ltd and Wackenhut Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd, SMS Couriers (Private) Ltd, Pathfinder (Private) Ltd (Trade and Countertrade); other companies in the GROUP are; First Select Pakistan (Private) Ltd, Energy and Resource Services (Private) Ltd (energy-related projects) and Dynavis (Private) Ltd (Group marketing and publications). SMS Land Development (Pvt) Ltd and SMS Construction (Pvt) Ltd.

Here is a clip of Ikram Sehgal himself explaining his business interests on the American talk show Washington Journal:

We applaud Mr Sehgal on his business success, which is truly impressive. And, whether or not we disagree, we respect Mr Sehgal’s right to personally believe that military coups and dictatorships are the best path forward for the nation. But we also believe that more disclosure is needed so that when Mr Sehgal is presenting his views, people are not misled into believing that he is qualified as a trained academic. Ikram Sehgal is first and foremost a businessman who makes his money from defence and security contracts, including contracts with foreign governments. Media groups promoting Ikram Sehgal’s views should disclose this information so that the public can judge his opinions based on all the facts.

Ikram Sehgal: Without seeking to achieve parity with India, Pakistan has to maintain the status quo, by upgrading its non-conventional weapons capabilities i.e. better and more accurate delivery platforms, more plutonium (instead of uranium) based warheads for its ballistic and cruise missiles (because they ensure a better ratio of yield versus weight of the fissile material used per warhead) and ensures second nuclear strike capability by deploying plutonium based warheads on its subs. This does not achieve parity with India but maintains status quo. The delay will enable Pakistan to accumulate sufficient plutonium stocks before negotiating over it.

http://bit.ly/pApgAb

And [Abdullah Saad]:

Keeping in view of the above mentioned reality, it can be argued that Pakistan cannot afford to, nor will ever seek to achieve parity with India. So then, how does it maintain the status quo? Essentially by upgrading its non-conventional weapons capabilities.

When I refer to the word ‘upgrading’, it doesn’t necessarily mean an increase in the ‘number’ of nuclear weapons but instead better and more accurate delivery platforms, more plutonium (instead of uranium) based warheads for its ballistic and cruise missiles (because they ensure a better ratio of yield versus weight of the fissile material used per warhead) and an ensured second nuclear strike capability by deploying plutonium based warheads on its subs. The idea is not to achieve parity – but to maintain the status quo.

This is where Pakistan’s strong objections to FMCT come into play. The idea behind the delay and the sudden increase of plutonium reactors is to enable Pakistan to accumulate sufficient plutonium stocks before Pakistan can no longer postpone entry into the FMCT.

http://bit.ly/hWHRLc

Abdullah Saad notes on Twitter that he has written to The News Editor Talat Aslam about the allegation requesting a response. We hope that he shares the response publicly.

See also:

• Culture of plagiarism at Jang Group
• Geo Caught Plagiarising, Censoring Report On Drones
• Is Jang Group paying former CIA officials?

Today’s issue includes two stories about the second tenure as COAS granted to Gen. Ashraf Kayani by PM Gilani that offer no factual news reporting, but instead are opinion columns opposing Gen. Kayani’s continued service as head of the military.

The first column, by Ikram Sehgal, is not so much a news report at all, but an examination of Gen. Kayani’s new tenure viewed in the context of the author’s previous opinion columns.

In a dramatic late night announcement by the prime minister on July 22, General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani was given an extension as COAS for three years from the date his present term expires on November 29, 2010. By some coincidence in my article last Thursday, I had said: “A new COAS of the Pakistan Army must be promoted. It would be severely disappointing if Kayani accepted the offer of extension being dangled in front of him. He hasan image that would suffer for posterity. If he cannot be C-in-C, Kayani should refuse an extension in the Waheed Kakar tradition”.

In essence, Ikram Sehgal is even admitting that he is not a news reporter, but is actually a serial opinion columnist. This is fine, and he is certainly entitled to his opinions, but his columns should be moved to the Opinion page and not published as legitimate news stories.

The same problem is found with Ansar Abbasi. His column today is another opinion piece that opposes a new tenure for Gen. Kayani. In fact, Ansar Abbasi’s column does not even pretend to be a factual report, but includes his opinion in the very title of the column: “Was this extension really needed? Probably not.”

Ansar Abbasi goes on to repeat the same opinion voiced by Ikram Sehgal in his column – that Gen. Kayani should refuse to accept a new tenure and simply retire.

Kayani did perform extremely well as the Army chief, he remained apolitical, did not allow the military to intervene in politics, generally believed to have fought well against terrorism, ensured free and fair February 2008 elections and played his role quite sensibly during tense moments but still giving him an extension should have been avoided. It is yet to be seen if Kayani would accept the offer and continue till November 2013. It would, however, be good for the institution of Army if he does not.

This is, unfortunately, not a problem only in today’s issue. Just yesterday, The News Group Editor Shaheen Sehbai wrote an opinon column that was featured as a ‘top story’ and was nothing but an opinion piece with a little conspiracy thrown in for good measure.

The government must be feeling a sense of relief calculating that in the last two years General Kayani has kept the army away from politics, as much as he could, had not interfered even when there was a lot of noise against corruption, highhandedness and defiance to the superior judiciary and had ìtoleratedî the shortcomings or inadequacies of the elected government, deliberately looking away in the national interest.

Again, this is not news reporting but Shaheen Sehbai taking the opportunity to air his opinion against the elected government.

Shaheen Sehbai, Ikram Sehgal and Ansar Abbasi all wrote opinion columns opposing a new tenure as COAS for Gen. Kayani. They did not write news reports. These pieces do not belong as ‘top stories’ but would be appropriate on the opinion page. If The News is concerned that there are too many opinions to fit only the opinion page and thus they need to fill the rest of the newspaper with them, perhaps they need to change their name from The News to The Opinion.

Ikram Sehgal: Conflict of Interest?

In two recent pieces published in The News ‘Just Say No’ and ‘The Ultimate Defining Moment’, former army officer turned security consultant turned defense analyst Ikram Sehgal, praised Hilary Clinton’s recent visit to Pakistan. Since PMW believes in fighting for “A Free, Fair and Factually Correct Pakistani Media” we believe Mr. Sehgal should be upfront and come clean about his own ties.

Mr Sehgal is head of SMS Security Company which is tied up with Wackenhut Services, a US-based private security services provider. Wackenhut-SMS are one of the contractors who provide security to the American embassy and to Americans in Pakistan.

We find it very interesting that in his recent writings Mr Sehgal concentrated not just on praising Secretary Clinton but also repeatedly emphasized the need for Pakistan to accept the $7.5 billion US aid package. And yet Mr Sehgal has refused to point out that there is a ‘conflict of interest’ issue at heart.

Mr Sehgal has the right to write articles praising or critiquing people but his readers have an equal right to know that he is benefiting monetarily and professionally from the people he is praising in his article. We recommend that all media outlets require and publish full disclosure from themselves and those individuals that they invite to write or speak for their publication. With full disclosure, we will be able to judge the arguments of the speaker on the merits of his words.

As a side note: At PMW we believe in ‘equal opportunity’ and strive to correct factual and ethical errors in our media regardless of political alignment. Yesterday we had a piece on The Nation, which is a constant critic of US and US-Pakistan ties, and today we have a piece on Ikram Sehgal who supports these ties. If you have a tip about a factual or ethical error in any Pakistani media – regardless of the politics – please send us a tip at pakistanmediawatch@gmail.com so we can investigate and publish a correction. It is up to us to keep our media honest.