Dealing with the ISI is a serious issue requiring a degree of gravitas, something that seems to be missing from most actions by the current government. When the CIA was thought to have become too big for its boots, the then-US president Jimmy Carter decided to reform it by purging its Directorate of Operations in what is now famously referred to as the Halloween Massacre.

Whether the ISI needs such a purge can only be decided through a proper review process which, as noted earlier, must result in reforming both the agency and its interaction with any government. As things stand, without such a process and an intrusive mechanism to verify that the agency is not overstepping its brief, the agency retains its capacity to make mischief and any government possesses the inclination to use it for internal mischief.

Do we need the ISI’s internal wing in the presence of the Intelligence Bureau? Currently, it performs both tasks, counter-intelligence and external intelligence. Is there need to have an agency, apart from Military Intelligence, that is officered at the top by the military? Should the ISI only concern itself with external intelligence and leave counter-intelligence to the IB or some other organisation?

These and other questions need to be addressed. But, and this is crucial — no matter what organisation is created — and how many purges are done, until a country retains a culture of political oppression, intelligence agencies, with their cloak-and-dagger outlook, will always come in handy.

So, in addition to any re-organisation, what is most needed are measures that can prevent a government from utilising an agency to further its political ends. And these measures must be part of a transparent process of checks and balances.

... contd.