MAY one dare ask the question, ‘What happens after the memo scandal?’ Pakistan is spending millions of rupees in terms of man-hours to try and unravel the mysteries of the memo. The expense could be worth its while if, at the end of the day, we ask ourselves the right question.

Consider the following situation: the commission decides that Husain Haqqani did in fact dictate the memo to Mansoor Ijaz. Let us also imagine that after the filing of the FIR and the trial, it is confirmed that some people in authority actually did ‘write’ the memo.

Then, perhaps the nation would realise that much more important than determining who wrote the memo is the implication of what the memo actually says.

Simply put, the memo asks for American help to avert a military coup against a democratically elected government. Is the request treason? Has a coup never happened before? Did it not happen to the respected petitioner, once the prime minister of Pakistan elected by two-thirds of the nation’s electorate in the 1990s?

Did it not happen again on November 3, 2007, an act by Gen Musharraf that has been declared unconstitutional by the apex court? Is it treason to try to prevent similar damage to the constitution? Knowing the history of coups in this country, is it wrong to suspect that it might happen again?

The real question the nation needs to ask itself is, ‘would we rather have another coup than allow a democratic government to ask a foreign power’s help to protect the constitution? Which is the bigger evil?’

The constitution of this country has been tampered with a number of times. Pakistan has lived under the law of the jungle, where words uttered by one individual were considered the ultimate truth, over and above the constitution as well as the judgments of the Supreme Court of Pakistan.

The only reason Pakistan’s rulers, civil society and media ceaselessly speak of protecting and preserving democracy is because they all believe it is fragile. Successive coups have never let it take root.

Neither is it a secret anymore, thanks to reports of declassified official documents of foreign envoys that some military coups in Pakistan were at least in the knowledge of the United States. If the elected rulers of those times had written similar memos to certain functionaries of the United States, it is quite possible that military coups could have been avoided.

Let the judiciary, the media, the people, even our brothers in the armed forces, put their hands on their hearts and ask themselves: is it treasonous to try to stop a coup, even by asking the help of a foreign power or to wait until it happens again?

The good thing about the memo scandal is that it has exposed the festering wounds of the nation for all to see. It is an apt expression of our troubled psyche.

There are a number of circles in the country that still believe that the constitution can and might again be violated by force, notwithstanding the admirable resolve expressed by the higher judiciary.

Give such fears, even over decades which civilian elected government in this country would consider itself to be really safe from the armed forces. For many, it is not question of if but when.

Given this state of mind, many would be left wondering whether they prefer a coup or a memo.